Source: Bigstock

That’s the exact same hypocrisy that was on display last month after the Maryland shooting. Journalists blamed everyone else—the NRA, Trump, conservatives, Republicans—but not once did they look inward. Many mainstream journos pointed to polls showing how distrustful Americans are of the media. But when those polls were cited, it was only so the journos could scream, “They’re wrong to hate us.” No one asked, “Why do they hate us?”

Look, I could lecture the media (yet again) on why their poll numbers are so low. I could talk about the ceaseless left-wing political bias, the endless antiwhite articles and op-eds, the numerous factual inaccuracies that seem to only get corrected when Trump tweets about them (take it from me—when a guy at my level tries to correct a glaring factual error in a major paper, he hits a brick wall). I could talk about all that stuff, but it wouldn’t matter. The press will remain in denial; it will filter all criticism through its timeworn, comforting rationalization: “We’re not biased, you just don’t understand good journalism!”

The Maryland shooter, Jarrod Ramos, didn’t have a beef with the Capital Gazette for political or ideological reasons. He had a very specific grievance resulting from a defamation case against the paper, a case he lost (some mainstream journalists were honest enough to acknowledge this during their Twitter day of mourning). In fact, Ramos had been harassing the judge in the case as well as the newspaper. This was not an anti-media ideologue, but rather (like Cheaves) one very crazy, violent idiot with a highly specific and targeted obsession.

If you read portions of the Ramos defamation-trial transcript, what you see is the judge patiently attempting to explain to a very stupid man why he lost. The judge takes Ramos step-by-step through defamation law to illustrate how he had not shown any proof of actual defamation. But to Ramos, all he needed to know was “I don’t like what was written about me. It made me feel bad! Therefore, it’s defamation.” Literally, that was the extent of his case.

Well, shuck-a-muck, I wonder where Ramos, an avid social-media user and consumer of media content, ever got the notion that “hurty” speech is legally actionable? Might it have been from the very media that blamed others for motivating the attack he carried out? Might it have been from the hundreds of “mainstream” journalists who, for years now, have pushed the line that any speech that makes women, gays, or people of color “feel bad” should be censored? The news media has purposely confused “hate speech” (which is constitutionally protected) with direct threats of violence (which are not). Additionally, these same journos have purposely confused “speech that hurts feelings” with hate speech. As a result, a large number of Americans have come to believe that hurtful speech is illegal.

Many of the leftist protesters who’ve tried in recent years to bust up speeches by people like Ann Coulter and Milo Yiannopoulos have stated that because “hate speech” is illegal, it’s therefore okay to use force to stop it. And if you try explaining to a leftist that hate speech is not illegal, you’ll get the same blank stare that Ramos gave the judge.

Ramos saw the judgment in his case as justice denied (even though it was 100% correct), so he took matters into his own hands, just like the violent cretins at Berkeley and elsewhere when they physically attack speakers with whom they disagree. The media hacks in mourning should, for once in their lives, look inward and wonder if they helped feed Ramos’ delusion.

But they won’t. It has something to do with Nietzsche and the risk of staring into the abyss. Best to just let the memory of their murdered colleagues go, and start prepping that next piece on why white people suck.

Comments on this article can be sent to the .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) and must be accompanied by your full name, city and state. By sending us your comment you are agreeing to have it appear on Taki’s Magazine.