No matter how bad my month of November has been, at least there is one thing that I have continued to do: follow the news and browse the web. There is one story that is brewing that has really captured my attention. Not for content, but for coverage.
The first time I saw anyone talking about modern day secession from the United States of America was on Facebook. A friend of mine posted this link to the Examiner. I didn't really believe it, so I Googled it and when I found it at the Washington Post, I felt a little ill. The Examiner was reporting it, and the WaPo had a blog, but both posts seem pretty news-y. The focus is on the "who, what, where, when and why" part of journalism. Here's another; this one from NBCNew.com on the 12th of November. Even the class I took in high school on journalism would approve of all of these articles. Very informative.
The method of reporting on this topic has evolved since those early days. It may be that the damage and threat of these seceders is becoming more apparent as their numbers grow, but the style of coverage is changing, too. Many of the articles I found myself reading over the past week have added the kind of coverage that increases the legitimacy of the secession movement.
Let's start at Politico. In a post that has Ron Paul, arms spread open under an American flag, saying that secession is an American principle, it is hard not to see the subtext. Politico also offers us a bit of a history lesson around the idea of secession. It's natural. It's American. It's a sign of the truest freedom. Huh? Ok. I remember more than my fair share of "America: Love it or Leave it!" sentiment from the early 2000s, but I don't remember them saying that they would take a part of it when they left. This is sensationalizing the news about a very small group of people, no matter how you slice it.
Even the Huffington Post can't help but add the air of legitimacy to this. Here's an article explaining the good news and bad news that awaits the newly formed country. And where would we be without a poll to see who is in support of the plans to secede: "...42 percent strongly opposing the idea, while 22 percent said they supported the idea. A quarter weren't sure." There are those damned undecided voters again! Someone get Nate Silver on the line.
Here's an article out of Canada that calls in a lawyer to find out what the legal implications would be. The Daily Beast compared this group of revolutionaries to the ones that started the civil war, even while they criticized their rationale.
Some media outlets gave the proponents of secession a platform! Fox News interviewed the leader of the Texas Nationalist Movement. Daniel Miller lays out, very clearly, why he thinks his cause would win if taken to a state referendum in this interview with Hannity.
Can we stop this, please? We are still talking about 700,000 out of 312 billion Americans. While statistics isn't my strong suit, I think this is a really small percent to be talking about with maps, economists, lawyers and historians. Watching the news unfold around this movement makes me want to scream. Stop giving this group attention! Go back to "just the facts" reporting. Anything less gives them legitimacy that their numbers do not deserve. We've moved to the teenage years of the Tea Party movement where they're threatening to run away. You can say "let 'em try" or you can beg "don't go!" and both of those will only fuel the tantrum. Don't reward bad behavior with attention. There are plenty of other things to pay attention to instead. Anything will do really.
Just don't bring me back to George Carlin.
No comments:
Post a Comment