The Grind:
The corporate media have once again adopted their favored tactic of questioning any Republicans who express concerns about the integrity of elections. The questioning revolves around the central query: Did Joe Biden truly win the 2020 election? Last week, a New York Times representative posed this question to Florida Governor Ron DeSantis during his visit to Iowa. NBC News correspondent Dasha Burns followed suit, though her questioning was marked by a focus on pressuring DeSantis into a simple “yes or no” response regarding Trump’s loss in 2020. This incessant inquiry, however, lacks sincerity, a fact evident in its absence from 2016-2020 when Democrats consistently rejected the legitimacy of Donald Trump’s victory.
It is crucial to grasp that the question’s lack of genuine intent is glaring. It becomes evident when one considers the analogy of the 1972 Olympics’ men’s basketball final. In this game, the American team adamantly refused to acknowledge their loss to the Soviet Union due to suspected unfair play. Unlike today’s media, reporters then did not badger players to concede defeat or label them “Olympics deniers.” Instead, they engaged in in-depth discussions and analyses of the controversial event, allowing for a thorough understanding of the situation’s complexities.
The Deatails:
The selective nature of media’s curiosity becomes even more pronounced when examining the 2016-2020 period when Democrats and media orchestrated the Russia-collusion narrative to undermine the legitimacy of Trump’s election. Hillary Clinton’s persistent claims that the 2016 election was stolen received little scrutiny from the same media outlets that now emphasize “accepting election outcomes.” Furthermore, substantial concerns exist regarding the 2020 election, ranging from coordinated changes to election laws to the widespread censorship practiced by Big Tech companies, all of which disproportionately impacted conservative voices.
Comparatively, those who contested the 1972 basketball game’s outcome are not dubbed “basketball deniers.” Instead, their concerns were taken seriously and extensively covered by media. Yet, in the current political landscape, genuine discussion about the anomalies and irregularities of the 2020 election is suppressed, branding those who raise these issues as conspiracy theorists.
In conclusion, the glaring disparity between the media’s treatment of the basketball controversy and the discourse surrounding election integrity is emblematic of a deeply polarized environment. This manipulation of public discourse is fueled by a media landscape that seeks to silence dissenting voices while championing a one-sided narrative. It is a distressing reflection of the ongoing erosion of free speech and open dialogue in the realm of political debate.