by Bill White (Conservative Values)
In today's politically charged climate, it's impossible to ignore the glaring double standard that exists when it comes to our legal system and traditional media reporting in the context of Left-wing and Right-wing ideologies. While justice and unbiased reporting should be pillars of a democratic society, it often seems as though these principles are selectively applied based on one's political leanings. While acknowledging the undeniable presence of this double standard, it often requires an external perspective to illuminate the discrepancies in the treatment of individuals and issues. By analyzing cases within the realms of the system of law and order, media reporting, and public perception, we are reminded of the extent to which our society has regressed.
One of the most prominent examples of the double standard in our justice system is how allegations of wrongdoing are handled based on political affiliation. When a Left-leaning individual is accused of misconduct, the reaction from the media and the public often includes calls for due process, the presumption of innocence, and a thorough investigation. However, when a Right-leaning figure faces similar allegations, the response is often swift and severe, with demands for resignation or immediate condemnation.
Take, for example, the allegations of sexual misconduct against prominent figures. In cases involving Left-leaning individuals, we have seen calls for careful consideration of evidence, and an insistence on "innocent until proven guilty." Yet, when similar allegations arise on the Right, individuals are often tried and convicted in the court of public opinion, online, usually without any evidence and certainly, without due process.
One example of the disparity is the calls for Representative Lauren Boebert (R., Colo.) to resign following revelations that she and her date groped each other in a packed theater in Denver last week. Contrast that with CNN's reporting of Susanna Gibson, the Democrat candidate in a competitive Virginia House district who denounced evidence that she and her husband had performed sexual acts on a pornographic livestreaming website, describing the sharing of those videos as “the worst gutter politics.” One Leftist even said that Gibson performing sex online for money (which may have violated state law) is a reason to donate to her campaign. State Sen. L. Louise Lucas, a leading Democrat lawmaker in Virginia, quickly came to her defense, calling on voters to “make this the biggest fundraising day of (Gibson’s) campaign.” Many women voters retweeted Lucas with a link to donate to Gibson’s campaign.
Media plays a pivotal role in shaping public perception and influencing the narrative surrounding political issues and figures. Unfortunately, a stark double standard exists when it comes to how media outlets report on Left-wing and Right-wing subjects.
On one hand, some media outlets with Left-leaning biases tend to downplay or ignore negative stories about Left-wing figures while giving extensive coverage to any hint of impropriety on the Right. Conversely, Right-leaning media outlets often magnify the missteps of Left-wing figures while minimizing or ignoring similar actions on the Right.
This selective reporting has a profound impact on public perception. It reinforces preexisting biases and creates a deeply polarized society where individuals are more likely to consume news that aligns with their political beliefs, further entrenching the divide.
Another concerning aspect of the double standard in justice and media reporting is the selective outrage that often accompanies it. When individuals on the Left are embroiled in controversies, there is often a reluctance among their supporters to criticize or condemn their actions. In contrast, Right-wing individuals facing similar situations are often abandoned by their own party and supporters.
This selective outrage not only undermines the credibility of those who engage in it but also contributes to the perception that the Court system and traditional media reporting are influenced by political bias rather than impartiality.
The double standard in law enforcement legal process and media reporting has far-reaching consequences for democracy itself. In a healthy democratic society or a Republic, like the United States, the principles of justice and media should serve as checks and balances, holding individuals and institutions accountable regardless of their political leanings.
When these principles are compromised, trust in the justice system erodes, and media becomes an instrument of political manipulation rather than a source of objective information. As a result, the public becomes increasingly disillusioned, leading to apathy, polarization, and a weakening of the democratic foundation.
The double standard in our justice system and traditional media reporting, when it comes to Left-wing versus Right-wing issues, poses a significant challenge to the principles of democracy. It erodes trust in institutions, fuels polarization, and undermines the pursuit of justice and truth. To strengthen our democracy, it is essential that we recognize and address these disparities, promoting impartiality, accountability, and transparency in both the justice system and media, regardless of political affiliations. Only then can we hope to achieve a society where justice truly is blind and media reporting serves the common good rather than partisan interests.
Bill White (Ram ben Ze'ev) is CEO of WireNews