“Outrage” has been the name of the media’s game for some time now. Playing off the insatiable bloodlust of the left-wing masses on social media, the Big 3 nightly news broadcasts have traded in straight reporting for emotional twists on the events of the day. And because angry viewers are return viewers, the main emotion these networks play on is rage.
According to a new study from the Media Research Center, that rage is usually focused on none other than President Donald Trump. An analysis of 2019’s news broadcasts on ABC, CBS, and NBC found that the word “outrage” was used a stunning 229 times throughout the year.
Our examination shows network reporters used that term far more frequently in stories that might offend liberals, with networks blaming President Trump and Republicans for triggering more “outrage” in 2019 than child abuse, sexual assault, racism, and even police brutality.
MRC analysts examined every instance of the word “outrage” in broadcast evening news reports throughout all of 2019. Despite all of the wars, crime and other horrors in the world, the media seemed to think U.S. politics was the biggest cause of outrage, with 64 political stories using the term.
But don’t think the term was employed even-handedly. President Trump and his fellow Republicans received the lion’s share of the blame in this category: 51 instances, or 80 percent of all political outrage, while Democrats accounted for less than one tenth of that (just five stories, or 8%). For the remaining eight cases, the individuals or organizations said to be causing outrage were not explicitly partisan.
Aside from the fact that all of this constant “outrage” simply isn’t healthy, it is surely having a brainwashing effect on the American public – at least that percentage of it still tuning into the network news on a nightly basis. By using terms like this and applying them to President Trump, the networks can easily persuade viewers into thinking that the whole world is angry at the president, angry at Republicans, and angry at everything conservative, white, and traditional. And since perception is reality, this view filters down into social media, real-life conversations, and (if they’re lucky) the voting booths.
Best of all, they can shield themselves from accusations of “fake news” by using words that are really just opinions. Who’s to say what’s “outrageous” and what’s not? You can’t really quantify it, so you can’t really accuse the networks of trafficking in fiction. The best you can say is that they’re biased, but if viewers have internalized that bias, they’ll just keep on believing the propaganda, day after day.
As we’ve seen.