Each year I teach a unit explaining the various ways in which the Legacy Media warps and distorts the truth.  Obviously, an integral part of that unit explains how the media shapes the news by the way it reports–through liberal bias–and also by what it chooses not to report.

One of the most recent examples of this bias is media treatment of NBC’s reporter, the execrable David Gregory.  The facts are familiar.  In a December 23rd on-air attempt to harry NRA leader Wayne LaPierre, Gregory held up a ubiquitous 30-round AR-15 magazine, demanding:

Now isn’t it possible that if we got rid of these, if we replaced them and said, ‘Well, you could only have a magazine that carries five bullets or ten bullets,’ isn’t it just possible that we could reduce the carnage in a situation like Newtown?

The problem is that magazine is particularly banned under the unconstitutional and gun-phobic laws of Washington, DC, where the interview took place.  Further, before airing the segment, NBC asked the DC police for permission to use the magazine, and was specifically denied that permission.  In other words, Gregory-and any other NBC employee who procured or handled that inexpensive, common, and innocuous firearm accessory, is liable for arrest, a fine of $1000, and imprisonment for up to a year.  The DC police have begun an investigation, but refuse to comment on it.  It is highly unlikely Gregory will be arrested and charged.  After all, NBC is virtually a subsidiary of the Democrat party.

Irony and hypocrisy abound.  Law abiding gun owners are doubtless thinking “they’d surely arrest me, even if I didn’t do it on purpose like NBC.”  And they would be right, as in the case of combat veteran Adam Meckler, arrested because he had several long forgotten rounds of loose ammunition in a backpack.  Be sure you’ve taken your blood pressure medication before reading this one.

An incident about which you’ve probably not heard well illustrates the second part of the lesson: what the Media choose not to report.  On December 17, 2012, a single killer went to a restaurant in San Antonio, TX to kill his ex-girlfriend.  When he opened fire, people fled the restaurant to a nearby theater.  He pursued and opened fire, but this case had a very different—and predictable—ending.  An off- duty sheriff’s deputy—Sgt. Lisa Cuello Castellano—was there.  The would-be killer got off a single shot and Cuello Castellano immediately shot him four times, ending his rampage.

Only the local media covered the shooting.  Even Snopes.com, reporting on the truth or falsity of the attack, sounds very much like the Legacy Media apologizing for itself:

…it isn’t yet clear whether he [the shooter] was deliberately intending to shoot innocent victims at the theater (as the gunman did in the July 2012 Aurora, Colorado theater shootings) or whether he was firing aimlessly in a fit of rage.

In general, the San Antonio theater shooting received little coverage outside of local news media, primarily because it didn’t include any of the factors that typically propel such stories from local to national news: it was not an especially horrific crime (or part of a larger crime), it did not involve any deaths or the wounding of large numbers of people, and it featured no prominent persons…The possibility that an armed off-duty law enforcement official may have prevented additional casualties by shooting the gunman might have made the incident more newsworthy than usual, but that aspect of the story is speculative, and as others have observed, the news media tend to highlight negative events rather than positive ones: ‘reporters don’t report buildings that don’t burn.

Right.  He was “firing aimlessly in a fit or rage” rather than trying to cause any real damage. 

In the media-fueled conflagration around the Newtown, Connecticut shooting, in their calls for “conversation” and “debate,” in their tacit and overt support for draconian gun control laws, laws that have already had a decade to work and failed utterly, one important side of the “conversation” rates no coverage at all.  The fact that once all preventative measures have failed and a killer starts shooting, only armed good guys can immediately stop them is not newsworthy under the terms of the “debate” established by the Media.

While infuriating, none of this is surprising. For decades the media has ignored the millions of incidents of honest citizens stopping armed attacks, at schools, in shopping malls, and elsewhere.  This is obviously the quality of “conversation and “debate” we can expect: a conversation with a predetermined result, admitting only that evidence that supports that predetermined result, which must always be a diminution of liberty and actual safety, which no doubt pleases politicians and criminals.

But I repeat myself.