ARE WE BEING MISLEAD BY AN AGENDA DRIVEN MEDIA?

I have written on this topic before, today I’ll be a little more specific.

I will summarize the internet coverage of three separate incidents in the Atlanta area and a U.S. House of Representatives hearing that was held shortly after the Atlanta incidents.

I feel, the media coverage is blatantly misleading. See what you think.

For those of you who are not aware of the Atlanta incidents here’s a quick recap:

Three spas in the Atlanta area were victimized by a lone gunman, according to police. Eight people were murdered, six of them were Asian females.

I am a recently retired police officer who served two departments for a total of 35+ years. The first news I heard of the incidents was a report on a radio talk show. In that report I learned, among other things, that a man was being held by the Atlanta Police. The man was thought to be a lone gunman who shot several people at three separate locations. That story related that the shooter was a sex addict and had targeted 3 spas because they were a source of temptation for him.

Later I learned that The United States House of Representatives had scheduled a hearing to investigate violence targeting Asian Americans prior to the Atlanta violence. I located a cbsnews.com article (March 18, 2021/808 AM 2021 CBS Interactive Inc. WE ARE AMERICANS). The article relayed that “Several Asian American lawmakers testified Thursday on Capitol Hill on the rise in violence and discrimination against Asian Americans amid the COVID-19 pandemic, saying the words of former President Trump and other republicans have inflamed tension.”

I was well aware that many people share that opinion, but I have not heard from any sources that the theory had been proven I was disappointed to see this in print with no disclaimers.

The article continues to say that, “The suspected gunman, 21 year-old Robert Aaron Long, denied the attack was racially motivated but officials said it was still too early to rule out a hate crime. Long told investigators he had a “sex addiction” and viewed the spas as a temptation he wanted to eliminate, officials said.”

The article goes on to say, “Congresswoman Judy Chu of California, the chairwoman of the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus, referenced the escalation of attacks against the Asian American and Pacific Islanders (AAPI) community and that Mr. Trump’s rhetoric contributed to the rise in the attacks.”

Again I see no specifics. What comments did Trump make to cause violence? I believe that if the comments are known they should be included in the article, and it they are not known the author should note that Congresswoman Chu made the accusations, but did not provide evidence to support them.

The article continues, “They were stoked by the words of former President Donald Trump who sought to shift blame and anger away from his own flawed response to the coronavirus,” Chu testified.

In my opinion, if this was a fair and balanced article, this statement would also call for at least a question or two. Did former President Trump say that was his intent? Is there a study that shows the former president’s response was flawed, or is that merely the opinion of Congresswoman Chu?

The article also quotes comments made by Congresswoman Meng (D NY) responding to comments made by Congressman Chip Roy (R TX) who had said he was worried the hearing will “venture into the policing of rhetoric in a free society, free speech and away from the rule of law and taking out bad guys.” Meng’s comments, “Your president and your party and your colleagues can talk about issues with any other country that you want, but you don’t have to do it by putting a bull’s eyes on the back of Asian Americans across this country, on our grandparents, on our kids,”

Again there is no indication of what comments are referred to. Are they really as bad as she says? We’ll never know because we, the readers, have no idea what statements she is referring to.

Congressman Lieu (D CA) alleges that saying “The Wuhan Flu” is racist. I Googled the worst flus in U.S. History and found the following: The “Russian flu” of 1889, The 1918-19 “Spanish flu” Pandemic, The 1957-58 “Asian flu” Pandemic, The 1968 “Hong Kong flu” Pandemic and The 2009 H1N1 Pandemic. Traditionally flus have been named after their area of origin it is only now that this practice is considered racist. I refer back to Congressman Roy’s concern that our freedom of speech is in danger. Why is this racist? What has changed? I agree that it is racist to judge a person based only on skin color or national origin. I disagree with the contention that it is racist to note the area of origin of a disease.

I have been following politics for over forty years. In that time I have been very attuned to discrimination. I find it offensive that, in this day and age, it is only required to say a person made a racist statement without any clarification on what it was the person said. I contend that what the speaker considers a racist statement may not be considered in that vein by a large, or small, percentage of the those hearing the allegation. In my opinion it should be mandatory that the speaker clarify the accusation or refrain from airing that view. I have heard many allegations that former president, Trump was racist. I have not heard any examples that justify those allegations. If you have any good examples of Trump’s racist policies or statements please comment. I would like to hear what I have missed.- Rant over, back to the story.

A second article I found on-line that was from the BBC (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-56424616), in my opinion, it was equally alarming.

The article opens with, “Eight people, many of them women of Asian descent, have been killed in shootings at spas in the US state of Georgia.” Two paragraphs later the writer pens, “South Korea later confirmed that four of the victims were of Korean descent.”

Does this have to be confirmed by Korea?

The BBC article proclaims, “No motive has yet been established, but there are fears the crimes may have deliberately targeted people of Asian descent.”

My concerns are: Why couldn’t the BBC find motives when the first news out had the suspect’s statement that he was addicted to sex and the spas were a temptation? Why is this being ignored? Could it be that it doesn’t fit an agenda?

Later in the article we are told that at the original scene two Asian women, one white man, one white woman and one Hispanic man were shot. If this is a racist attack, at this point, it is a very confused racist. The Hispanic man was only wounded. The other four died of their wounds.

The BBC article also indicates that the advocacy group Stop AAPI Hate, called the shootings, “an unspeakable tragedy” for both the victims’ families and the Asian-American community, which has “been reeling from high levels of racist attacks.”

This article, as the previous one, does not need to give any facts. Simply saying the community is “Reeling from high levels of racist attacks” is good, I guess (Not really). Is a high level 100 in a week? One in a week? Does a mean comment qualify as an attack? Does an attack have to be violent? As a reader I would like to know if they are leading me into a “nonfactual wonderland” or is there a very legitimate problem? I think numbers would help me make a decision, how about you?

The BBC article ends with five facts about Asian Americans- No, the facts don’t mention how many total attacks, how many recent attacks or anything related to the premise they are pushing. The facts are related to the number of Asian Americans in the U.S.

“Anti-Asian hate crimes skyrocket 149% in 16 major US cities between 2019-2020, study says” is the title of another article of concern to me (Catherine Park https://www.fox9.com/news/anti-asian-american-hate-crimes-skyrocket-149-between-2019-2020-study-says). I saw many of the same problems I listed above in this article. I’ll limit the examples so I can get to “the punch line” sooner.

Anti-Asian assaults are rising, in the articles I have read and summarized so far, no actual numbers were mentioned, only percentages or vague phrases such as “reeling from a high number of racist attacks” without defining “high number” or “attacks.” This article is much the same.

It mentions “In some cities where anti-Asian hate crimes were not being reported as much to the police in past year, police reports were found to have substantially increased.” Does that surprise anyone? Where they didn’t report it before the number of reports has gone up. OK, how could it go down or stay the same if they had not been categorizing anti-Asian crimes, and now they are? My guess is it had to go up, does anyone disagree?

Another quote, “In Philadelphia, for instance, where Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders make up about 7,5% of the city’s population, there was a staggering 200% increase in reported hate crimes against AAPI’s.” One report in 2020 and two in 2021 is a 200% increase, I would like to see numbers!

The article also mentions that, “Between March 19, 2020 and Dec. 31 2020, the data showed AAPI’s were being harassed not just verbally but that some were physically assaulted and even spit on.” I worked as a police officer and I was regularly harassed verbally and physically. This might be a true growing problem, but the only thing I’m seeing in these articles are opinions. I suspect that if the numbers went from 1,000 to 2,000 those numbers would have been included in the article.

Are you seeing the same problem I’m seeing? What do they mean by assault? What are the numbers? Maybe we don’t need numbers. We should just be outraged, or we are heartless!

The article continues, “The study also shared Google data from March 2020, the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, that shows searches spiked for racial slurs hateful towards Asian Americans and phrases such as ‘China virus’ and ‘Kung flu.’ Around the same time the Trump administration unwittingly coined these alternate names for the novel coronavirus.”

I mentioned earlier that only recently did naming a virus after the area it came from become a problem. I still don’t see it. I wouldn’t have said “Kung flu,” but I can honestly say I never heard that term until this article.

This article added information on a resolution passed in the House, “The resolution, approved 243-164, called on all public officials to condemn anti-Asian sentiment and to investigate hate crimes after a rise in aggression and violence from those blaming people of Asian descent for the pandemic. The measure did not name Trump but noted inflammatory terms used by him and other Republicans – including “Chinese Virus,” “Wuhan Virus” and Kung flu” – and says they have perpetuated an anti-Asian stigma

I listen to radio political talk shows a lot and I have not heard the term “Kung flu” until I started researching for this article. The other terms, as I noted, were common practice- naming the disease after the area of origin. I also find it interesting that The House had time to do this while we are still fighting a pandemic and our fiscal debt is spiraling out of control. Another reason I don’t understand this resolution is that I don’t believe it was legal to commit hate crimes or violence against any group before the resolution, was it?

I’ve been calling for numbers- you’re going to need to sit down for this. I found a transcript of an interview on NPR Radio (https://www.npr.org/transcripts/978496038). A. Martinez was the host.

After much of what I’ve reported above was repeated in the interview Martin Kaste says, “And the list goes on. In Los Angeles, for instance, the number of hate crimes directed against Asians was up more than 100% from 2019 to 2020, though the actual numbers were from 7 to 15. The numbers were bigger in Seattle, where the police count hate and bias crimes together. Asians were targeted 49 times in 2020, compared to 21 times the year before. That’s a big increase, but there were also big jumps in crimes targeting whites and Blacks. And it’s important to remember that 2020 was just more violent across the board.”

I’m sorry it took me so long to get to the point, but what I’ve been saying is that we are being mislead by the media, I believe intentionally.

In every article we were seeing huge percentages of increases in violence towards Asian-Americans- but no numbers. Finally in that NPR interview we hear the elusive digits. A 100% INCREASE!!! From 7 to 15 in Los Angeles! I checked to put this in some sort of perspective. In the city of Los Angeles (Numbers for Los Angeles County were, obviously, much higher) they recorded 1,278 Aggravated Assaults from 02/14/21 to 03/13/21 (one month). An aggravated assault is much more serious than a basic assault and there are much fewer of them reported. The article does not say if the statistics they quote are from Los Angeles County or The City of Los Angeles- I chose the smaller number anywhere there was a choice and still there is an embarrassingly large gap.

I hope you enjoyed my rant. If you did please tell friends. If you didn’t please comment.