A recent turn of events at ABC has brought some attention to media biases. Terry Moran, a senior correspondent, was let go in June after making some rather extreme comments about Stephen Miller and Donald Trump. He referred to Miller as a “world-class hater,” a statement that raised eyebrows in various circles.
Fast forward a couple of months, and Moran is now acknowledging that mainstream media can be “careless” and biased, especially concerning the lack of “diversity of perspectives.” It feels like a strange twist, doesn’t it?
His commentary, dubbed “Real Patriotism,” suggests that protesting against Trump’s policies somehow makes one less of a patriot. This is, well, intriguing if you think about it. For Moran, criticizing the president equates to a lack of genuine patriotism, which is a bold claim.
He has written quite a lot already, calling out figures like Justice Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito for what he sees as their alignment with a “sinister ideology.” Moran sees today’s times as dark under Trump’s administration and has made a variety of strong statements against him and his nominees.
His style—somewhat reminiscent of left-leaning commentators—raises questions about objectivity in media. And I can’t help but wonder: does he genuinely believe he’s seen all sides? He’s suggesting that biases are largely unintentional rather than deliberate, which feels a bit evasive.
He’s aware of his reputation as an anti-Trump figure. In fact, he proudly admits to never regretting his sentiments about the former president. Yet, he attempts to convey that there’s a need for trust in media, despite acknowledging some bias.
This seems like a contradiction. If someone like Moran, with his background, admits to biases, doesn’t that mean we should question the narratives put forth by the rest of the media? His desire to connect with an audience while also asserting high ground feels like an ironic stance.
What’s troubling is this elitist attitude creeping in, suggesting that understanding opposing viewpoints grants him a license to express his disdain for Trump with more vigor. It’s almost condescending at times.
As for additional topics of interest, Tulsi Gabbard has been vocal about an Obama-era intelligence report, which claimed Russia believed Hillary Clinton had a better chance against Trump. And then there’s an ongoing conversation regarding the role of female police officers, particularly a case that has drawn scrutiny after an officer was investigated for threatening a driver.
This mix of controversies and commentary is certainly stirring the pot in media and politics these days, reflecting the complexities and contradictions that often emerge in public discourse.
