The MSM is always calling things “controversial,” but just what do they mean by that? Here’s a clue from a Washington Post story today:
A majority of Americans initially support a controversial National
Security Agency program to collect information on telephone calls made
in the United States in an effort to identify and investigate potential
terrorist threats, according to a Washington Post-ABC News poll.The
new survey found that 63 percent of Americans said they found the NSA
program to be an acceptable way to investigate terrorism, including 44
percent who strongly endorsed the effort. Another 35 percent said the
program was unacceptable, which included 24 percent who strongly
objected to it. (emphasis added)
Call me crazy, but if a 2/3 majority of any group agrees on
something then it’s hardly controversial. So why would the WaPo call
this controversial? The answer can only be: because they, and the rest
of the media, don’t like it. Controversial is what the media say it is.
Rush Limbaugh is “controversial.” Michael Moore is “outspoken.”
And another thing. When was the last time you saw a story on a poll
that said “Americans initially support” anything? What did the
reporter, or editor who might have added it, mean? Does it mean “once
these stupid rubes learn the real truth they won’t support it”? Or,
“once we’ve been able to do our disinformation thing on this issue the
stupid rubes won’t support it”? Probably a little of both, as they pretty much admit:
The survey results reflect initial public reaction to the NSA program.
Those views that [sic] could change or deepen as more details about the
effort become known over the next few days.
