Guest Opinion Response: Distortion of Our News

A few years ago, I heard a comment on the radio which made a strong impression on me. A member of the Heritage Foundation, a well-known and respected conservative organization, was being interviewed by a reporter for the New York Times. The member was constantly criticizing the New York Times for biased and untrue reporting; the reporter stating the opposite, that their content was carefully vetted. The reporter asked why he continuously criticized the New York Times for untrue reporting. Simple, he replied, it isn’t that you directly lie but it’s the stories you choose to report.

It was one of those eye-opening moments in life when you realize something to be true that you’d never thought of before. But something else came to mind when I recognized the truth of that statement. It isn’t the only thing that distorts the news. It isn’t just what’s chosen to be reported it is also how often it’s repeated. After all, if a story is chosen and then repeated many times it takes on an aura of truth that most likely isn’t justified by what is being said. That was written by Adolph Hitler in Mein Kompf. It is amazing how many modern-day politicians rely on that old trick to persuade their followers.

But is that the only thing that distorts the news?

We live in a new age. For the newer generations the Internet has always been there; for the older generations it looks like a relatively new phenomenon. There is much good done through the development of the Internet. But there is also a dark side to the Internet. The Internet allows communication – both good and bad. Those who choose the negative use the internet to spread information that damages the very core of what the US stands for. Today we have multiple 24-hour news channels, in addition to our local and national news. What happens when someone listens to news from one particular channel and copies it into a format with added emphasis of proof that it is the one true story of what’s going on? We now have a recipe for disaster.

What truly prompted me to write this letter is the total lack of communication among people today. If those same people would sit down and talk to each other they would probably find they agree on the vast majority of the things that make up The United States of America. Granted, there are real differences. But is there room to discuss those differences and take the hatred out of the communication?

Doesn’t it make sense to research something out so that you’re truly comfortable with what you’re saying before you say something that isn’t true?

In the September 8th issue of the Whitehall Ledger an article was written as a guest opinion that either not properly researched or intentionally being distorted. It is under the headline “Proposal Would Set Terrible Precedent.” Considering the fact that Chuck Denowh, policy director of United Property Owners of Montana, has every right in the world to both his opinion and to be able to say it as the constitution gives him that right. Is what he is saying true? There are some things in the article that are true. But I suggest that if you researched this out from various other sources and if you appreciate public lands and support them for very various usages you will disagree with much of what he said.

This article leaves out a tremendous amount of information about the BLM. As I questioned some of the things said in this article, I decided to spend a little time researching the history of the BLM. What I considered to be the best source for information was a website with the following title. https://publicland.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/150359_Public_Lands_Document_web.pdf

The article was compiled by members of the public lands foundation that is mainly made up of former retired employees of the BLM. I’m not about to copy the entire 20 pages describing the history of the BLM, but I would suggest that anyone who is interested in public lands take the time to look up the website and read it. Judge for yourself if you believe the information presented there is legitimate. I certainly do.

The first acquisition took place in 1781, 104 years before the Declaration of Independence. A little before the origination described in the article as being 1934. The entire history of public lands is documented in this 20-page article.

As an independent, I refuse to take a stand on whether I agree or disagree with what Chuck Denowh said in his article. I only write this letter to describe what is causing the breakdown in communication in this country. I ask you to read the information presented in the aforementioned website and judge for yourself.