Stephen Colbert covered the story of how so many in the media jumped the gun and automatically assumed the Norway killer was Muslim. But the real kicker is that while initial speculation may have leaned in that direction, certain media (you can guess who) STILL refused to back down even AFTER learning the terrorist was actually a blond blue-eyed Norwegian-born racist.
Now, it turns out on Saturday we found out the attacks were carried out by Anders Breivik, a native Norwegian Christian, with a 1500-page manifesto railing against the Muslimization of Europe. Now some say that these false reports of Muslim involvement were a widespread failure of the media, but I say by going with their guts, these journalists were able to get the story they wanted, and scoop reality.
....
Now fortunately, cooler heads are covering their asses. In an editorial response to their editorial, The Wall Street Journal calls Breivik an "al-Qaeda copycat" and reminds us that:
If this does prove to be the work of Islamists, it will be noted that neither Norway's opposition to the war in Iraq nor its considerable financial and political support for the Palestinians spared it from attack.
And if that hypothetical day should come, that's an imaginary lesson they will not soon pretend to forget.
And as the Washington Post's Jennifer Rubin wrote in her retraction, yes, the attacker's jihadists links "did not bear up", but that:
There are many more jihadists than blond Norwegians out to kill Americans
Right. So if you're pulling a news report completely out of your ass, it is safer to go with Muslim. That's not prejudice, that's probability. Because the news business is all about guesstimating, just taking shots in the dark. It's Friday, you're trying to beat the traffic for the weekend, you hear about a horrible attack, and you roll the bones and go, "Muslim!" Same way when you see someone turn the wrong way up a one-way street, your journalistic instincts go, "Asian!" After all, by Jennifer Rubin's logic, there are many more Asians than Americans out there.
Video and transcript below the fold.
Of course, today, here and all around the world, all our thoughts and prayers are with the people of Norway, who suffered an unspeakable tragedy on Friday. The killer has been caught, has confessed, and no punishment is too harsh fro him. The horror he has wreaked is incomprehensible, and words fail the civilized.
But sometimes in a crisis, true heroes emerge, like the brave men and women of America's newsrooms, who identified the culprit long before the Norwegian authorities did.
CHRIS JANSING (7/22/2011): Who's responsible for this blast? Well, Norway has been grappling with some homegrown terror plots linked to al-Qaeda.
NEIL LIVINGSTONE (7/22/2011): Without all the facts in, the finger of suspicion would suggest that this is probably Middle Eastern in its origin.
LAURA INGRAHAM (7/22/2011): Two deadly terror attacks in Norway, in what appears to be the work, once again, of Muslim extremists.
And the print media did its part with coverage like Washington Post blogger Jennifer Rubin, who Friday afternoon wrote:
... there is a specific jihadist connection here ... This is a sobering reminder for those who think it’s too expensive to wage a war against jihadists.
And The Wall Street Journal, which noted that:
Al Qaeda's Ayman al-Zawahiri has repeatedly singled out Norway
And you know The Wall Street Journal is accurate, because as a Murdoch paper, they've got proven ways to get inside information.
Now, it turns out on Saturday we found out the attacks were carried out by Anders Breivik, a native Norwegian Christian, with a 1500-page manifesto railing against the Muslimization of Europe. Now some say that these false reports of Muslim involvement were a widespread failure of the media, but I say by going with their guts, these journalists were able to get the story they wanted, and scoop reality.
And even if there was a rush to judgment, we must not repeat that mistake by rushing to accuracy. Just because the confessed murderer is a blond blue-eyed Norwegian-born anti-Muslim crusader, does not mean he's not a swarthy ululating Middle Eastern madman. Jim.
7/22/2011:
BROOKE BALDWIN: What do you think of the fact that he looked Nordic?
TIM LISTER: In the first few hours after any such event, there's so much information or misinformation flying about, that I wouldn't want to draw too many conclusions. Maybe it was a good disguise.
Yes. Which is more plausible, that a non-Muslim did this, or that al-Qaeda has developed Polyjuice Potion?
Now fortunately, cooler heads are covering their asses. In an editorial response to their editorial, The Wall Street Journal calls Breivik an "al-Qaeda copycat" and reminds us that:
If this does prove to be the work of Islamists, it will be noted that neither Norway's opposition to the war in Iraq nor its considerable financial and political support for the Palestinians spared it from attack.
And if that hypothetical day should come, that's an imaginary lesson they will not soon pretend to forget.
And as the Washington Post's Jennifer Rubin wrote in her retraction, yes, the attacker's jihadists links "did not bear up", but that:
There are many more jihadists than blond Norwegians out to kill Americans
Right. So if you're pulling a news report completely out of your ass, it is safer to go with Muslim. That's not prejudice, that's probability. Because the news business is all about guesstimating, just taking shots in the dark. It's Friday, you're trying to beat the traffic for the weekend, you hear about a horrible attack, and you roll the bones and go, "Muslim!" Same way when you see someone turn the wrong way up a one-way street, your journalistic instincts go, "Asian!" After all, by Jennifer Rubin's logic, there are many more Asians than Americans out there.
The point is, this monster may not be Muslim, but his heinous acts are indisputably Mus-lish. And we must not let his Islam-esque atrocity divert our attention from the terrible people he reminds us of.
Now I have a confession. Sometimes there are feelings that cross my mind that I do not immediately report as news. Well, I'm sorry for that. I let you down, and it will not happen again. So to my fellow journalistic gun-jumpers, I will now write all the headlines for the rest of the year.
OK? Done. Now we can put our journalistic energies where they're needed: writing the retractions. We'll be right back.
Stephen also commented on New York's new gay marriages, and then looked at how Summer's Eve's new commercial feature... a talking vagina. Be forewarned, Stephen warned:
What you are about to see, you cannot un-see.
Do not click on that link unless you never want to un-see that ad ever again in your lifetime.
Meanwhile, Jon noted how weathermen suddenly all seemed to cook food on the pavement during the heat wave, and then looked at how Congress can't get its shit together over the debt ceiling. And Jason Jones and Sam Bee went to cover in person the first gay marriages in New York.