“College students protest speaker branded white nationalist,” read the Associated Press headline reporting on protests over a lecture by Charles Murray at Middlebury College in Vermont.
Has Charles Murray been “branded” a “white nationalist?” Yes, that is factually correct. But its veracity does not in any way necessitate its inclusion in the headline.
That was a choice, predicated on unfair assumptions about Murray’s career.
In fact, the headline is an obvious concession to the AP’s decision to frame the story as a matter of noble student protesters resisting a campus invasion by some type of hateful bigot intent on spewing his racist propaganda.
That, of course, is not objective.
Objectively, a group of liberal student protesters spent the night loudly disrupting a lecture by a scholar with whom they disagree, making impossible his efforts to share widely-cited research with an interested audience, all despite the school administration’s pleas for them to respect free expression.
It is fine for reporters to note that the students’ opposition to Murray was predicated on the (incorrect) belief that his scholarship is racist. But to frame the story by actively substantiating that belief without including one counterpoint is malfeasance.
The story quotes students and professors defending Murray’s visit as an opportunity to facilitate the free exchange of ideas and ideological diversity. But without challenging the highly contested allegation included in the headline itself, and then substantiated throughout the piece, the AP leaves readers with the impression that it’s true.
That is not accurate, nor is it fair.
Tweeting out a link to the Washington Post’s published AP story, on Friday morning Murray himself asked, “This is how WaPo reports on an out-of-control mob that physically assaults a speaker and a professor?”
Emily Jashinsky is a commentary writer for the Washington Examiner.
