The assassination of former Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe has brought out the worst in legacy media once again.
Perhaps if he had been a communist dictator instead of an American ally, several outlets would be kinder in their obituaries.
Abe was a staunch ally of the United States and Japan’s longest-serving prime minister since World War II. But NPR decided to call him a “divisive arch-conservative.” After deleting that tweet, NPR settled on calling him an “ultranationalist.” It’s a stark contrast from how the outlet, which receives taxpayer funding, referred to communist Fidel Castro, stating that he “inspired both passionate love and hate” and that “many who later lost faith in him can remember how they once admired” him.
NPR describing Fidel Castro vs. NPR describing Shinzo Abe posthumously. pic.twitter.com/lP1SatxgkI
— Natalie Johnson (@nataliejohnsonn) July 8, 2022
The same was true at the Associated Press. The outlet’s headline for Castro’s death glorified him as the man “who defied U.S. for 50 years.” For Venezuela’s communist tyrant Hugo Chavez, he was remembered as a “fiery Venezuelan leader.” But Abe “leaves a divided legacy,” presumably because he opposed communists who oppress their own people as opposed to being one of them.
Spot the difference pic.twitter.com/ulielHPuom
— Eric Cunningham (@decunningham2) July 8, 2022
CBS Mornings trashed Abe immediately after his assassination as a “polarizing figure” who was “a right-wing nationalist and a conservative” whose political opinions were “controversial.” The Hill similarly declared that Abe was “divisive,” trashing him for wanting to amend the country’s constitution to allow for a stronger military in the face of Chinese aggression.
.@CBSMornings trashes Shinzo Abe hours after his assassination, calling him “a polarizing figure,” “right-wing nationalist, and conservative” whose “political opinions were controversial” pic.twitter.com/XAUXAkqKu2
— Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) July 8, 2022
This has become normal for legacy media when it comes to obituaries and announcing the deaths of prominent figures. If the figure was a communist or a terrorist, we must be told of all the good they did. If it’s a figure who can be considered conservative by any metric, we must be told of all the harm they caused and all their faults or how “divisive” and “polarizing” they were.
Apparently, being a U.S. ally and an opponent of the Chinese Communist Party wasn’t enough to save Abe from the typical treatment of conservatives after their deaths. Or then again, maybe that’s the whole point — that they have it in for allies of the U.S. and enemies of China.
This disgraceful practice of shaming people labeled as conservative after death while glorifying or whitewashing the lives of communists and terrorists deserves its own obituary. Legacy media already do their best to score political points as long as figures like Abe live. When they cap off a lifetime of biased coverage with this sort of grave-dancing, they only bury their own credibility.
