»» Columnists

Dan Abrams: Please Stop Complaining About The Media’s “Ground Zero Mosque” Coverage

by Dan Abrams | 11:50 am, August 30th, 2010

» 21 comments

Now that the initial furor has died down, much of the media is quickly coming to a consensus that the debate over building a Muslim community and prayer center two blocks from Ground Zero was overblown. It is/was part of a “summer of fear,” a “ginned up rage,” or “a frenzy over a story that doesn’t really exist.” Media hand-wringing and navel gazing often follow the hysteria of an over covered story in an effort to downplay and dismiss the media’s own coverage. After all, the media, loves to cover nothing more than, well, itself (ahem hence Mediaite).

But was this story really the equivalent of summer sharks, missing girls and frightening weather? Is the media to ignore or diminish a story where 70 percent of the public and 63 percent of New Yorkers oppose building the center in that location? Surely many will blame the media coverage itself for those numbers, and it is true that like any story that receives a lot of media attention, public awareness of the “Ground Zero Mosque” has had an impact on the “Ground Zero Mosque” story. (It’s also true that few complained when the project was first announced many months ago.)

But the fact that most didn’t know about it doesn’t mean they wouldn’t have cared if they did. The ultimate question is whether this was/is a legitimate story ripe for significant media coverage, or just a political and xenophobic ploy disguised as a news debate. Sure, some have hidden behind the “debate” to encourage Islamophobia, and most of them have been appropriately called out by their political opponents in the opinion media time and again. Amongst the mainstream media, however, the pendulum is now swinging too far in the other direction, as many run for cover from a story that not only deserved coverage, but the media was really obligated to cover, if the standards for judging news have not been altered for this story.

So then I must be part of the “move the mosque” crowd? I mean, how could I believe the extensive coverage is appropriate if I also think the Cordoba Initiative should be permitted to move forward in that spot? Well, just because I happen to support any religion’s right to build a facility two blocks from Ground Zero, just because I do not equate radical Islamists with the peaceful Islamic religion, just because I think it would be unconstitutional to try to impede it, does not mean this is not a legitimate story worthy of debate.

To the chagrin of many, the media gravitates towards controversy. It is in their (our) DNA. Whether anyone or everyone likes it or not, it is what they do. It’s why politics and sports, mystery and mayhem dominate coverage. This story includes the ultimate elixir for media coverage: emotion, politics, terrorism, religion and bias. Some will say that the existence of those elements alone shouldn’t mean that the media must play into the hands of those appealing to biases and the most base of human instincts. True, so then what makes this controversy deserving of days and days of saturated media coverage? Who knows how much coverage is appropriate, but it’s obvious that when terrorists attack the U.S., sensitivities will be high to anything large built in that area a year after the fact or even almost ten years later. The area around Ground Zero is news because its Ground Zero. Period. Building a center two blocks away which supports the very cause that the terrorists claimed (at least by name) was their calling, increases its news value exponentially. It doesn’t validate the terrorists’ warped view of Islam, but, like it or not, in this day and age, it makes it news. Simply dismissing the entire controversy as a non-story is to presume that no one should question the prudence of building the facility at that location. That is also to take a side in the debate.

Consider another hypothetical example. A radical group of extremist Jews who claim to be angry about Turkey’s role in the Gaza boat fiasco bring down the Saphhire Tower, a brand new modern high rise in the heart of the Istanbul financial district. Turkey has long been lauded by the international community for welcoming different religions and is considered a beacon of multiculturalism. The Israeli government and all major Jewish groups immediately condemn the attack in the harshest terms.

The rebuilding effort takes years and in the meantime, a mainstream Jewish group proposes building a Jewish cultural center and synagogue two blocks from the location of the downed skyscraper. Of course there would be complaints, some based on antisemitism, others based on the sensitivity of the location. But even if you disagree with them, would we question whether it is a legitimate story worthy of extensive debate on the news stations, websites and newspapers of the region? Would we minimize those questions by constantly referring to the summer news doldrums? Like in this case, I would personally think those questions founded in a misunderstanding of the Jewish faith and the unfortunate conflation of Jews and radicals but I would still recognize and appreciate why the local media was covering the story. A lot.

Should we question how some have covered this story here? Of course. Should we critique those who have nakedly tried to milk it for political gain or not so nakedly appealed to prejudice? You bet. But for members of the media to scapegoat their brethren as a whole for focusing on this, is to become blinded by their own political biases. Everyone would like to see a Utopian media where only the most “important” stories of the day are covered but until that happens, lets admit that singling out this one for particular scorn is to either highlight the author’s take on who is right, or to usher in a completely new standard for judging what is news.

Dan Abrams, Ground Zero Mosque, Islamic Cultural Center, Park 51, Park51, Summer of Fear

m

People blame an entity that has no coherent voice and which doesn’t actively defend itself or refute any argument against itself. The “media” is socially constructed entity. Who wouldn’t want to accuse some thing of something that nobody defends, with no repercussions and no chance of being refuted? It’s just so damn easy.
http://gordonbloyershow.com gordonbloyershow

The Mosque will not be built in that location, no matter how much the media left wants it.
Cecelia

Oh, Dan, you guys always consider yourselves to be the thin technicolor line between saintly progressive idealism in the populace and our grabbing up the torches and pitchforks. It shouldn’t surprise you that that those stats are causing some consternation among your brethren.

To you guys, public sentiment is always the child of media influence. One way or another…
Iris

Or you’ll huff and you’ll puff and Blow the mosque down, yeah gordonblows
NORBIT

Dan, to be perfectly honest, the Democratic zeitgeist these days is SO dangerous to the well-being of our society, that any legitimate controversy that hurts them in November is just fine with me!
http://insidecablenews.wordpress.com/ Spud

“But the fact that most didn’t know about it doesn’t mean they wouldn’t have cared if they did.”

Chicken/Egg argument. This is wading into “what ifs”. Stick to the subject: What happened.

The coverage was overblown and the media ran with it. It doesn’t matter if it was summer or winter or leap year. It’s what the media does. It starts with superficial reporting relying on talking points and press release arguments to fill in the blanks they’re too lazy to fill in themselves. This is followed by hand wringing at the possibility the media aided and abetting a story. This is followed by what we see in your article; hand wringing over the hand wringing.

I’ve seen this play out too many times before with too many subjects. Pick one…

The 2000 recount in Florida
The run up to the Iraq War
Terry Schiavio
Flag burning
Beck’s rallies
Obama’s Nationality and Birth
ACORN
Gay Marriage
Almost anything Sarah Palin

In short, this is nothing new for the media and, consequently, just doesn’t get me as worked up as you.

I do think it’s a news story. But I also think it’s more than necessary for the media to examine how it’s being manipulated on this story. The media is, by and large, not very deep and easily susceptible to being rolled by either side of the political spectrum. I think it got rolled here on this story by both sides. The signal to noise ratio was too low, with a few exceptions here and there where reporters took the time to examine the story from all angles. But they’re reporting tends to get drowned out by the noise or ignored by the people who only want to read or see what they already believe to be true, regardless of their ideological leanings.

“Is the media to ignore or diminish a story where 70 percent of the public and 63 percent of New Yorkers oppose building the center in that location?”

Dan you should know better than to cite polls as evidence. Polls and their results can be easily skewed by how the questions are phrased. In this case, both poll questions used the term “mosque” which, as some of us already know, it won’t be.

Furthermore for you to spend too much time blasting the media “as a whole” for scapegoating the media “as a whole” is more than a little shallow. You paint your article with the same broad brush that you rail against the media using. Name names Dan. Tell us which media are the ones blaming the media as a whole for this? Are they Op Ed people who always paint with the broadest of brushes? Are they publishers, who have little input in the day to day story telling (excepting maybe Rupert Murdoch)? Are they TV news executives? Are they talking head primetime show hosts, who’s opinions tend to have the least amount of credibility? Who are these people? Depending on who they are and what they do, the validity of your point may carry more or less weight.

Name names Dan. Then we’ll talk…
Arkansas Steve

DAN,

How do we send a message to you or your office with out suggestions for making Mediaite a better site?

How do we send a message to one of your writers? Currently, I can only respond to one of their stories, but my subject may be unrelated to that story.

Shouldn’t you & each of your staff writers have a separate email for taking comments & suggestions directly?
in my humble opinion

DAN, LET US KNOW YOUR OPINION OF THE SUPREME COURTS OPINION RE CORPORATIONS ARE PEOPLE AND HAVE THE RIGHT OF FREE SPEECH AND MAY CONTRIBUTE TO CAMPAIGNS.
WOULD YOUR DAD PERHAPS COMMENT? THAT WOULD BE COOL.
http://mediaite.com Steve Krakauer

Arkansas Steve:

Check out the About Us page for all our direct emails…

http://www.mediaite.com/about/
disgusted

This gives the people something else to WHINE about – !!
avoidswork

Dan~ Calling it a mosque, giving the fear credit, digging into the man behind Park 51, etc., is more than just a “how it was done” issue. It’s the central problem with so much coverage of anything these days. But specifically regarding anti-Muslim sentiment in America. Where are voices of moderation telling people (just as my mom told me growing up): “you don’t have to like it. you do have to accept it.”?

“…To the chagrin of many, the media gravitates towards controversy. It is in their (our) DNA. Whether anyone or everyone likes it or not, it is what they do. It’s why politics and sports, mystery and mayhem dominate coverage…”

Yes, Dan, and that’s why America and its media are idiots of the highest order. We/You should be mortified at what is considered “media” these days. This article is as bad as the Daily Beast’s Meghan McCain saying the right man (her dad) won in Arizona.

All it does is make for <>.
CosmosDan

It’s not just the amount of coverage it got. It’s the incredible dishonest slant of the coverage that got people so riled up. The media is welcome to cover controversy but how about doing it with facts and honesty. That might have some affect on how the public reacts.
shootfromthehip

Good thoughtful post, Dan.

I think you should write more on the site when you have time.
sticks

Seriously you liberal Thugs, that means you Dan Abrams… What is soooooo damn hard to understand here ?… Nobody says they cant build it… But, what has happened to compassion for your fellow Americans ?… How do you and every other liberal for that matter not see, how someone who lost a loved one maybe, just maybe, might not want what the mosque SYMBOLIZES to be so close to Ground Zero ?…
SpineCrusher

sticks said:
Seriously you liberal Thugs, that means you Dan Abrams… What is soooooo damn hard to understand here ?… Nobody says they cant build it… But, what has happened to compassion for your fellow Americans ?… How do you and every other liberal for that matter not see, how someone who lost a loved one maybe, just maybe, might not want what the mosque SYMBOLIZES to be so close to Ground Zero ?…

People who have no compassion should not be surprised when people question their motives for suggesting compassion.

How about the Christian 9/11 Church that they’re trying to build EVEN closer to Ground Zero…are you going to go out and try to stop that one?

http://www.salon.com/news/ground_zero_mosque/index.html?story=/politics/war_room/2010/08/30/bigot_establishes_ground_zero_church
sticks

Spine… Are you talking about the church that was there before the attacks ?… Then hell no Im not going to object to that… Seriously, how do you not understand this ?…
gar

It became a big story to take pressure off more pressing issues, like the economy, the housing meltdown, rising healthcare costs, and a middle class that’s questioning the plight of this country.The left is running out of arguments on these issues so they go into personal attack mode. IT’S NOT WORKING .Top down politics by academic elitists without any buy-in by the foundation of this country will be dealt with in November.
jk76

Muslims give us reasons to fear Islam every day all over the world, and a couple times a year in our world. Sure it’s not the 1st page in the Qur’an that says “go kill people”, as has been for all history people using religion to gain power and guide followers. It’s also a cultural thing. The family structures, the society as a whole, the ability and/or access to do things or go places. As well as how susceptible people are to a faith, to be guilible and blindly follow.

Not all people in a group are representative of a portion of said group. People come to the USA for variety of reasons, even to come here and complain and compare us. As we grow in population it becomes harder to control and watch domestically; also group conflicts become greater.

The mosque debate needed to happen, the media wanted conflict and drame, as well as show how accomadating lefties are (yay more votes). They no longer inform. Also fucktards comparing 9/11 to irrelevent shit or stuff that just isn’t even similar in any way make me want to donkey punch them. This doesn’t boil down to ‘sensitivity’ so you can’t just compare sensitive areas…Beck’s rally? yeah someone compared it, and that jacknut above talking about a church, only one religion did 9/11 you toe jam licker
Joe4more

Dan, I don’t have any problem with the amount of media coverage on the Park 51 project. What I can’t accept is the shallowness that journalist display, everyday, every “big” story. Why has it become routine to let individuals, be it politicians or their lackeys, get away with anything they want to say; not to mention the “spin doctors”? Watching Dan Senor last week, being deployed in front of any camera that would have him was sickening; but he must have been bringing something critical to the debate, he was everywhere – or one would think – wrong; he had nothing, nothing but lies, twisted words, and misrepresentation all frosted with a thick layer of fear mongering.
Dan, where are the journalists? While watching David Gregory getting played on MTP last Sunday, my 20 yr. old son asked me how does one battle rhetoric? Good question I replied! I suggested the answer is directly correlated with the depth of knowledge about the subject possessed by the interviewer and the strength of the interviewer’s backbone. Correct me if I’m wrong!
http://www.facebook.com/people/Laura-Manske/1424902265 Laura Manske

Watch. Listen. Think… Check out this powerful song/video about the Ground Zero “mosque” controversy:

HEY AMERICAN on YouTube

by NYC songwriter David Ippolito – a voice for PEACE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-dGCVwZdu4
reelwebdesign

Truth is who really gives afuck. If the media didn’t make it a big deal it would have just happened with no problem as anyone from NY knows that 2 blocks is like an eternity away in the city. Also most of those demonstrators were shipped in by the TEA party from different states that couldn’t give a rats ass about New Yorkers or what goes on here (ofcourse they fail to realize that a good 1/4 of the GDP comes from us!).
No one really cares this is just a political move and/or a hatred move against anyone who is Islamic.
Personally I think all religious people are crazy but hey we have to give everyone there right to believe what they want otherwise we have caved in and have let the Al Queda win by letting them change our core beliefs.