Protesters or Agitators? Media Should Apply the Latter To Those Intent on Shutting Down Rallies

Since President Obama took office in 2009, we’ve heard much debate over whether he truly understands the nature and degree of the threat posed by terror organizations such as Al Qaeda and, later, ISIS. Conservative politicians and media will point to his refusal to, and we’ve heard this many times, “call it what it is: Radical Islamic Terrorism.”

For example, here’s Ted Cruz on the topic:

“Well, the first thing we should do is identify the evil we are fighting. Obama literally will not utter the words ‘radical Islamic terrorism. And as matter of policy, nobody in the administration will say the words ‘radical Islamic terrorism,” said Cruz. Many commentators on the right, most notably Sean Hannity and Mark Levin, echo this sentiment regularly when the topic presents itself.

Politifact rates this assertion as “true”. The administration will describe terrorists as “thugs” or “killers” and is insistent on using ISIL over ISIS (a whole column in itself). The president says his reasoning is based on a rhetorical strategy to isolate groups that are “desperate for legitimacy”. The difference in opinion on characterization has been debated for the past seven years. In the end, nothing is likely to change on that front unless a Republican wins office in November.

“Words have energy and power with the ability to help, to heal, to hinder, to hurt, to harm, to humiliate, and to humble,” the author Yehuda Berg once wrote. Which brings us to a question regarding the words to describe those who are disrupting and even shutting down Donald Trump rallies, as we witnessed in Chicago over the weekend: Should these groups — which are obviously well-organized and have stated a clear intent to do more than just protest — be characterized as “protesters,” or “agitators” by the media?

Before continuing, let’s look at their respective definitions, per Dictionary.com:

Protester: an expression or declaration of objection, disapproval, or dissent, often in opposition to something a person is powerless to prevent or avoid.

Agitator: person who disturbs, causes trouble

Given what we’ve seen over the past few days — rallies cancelled outright due to security concerns and someone needing to be tackled by Secret Service before running onto a stage in an attempt to physically attack candidate Trump — the obvious choice here is B. To that end, here are some notable clips from an NBC News report (How Bernie Sanders Supporters Shut Down Donald Trump’s Rally Friday Night) with direct quotes from the agitators themselves who were involved:

When Ja’Mal Green, a prominent black activist and Bernie Sanders supporter in Chicago, saw that Donald Trump was coming to the University of Illinois-Chicago, he knew what he had to do.

“Everyone, get your tickets to this. We’re all going in!!!! ‪#‎SHUTITDOWN‬,” he posted on Facebook last week.

“Remember the #TrumpRally wasn’t just luck. It took organizers from dozens of organizations and thousands of people to pull off. Great work,” tweeted People for Bernie, a large unofficial pro-Sanders organization founded by veterans of the Occupy movement and other leftist activists.

MoveOn chipped in money to get signs and a banner printed and blasted out an email to members in the Chicago area encouraging them to join the protest.

“We’ll just keep a lookout and see if [Trump] tries to come back to Chicago,” one agitator, (Matthew) Ross told NBC. “Hopefully, there’s a domino effect.”

Tries to come back to Chicago. So the goal is to ban a candidate from whole cities now? And does the tone of that report — from a major news organization — sound like it comes from those looking simply to have their voices heard? Or does it resemble a willingness to disrupt and incite to the point of shutting an actual event down?

Here’s another quote from an agitator at the Chicago Trump rally (emphasis mine): “Trump represents everything America is not and everything Chicago is not,” Kamran Siddiqui told the New York Daily News. “We came in here and we wanted to shut this down. Because this is a great city and we don’t want to let that person in here.”

Again, it’s hard not to come to the conclusion it’s the latter when it comes to the choice between protester and agitator.

Now… lest this column be seen as one defending Trump. We’re so polarized now that it’s automatically assumed there an absolutely-right and dead-wrong side to every controversy. But both sides can be wrong.

Know this: Trump’s words have fanned the flames. He shouldn’t be offering to pay legal fees of those who sucker punch those at his rallies or say he would actually like to punch them in the face himself. That kind of rhetoric — as noted here — is more petulant and punkish than presidential, and only provides said agitators an excuse to create chaos on the campaign trail.

Trump — of course — won’t apologize or ask for calm, as many on the left and right have asked him to do. That’s not the brand he’s selling. It’s a brand that is unwavering and unapologetic… even if it’s wrong and/or potentially dangerous. And it’s not just Trump who is a target, but columnists like Ben Shapiro (formerly of Breitbart), who had a fire alarm pulled and doors blockaded by agitators in a hall before a speech he was going to make at Cal State (L.A.). Just last month at Rutgers, gay conservative columnist Milo Yiannopoulos had his speech constantly interrupted by fake-blood-stained agitators who also vandalized the campus building where he spoke while chanting “Black Lives Matter” as they exited. Bernie Sanders had to forfeit the stage to BLM members at a rally earlier in the campaign. The list goes on and on…

Protesters or agitators? Words do matter… as does properly characterizing those looking to eliminate free speech (while hiding under the guise of free speech) when the actual — and ironic — intent is to suppress, to shut down.

Regardless of what you think of the candidate, those inside a Trump event looking to do just that really need to be called out for exactly what they are: agitators.

And that starts with a media all too willing and able to cover all-things Trump.

— —

Follow Joe Concha on Twitter @JoeConchaTV

This is an opinion piece. The views expressed in this article are those of just the author.

New: The Mediaite One-Sheet "Newsletter of Newsletters"
Your daily summary and analysis of what the many, many media newsletters are saying and reporting. Subscribe now!