In a media world that loves sharp lines, discussions about Trump’s shooting follow a predictable path

There are not many facts. There is, however, an avalanche of conclusions.

This is what happens in many corners of the media and among its frequent commentators, after the attempted assassination of Donald Trump.

Authorities I didn’t establish why a 20-year-old Pennsylvania man tried to assassinate the former president — and now that the shooter is dead, we may never know. This has not stopped media figures and politicians from making strong speculations. President Joe Biden, the Democrats, and the left-wing media were all blamed, without evidence. Then there’s the ever-popular, amorphous, in-the-eye-of-the-beholder target – “them.”

“They tried to incarcerate him, now they tried to murder him,” said Fox News contributor Jacob Chaffetz.

Taken as a whole, it is a reflection of the purpose for which breaking news coverage in a modern media world was built – drawing sharp lines, leaning into epic stories, leaving little room for middle ground or, at times, even for the truth.

Some of the statements were specific. “The Republican district attorney in Butler County, Pennsylvania, should immediately bring charges against Joseph R. Biden for incitement to murder,” said U.S. Rep. Mike Collins of Georgia. wrote on social media. “Democrats and the media are to blame for every drop of blood,” he said Representative Marjorie Taylor Green.

“The central premise of the Biden campaign is that President Donald Trump is an authoritarian fascist who must be stopped at all costs,” said Ohio Senator JD Vance. posted, two days before he was chosen as Trump’s running mate. “This rhetoric led directly to the attempted assassination of President Trump.”

Talk show host Erick Erickson blamed MSNBC. “These people wanted Donald Trump assassinated,” he said on his radio show. “You can’t tell me no.” Charlie Kirkfounder of Turning Point USA, said “Democrats have been inviting this for some time.”

Many news organizations reported clues about the attempted assassination of Thomas Matthew Crooks — party registration, political donations, signs on his lawn — but refrained from drawing conclusions.

For many politicians and opinionated media figures, there is little incentive for restraint, said Nicole Hemmer, a political historian at Vanderbilt University and author of “Messengers from the Right: Conservative Media and the Transformation of American Politics.”

“Because there is so much competition in the world of right-wing radio and podcasts, the pressure to be the loudest, most exaggerated, angriest voice is even greater than it was in an earlier era,” Hemmer said.

They serve a specific audience, and “they don’t believe there will be forgiveness among that audience if they don’t serve them effectively,” said Michael Harrison, editor of Talkers, a trade publication for political talk shows.

Blaming Democrats, Hemmer said, also blunts that party’s line of attack against Trump in the current presidential campaign — accusing the Republican of inciting political violence in the past, such as before the Capitol insurrection on January 6.

After the assassination attempt, Biden called for greater unity and a cooling of political rhetoric. But the president was left vulnerable after his debate with Trump when he told donors it was “time to put Trump on target” for false statements on stage. The choice of phrase seems blunt in retrospect, and Biden told NBC’s Lester Holt on Monday that saying it was a mistake.

Speculative rhetoric in the wake of the tragedy is neither new nor one-sided. Right-wing media and political figures were quickly criticized after the 2011 footage from US Representative Gabrielle Giffords of Arizona. The New York Times apologized and was later sued for libel for falsely linking the Giffords shooting to a map released by former Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin that placed Democratic-controlled voting districts in the electoral crosshairs.

Anger toward mainstream or liberal media figures has been palpable in the wake of Trump’s shooting; one of the supporters at the rally in Pennsylvania pointed the middle finger at the television cameras that saw Trump being removed by Secret Service agents.

Fueling this anger is easy — and, for some news operations, profitable. There are few barriers against indulging in such speculation, Hemmer said.

“The only effective protection is lawsuits with great damages,” she said, as Fox News has faced before agreement with Dominion Voting Systems about claims made after the 2020 presidential election, or jury verdicts against Alex Jones for his False claims about the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Connecticut.

But those cases involved very specific accusations, not a general statement of “you caused this,” Hemmer said.

“They don’t have to be specific,” she said. “All you need is ‘them’ and that does all the work.”

Politicians are more likely to join in the blame and speculation than in the past, because those who do so successfully, like Greene, have used it to raise money, Hemmer said. Party leaders have less power to stop them because the threat to withhold campaign donations is becoming increasingly ineffective, she said.

“The media and politicians definitely support each other,” Hemmer said. “More than that, the lines between the two roles have been so frayed that it is not a surprise to see office holders and media personalities saying the same things.”

___

David Bauder writes about media for the AP. Follow him on