We knew it would be coming.
Every time there is an event in the world that goes against the dead legacy media’s preferred narrative, we don’t just fear how atrocious the coverage will be; we’ve come to expect it. That’s how low the Western media has sunk.
Sadly, yesterday’s antisemitic, targeted terror attack in Boulder, Colorado, is no exception.
The media were shown photos and videos of the attack as it happened. They were supplied with eyewitness accounts showing the attacker screaming and threatening people with exclamations like ‘End Zionism!’ and ‘Free Palestine!’
None of it mattered.
Last night, Seth Frantzman, author and correspondent for The Jerusalem Post, posted a devastating thread of the media coverage of Boulder, and all of it is simultaneously jaw-dropping yet entirely unsurprising.
Frantzman opened his thread with a question about some VERY unnecessary quotation marks from CNN:
Why did CNN deel the need to put “peaceful” in quotes. The idea is to make it seem that there is a question as to whether it was peaceful. pic.twitter.com/YOR8HifQGM
— Seth Frantzman (@sfrantzman) June 1, 2025
CNN, the network that can show live images of BLM protesters burning down cities and call that mostly peaceful, somehow cannot bring themselves to use the word peaceful regarding the Boulder rally without qualifying it.
As Frantzman asks, ‘Why? Why, CNN?’
Oh, but it gets worse.
Note that the article doesn’t say anything about the man’s statements. It does say “The source stressed potential mental health concerns have not yet been ruled out, which could factor into any charging decision.”
They don’t do reporting on the actual event, they try to make it… pic.twitter.com/fbEkdc8l5i
— Seth Frantzman (@sfrantzman) June 1, 2025
… they try to make it seem as if it being ‘peaceful’ is a controversial issue; but then do no reporting about what the suspect said.
Again, Mohamad Soliman was ON VIDEO shouting his antisemitic rhetoric while brandishing Molotov cocktails. CNN reported none of it.
The BBC also doesn’t say anything about the perpetrator, but they don’t put “peaceful” in quotes.
“A pro-Israeli peaceful demonstration was under way when the attack happened, police say – the group meets regularly for a walk to remember the hostages taken by Hamas” pic.twitter.com/RonhSYAacX
— Seth Frantzman (@sfrantzman) June 1, 2025
We suppose that’s an improvement? Maybe?
But still nothing about the attacker. And the BBC also questions whether the attack was ‘targeted,’ even though THEIR VERY OWN STORY cites the Colorado Attorney General (not to mention the FBI) saying that it was.
yet here you have officials saying it was targeted. So why the need to make it seem it was not? pic.twitter.com/nqpXLnmlPa
— Seth Frantzman (@sfrantzman) June 1, 2025
We know why.
NBC is better, it notes that these were people who gathered to support hostages. No quote marks here. pic.twitter.com/gwg8npDyXz
— Seth Frantzman (@sfrantzman) June 1, 2025
This is one post where we disagree with Frantzman. NBC did not ‘do better’ at all.
This was their initial headline:
How many euphemisms for “Jews” did NBC workshop before they landed on “Gaza hostage awareness marchers”? https://t.co/DbumzAn7Mo
— James Hasson (@JamesHasson20) June 2, 2025
If your headline is twisting the English language in more directions than a pretzel, you are not doing journalism. You are doing propaganda.
Also, notice how so many of the mainstream media’s headlines use the passive voice. That’s not an accident. They didn’t write ‘attacker injures peaceful demonstrators.’ They wrote ‘Gaza-hostage-awareness marchers injured.’
It’s intentional.
here is CBS…which won’t identify anything in the headline…just a people being burned… pic.twitter.com/9HJQGB3aIY
— Seth Frantzman (@sfrantzman) June 1, 2025
At least CBS used the active voice. That’s something.
But they can’t bring themselves to say who the victims were. They’re just ‘people.’
Paragraphs in…CBS won’t tell you anything about it, it’sjust some generic event. This is a clear attempt to hide what happened.
Only later in the article: “Witnesses at the scene told CBS Colorado that the suspect attacked people with Molotov cocktails who were participating… pic.twitter.com/uF8PfA1aG3
— Seth Frantzman (@sfrantzman) June 1, 2025
Let’s see if ABC did any better. (Spoiler alert: They did not.)
Here is ABC…you have to read half the article to get to;
“Leo Terrell, head of the antisemitism task force at the Justice Department, said that an ‘incendiary device’ was thrown at participants in the Run for Their Lives walk. The attack happened ‘as they peacefully raised… pic.twitter.com/svzbz2j3Bb
— Seth Frantzman (@sfrantzman) June 1, 2025
Why is this half way into the article? Why not the lead?
It’s systematic. Every. Single. Article.
NPR was no better. They also hid all of the details in a passive voice headline.
Anonymous people burned https://t.co/bPeYYcLHUp
— Seth Frantzman (@sfrantzman) June 2, 2025
Not to harp on this point too much, but using the active voice is Journalism 101. Especially in headlines. You learn that on your very first day.
Even if the headline writers are interns, where are the editors?
Frantzman returned to the CNN headline later in his thread, asking the obvious question.
Let’s ask a simple question. If it was a peaceful gathering of ANY OTHER group and someone attacked them with molotov cocktails…would “peaceful” be put in quotes. Would the motive of the perpetrator be erased…or at the end of the article.
If it was a BLM march would…
— Seth Frantzman (@sfrantzman) June 1, 2025
Is it unfair to latch onto this one word and the quotes? No. It’s worth asking why. Why did someone feel the need to add quotes to this? It was a peaceful mark wasn’t it? Someone attacked it. There’s no question about whether it was peaceful. There is only a question about the…
— Seth Frantzman (@sfrantzman) June 2, 2025
It is NOT unfair to latch on to that glaring example of media malpractice, and it is NOT unfair to ask why.
Frantzman offered his own answer to that second question:
This is how legacy media reported an attack on people. This is what they do. They downplay the motive and refuse to report what the perpetrator said…every attempt is made to hide all the details. It’s systematic. It’s not just “whoops”…it’s systematic.
The screenshots tell…
— Seth Frantzman (@sfrantzman) June 1, 2025
… The screenshots tell you how they did this. It has been hours since this happened. It’s not that they didn’t know. They know…they see it…and they too often work to hide and minimize it.
As we noted, by the time many of these articles came out, there were photos, there were videos, there were eyewitness accounts, and there were statements from the FBI, the Colorado Attorney General, and even the governor.
We know because many of these articles included references to those accounts and statements, even though many buried them deep in the story.
Frantzman correctly observes that this is systematic. It is also intentional.
And sadly, it is entirely unsurprising from today’s media.
*barely speaks English
*yells Free Palestine
*throws molatov cocktails at peaceful protestors
*named Mohamad Soliman
Media: “He’s a Colorado man and we’re unsure of his motive.”
At this point, if you’re not on X, you’re not getting the truth
— Chela Vega (@MissVega8888) June 1, 2025
It’s been this way for a while, but it is becoming so egregious as to be downright offensive.
With each successive news event that contradicts the preferred narrative, all we can count on from the legacy media is that they will lie to everyone. Shamelessly. (Some outlets are STILL pushing the debunked story from the weekend that Israel attacked a Gaza aid distribution center.)
And they have the nerve to wonder why everyone hates them.
Editor’s Note: The mainstream media continues to deflect, gaslight, spin, and lie.
Help us continue exposing their grift by reading news you can trust. Join Twitchy VIP and use promo code FIGHT to get 60% off your membership.