With No Proof--NY Times, AP, and CNN Rush To Defend DEI in DC Crash

Unethical reporters violate longstanding journalistic principles for fair and balanced reporting, instead pushing their own far-left agenda

When a reporter covers a controversy, it is not up to the reporter to solve the controversy or prove which side is right, as I noted in my book Special Victim Status. Instead, the ethical thing for a journalist to do is to report evenhandedly on both or all sides of the controversy.

But with today’s left-wing social justice reporters, this rarely if ever happens. Case in point—comments by President Trump and members of his administration stating that DEI policies were a primary or contributing cause for the tragic crash on January 29 which killed 67 people when a military helicopter hit a regional jet landing at Reagan National Airport.

When Trump and his staff said DEI may have been to blame, by lowering standards for controllers—noting lawsuits agains the agency for DEI policies—left-wing reporters immediately went on the attack. Consider comments by the New York Times, AP, and CNN:

“CNN: Trump did not cite any evidence for how efforts to hire more minorities, people with disabilities and other groups less represented in American workforces led to the crash, saying “it just could have been” and that he had ‘common sense.’”

“AP: WASHINGTON (AP) — As the nation reeled from the deadliest American aviation disaster in more than two decades, President Donald Trump on Thursday baselessly blamed diversity initiatives for undermining air safety and questioned the actions of a U.S. Army helicopter pilot involved in the midair collision with a commercial airliner.”

“NY Times: Mr. Trump cited no evidence that diversity programs had anything to do with the fatal accident, which killed 67 people, and even admitted when pressed that the investigation had only just begun.

All accused Trump et al of making these claims without any proof. Trouble is, the political propagandists in the media do not realize that the exact same claim could be made about them. Simply turning their statements around reveals the partisan political nature of their comments. We could just as easily say that the New York Times, CNN, AP, and others offered no proof that DEI hadn’t caused the crash. They simply pushed their own ideological agenda. Clearly, the reporters have no real deep understanding of the nature of proof or evidence.

Ethically, again, reporters should give both sides of the controversy and let readers decide. But by simply giving their own opinions, the reporters violated their own organization’s ethics policies in many cases.

Logically, anyone with a brain can understand why hiring people with intellectual or psychological disabilities, if this happened as Trump alleged, might well affect their ability to do the job—any job.

Reports that the Control Tower may have been shorthanded do not prove Trump and company wrong, since it is possible that DEI policies led to short staffing. The controller on duty or the supervisor or both might have been “DEI hires,” for example. Or, one could claim that the agency focus on DEI has hindered its ability to find enough competent staff. It would be perfectly acceptable for reporters to quote critics, saying, “Democrats dismissed Trump’s statements, saying DEI actually strengthens air safety”—or whatever their particular claims are. Claims that the policies were instituted under President Obama do not prove that they weren’t responsible in any way. And as for why he allowed them to continue, Trump could merely say that back then he wasn’t aware of the policies or didn’t realize how harmful they were. Just to paraphrase what Florida Governor Ron DeSantis said at one point, when asked why some DEI policies had been enacted when he was in office, he said, “DEI sounds good at first until you get to know what it means and how discriminatory it is.”

I am not taking any particular stand or what did out didn’t cause the crash. That will come out over time as the investigation proceeds. Instead, I am simply commenting on how reporters covered the incident and subsequent political controversy.

There are any number of issues that might seem worth investigating—the placement of the airport so close to the center of not merely a major city but also the nation’s capitol and the fact that helicopters were constantly crossing the airplanes’ flight paths. My own concern is that the aircraft were flying with minimal height separation—even if nothing had gone wrong—of less than 200 feet—even though the NTSB nows says the radar was only accurate to plus or minus 100 feet for each aircraft.

The media’s coverage of the crash stands in stark contrast to how the media covered the recent wildfires in Los Angeles. But both show how the media rushed to politicize the events to push a political agenda.

In the case of the fires, reporters immediately began pushing the narrative that climate change was the primary or contributing cause of the fires. But the most recent evidence shows that the Altadena (Eaton) fire may have been caused by a spark at an electrical transmission tower; a camera at a gas station caught a spark from the tower before the hillside around it burst into flames. Also, authorities are looking into whether fireworks caused the Palisades fire. There are reports there was a fire in the same spot caused by illegal fireworks on New Year’s Day. Firefighters thought they extinguished the fire, but now it appears it may have reignited. At least that possibility is being explored.

I do not take any position on what the ultimate cause of the fires or the accident may be. But it is clear that the media rushed to push its own preferred political narratives—supporting DEI and climate change—in both cases.