Get help now

The NRA Is Brainwashing Americans With Fake News

Updated August 17, 2022
dovnload

Download Paper

File format: .pdf, .doc, available for editing

The NRA Is Brainwashing Americans With Fake News essay

Get help to write your own 100% unique essay

Get custom paper

78 writers are online and ready to chat

This essay has been submitted to us by a student. This is not an example of the work written by our writers.

With the increase in mass shootings in America, gun control is understandably at the center of many minds in America today. Following each gun-related massacre, the news media reaches out to as many people as possible to boost ratings by interviewing those directly affected by the tragedy. Unfortunately, research has proved that certain interviews may have been scripted and falsified with inaccurate data spread by unreliable sources. In addition to fabricated interviews, many news sites are full of statistics regarding gun-related violence that may not always come from reliable sources. At the center of this argument is John Lott, a pro-gun advocate and public voice for the NRA. Lott has appeared on many credible media outlets sharing his opinions and statistics from unverifiable surveys that he personally conducted.

This fake news has led to the unintentional deception of many followers across the nation. Based on the inaccurate statistics that are broadcast across national television, newspapers and the internet, unsuspecting minds unknowingly are influenced into swaying their political views to help the less favorable side gain an advantage in the public eye. This essay will review both sides of the argument without prejudice, enabling the reader to decide which side of the argument they wish to support. Gun control is a highly controversial issue that is plaguing our society. One should not have to fear for their lives because they decided to go shopping at the mall or watch a movie at the theater. Children should not have to go to school wondering if it will be the last time they will see their parents because of the fear of being killed by a school shooter. One may think that these killings have become common incidents because of the overexposure of these tragedies across media by anti-gun groups, but, in reality, “between 1999 and 2013, mass shootings covered by the CRS study accounted for a microscopic 0.004 percent of all deaths, about 0.66 percent of all murder victims, and less than one fiftieth the number of non-firearm murder victims in the United States”. In other words, “the chance against a person being killed in a mass shooting in the United States was about 517,000:1” (NRA-ILA).

In the immediate aftermath of any mass shooting, you are guaranteed to find anti-gun advocates blaming the National Rifle Association (NRA) for their role in allowing these tragic incidents to happen. It is a common belief that the NRA has greatly influenced politicians to overlook certain gun control laws with their financial power. One politician, in particular, stands out. Florida Senator Marco Rubio has been accused of taking donations from the NRA in exchange for allowing relaxed gun laws in his home state. This is a false claim. Contrary to what many Americans believe, the NRA is not listed in the top 20 donors to Rubio in the past nine years. Out of the $91 million dollars raised since 2009, “The NRA is responsible for just over $3 million of that, or 3.3 percent” (Novak). In fact, the NRA spent $203 million in 1998, with the majority of that amount going toward advertisements on local cable stations during the elections as opposed to a majority of congress members.

“People in favor of reducing gun violence and mass shootings need to focus on specific choices and set out to convince the public to back them with their votes. Then the politicians will be forced to follow” (Novak). The American mindset has been brainwashed with statistics that have been broadcast across national television, newspapers and the internet. There are many times that these statistics have proven to be inaccurate or given by unreliable sources. Unfortunately, the NRA has provided the people with false claims and articles boosting their propositions, both purposely and unknowingly, in order to rank their status higher. The director of Guns Down, Igor Volsky, assessed this issue directly on a news broadcasting YouTube channel called Mic. According to Volsky, “the NRA uses its massive presence on television and new media to communicate that message of fear on a daily basis.” The more fear one has, the more they will obey.

“The images in the NRA’s ads are always designed to evoke fear in the viewer” (Smith). This is the kind of fear that will push members to remain loyal to the NRA and purchase another firearm, thus furthering their guns sales and gain publicity. Chapter 6 of Lies, Incorporated, Two Dangerous Weapons: Guns and Lies is a great literary source that focuses on how gun control advocates, such as John Lott, have spread their message favoring their viewpoints based on lies and undocumented data. The aforementioned book cites a few instances in which mass shootings have taken place, including the Sandy Hook School shooting, the Batman Killing movie theater massacre, and the Columbine shooting. At all of these events, Lott was either present on the site to give his pro-NRA opinions to the media or publicly spoke of the tragedies and their ramifications very shortly afterward. He made sure that he had his word in about the incident.

The chapter exposes the false statistics and inaccurate generalizations made by John Lott, a pro-gun community activist who has been very vocal in the media in the aftermath of several mass shootings. Lott provided many news sources, such as CNN, Fox News, Today and National Public Radio with statistics from personal surveys and his opinions. After being questioned on the validity of these surveys, it came to the conclusion that there has been no evidence of data from the surveys collected. Therefore, it appears that Lott has been misinforming the media with false statistics to promote his pro-gun stance solely for self benefit. He even admitted to having no concrete information to back up his statistics, but remains a top advocate for the NRA and somehow always has enough funding to nationally promote his viewpoints. Lott even went so far as to create a fake profile, named Mary Rosh, to argue in his defense across many political message boards. For Lott making this make-believe character, “it shows his extensive willingness to deceive to protect and promote his work” (Rabin-Havt 120).

This pseudonym helped prove that Lott was an unreliable source of information, contrary to what many news sources believed. Many later felt betrayed and affected by the lies being thrown at them, making it harder for them to judge what is real or not for the future. There is no proof that the NRA verified any of Lott’s findings before using the data to support their motives. The book shows that although there is no factual evidence of support Lott received for his persistence, he always benefited from his work. Even after Lott was pulled out of the shadows for his fraudulent surveys and statistics, the NRA continues to use Lott’s fake data to benefit them and misinform the public. “‘It’s not true’ is a favorite refrain of Lott’s when parrying with the press, and the phrase makes for good TV. He often uses it to pivot to his own invented facts, even when a great body of evidence exists that proves him wrong” (Rabin-Havt 113). Many feel that the NRA is feeding the American people with lies just so that they can maintain their power in the political world. The NRA feels the opposite is true.

The NRA has opposed “fake news” in the media. A Huffington Post reporter, Melissa Jeltsen, attended the NRA’s most recent convention in May of 2018 hoping to get a fair and honest interview by members regarding their concerns, “the rise of an emboldened gun control movement” (Storey), just months after the Parkland and Las Vegas mass shootings. Unfortunately, she was met with animosity and was shunned from each member she approached because she was a reporter who was part of the “fake news” propaganda that they were all against. She listened to pro-gun speeches by both the President and Vice President of the United States and watched videos played by NRA spokesperson Dana Loesch in which the audience went into an uproar when a television was destroyed with a sledgehammer symbolizing the destruction of fake news. Vice President Pence and several other NRA members made one thing very clear to Jeltsen, which was, “the media purposely misrepresent the reality of gun ownership in the U.S. by focusing on fringe cases” (Storey).

The NRA also points out the fallacies in the news media, especially on Twitter. Since both the President of the United States was speaking at the NRA convention, the Secret Service placed a temporary ban during his specific speech. “ ‘As a result, firearms and firearm accessories, knives or weapons of any kind will be prohibited in the forum prior to and during his attendance.’” Unfortunately, a falsified report from the Associated Press was sent to all news media outlets that ‘the NRA had banned guns’ instead of attributing the ban to the Secret Service” (Cummings). The AP corrected themselves after receiving backlash from many NRA advocates. After initially calling out the AP by saying “’Don’t complain about eroding your credibility and people calling you ‘fake news’ when you publish things like this.’”, spokesperson Loesch went to Twitter to thank “the AP for the correction and for its ‘transparency’ (Cummings).

Loesch vocalized her dismay for other media sources, namely the New York Times, in a video posted on the NRA channel on YouTube. In her monologue, Loesch states ““We’ve had it with your narratives, your propaganda, your fake news. We’ve had it with your constant protection of your Democrat overlords, your refusal to acknowledge any truth that upsets the fragile construct that you believe is real life. And we’ve had it with your pretentious, tone-deaf assertion that you are in any way truth or fact-based journalism” (Luo). This is just one of the many videos that the NRA posted on its YouTube channel, Facebook page and Twitter feed to boost ratings, gain web traffic and incite controversy. This strategy worked because the accusations of fake news that have been alleged all over the media have been addressed by politicians and brought to light. To further prove that unreliable sources are more common than not, researchers at Stanford University’s Graduate School of Education conducted a research study on over 7800 students for more than a year to see how well the participants can evaluate online sources of information.

The participants ranged from Middle School to College and were located all across the United States. Despite the vast age difference, the results were shockingly similar across the board. The researchers found that there was a ‘stunning and dismaying consistency’ in which the participants failed to find the credibility of the online resource they were instructed to find. According to the researchers, ‘Many assume that because young people are fluent in social media they are equally savvy about what they find there’ (SHEG). Unfortunately, the results of the study proved the opposite (Domonoske). Many would assume that because young people are experienced with social media they are equally savvy about what they find and research. The study being conducted showed otherwise. Unfortunately, not all research studies prove to be as valid as the Stanford study. One misleading research paper is entitled, “Harvard University Study Reveals Astonishing Link Between Firearms, Crime and Gun Control” and more commonly referred to as the Harvard Study. Although the paper was published in the Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy, it was not written by researchers affiliated with Harvard. Rather, it was written by two very vocal gun activists who strongly believe in defending the second amendment, Don Kates and Gary Mauser.

The research is full of fallacies and does not have credible statistics gathered by supporting evidence, nor does it have any academic accuracy. According to Defilippis and Hughes, “there are four particularly egregious errors in the paper” that include, “faulty international data,” “Conclusions About Firearms and Suicide That Run Counter to the Facts”, “Repeating the Discredited “More Guns, Less Crime” Theory” and “Referencing Impossible Defensive Gun Use Numbers”. There are numerous other flaws that are present in the study, yet this paper is continuously used with the belief that it is a valid study conducted by Harvard researchers. It is disturbing that so little research has been conducted in the aftermath of mass shootings. This may be caused by the NRA. “ For decades, the NRA pushed legislation that stifled the study and spread of information about the causes of gun violence” (Raphelson).

Congress wanted to make budget cuts to please both sides of the gun debate and were initially deciding whether or not to shut down the National Center for Injury Prevention and Control “arguing that its work was “redundant” and reflected a political agenda” (Lou) . As a compromise, the Dickey Amendment was created and passed. The NRA-backed bill is believed to have contributed to the extreme reduction of gun violence research because funding was cut by ninety percent. Lars Dalseide, an NRA spokesperson challenged the assumption saying “ ‘The fact is, a number of studies are released every year. While most are tainted with preconceived outcomes in search of supporting data, there is plenty of funding in that arena.’” (Raphelson). Despite Delseide’s claim, it was very difficult to find credible gun-violence related data to use in this research paper. Fake news across social media and the internet has led to a social uprising in America today. Americans are waking up to the fact that they have been deceived by news sources that they once trusted.

Based on the inaccurate statistics that are broadcast across national television, newspapers and the internet, unsuspecting minds unknowingly are influenced into swaying their political views to help the less favorable side gain an advantage in the public eye. The spread of this misinformation is a major concern for the future of our society. The media’s role in this problem is substantial. In order for a better-educated public, the media must first do its part to report honest journalism instead of racing to be the first to publish. If all outlets used sources like John Lott, there must be possible solutions for rectifying the situation. Instead of using any source available, reporters should be responsible enough to first verify that the source is reliable and facts are accurate. In addition, all students should be educated in school and learn all the strategies for analyzing news sources. There are a few reliable websites available that will assist the reader in fact-checking. FactCheck.org, Politifact.com and Snopes.com are just three of the many sites available to help distinguish the truth from fake news. Educating the students at a young age will help prevent misinformation in the future and will lead to well-informed citizens.

The NRA Is Brainwashing Americans With Fake News essay

Remember. This is just a sample

You can get your custom paper from our expert writers

Get custom paper

The NRA Is Brainwashing Americans With Fake News. (2022, Aug 17). Retrieved from https://sunnypapers.com/the-nra-is-brainwashing-americans-with-fake-news/