Penn State University released the results of a study on October 1 that debunked one of the more insidious deceptions about prominent conservatives. Progressive reporters and commentators stuck their collective fingers in their ears and began shouting “la la la la la.” When you find out what the study revealed, you will understand why.
Some on the left and in the progressive media have attacked conservative pundits by deceptively painting them as fringe figures responsible for radicalizing young men. Right-leaning commentators like Ben Shapiro, Steven Crowder, and even Dave Rubin, a classical liberal, have been painted with this broad brush.
When a young man defaced an Indiana synagogue, Buzzfeed claimed that Shapiro, an Orthodox Jew, had inspired the hate crime. Other leftist news outlets also blamed Shapiro for the mass shooting at a Canadian mosque last year.
The New York Times published a piece in which they interviewed Caleb Cain, a college dropout who was radicalized into the world of the alt-right and was later de-radicalized. The article mentioned comedian Steven Crowder and Paul Joseph Watson, implying that they were extreme figures who contributed to Cain’s journey to the alt-right. Many on the left even falsely claimed that Candace Owens motivated the shooter who attacked an Australian mosque earlier this year.
But the results of Penn State’s study took a sledgehammer to the radicalization myth and shattered it into itty bitty bite-sized pieces of fiction. The researchers found that conservative content on the internet could, in fact, lead to the de-radicalization of its audience. The study, titled “A Supply and Demand Framework for YouTube Politics,” states that “contrary to the ‘gateway drug narrative,’ the Intellectual Dark Web, consisting of such personalities as Ben Shapiro, Joe Rogan, Jordan Peterson, and Dave Rubin, is de-radicalizing potential alt-right viewers.”
The study showed that both alt-right and alt-lite content had increased online. But the total number of views for this material has decreased while the views for mainstream conservative content has increased. “These patterns are inconsistent with radicalization happening at a major scale,” the researchers wrote. “Indeed, from these data alone, de-radicalization seems a more plausible baseline hypothesis.”
Why No News Coverage?
Although the university published the report on the first of October, it is only now that some media outlets are reporting on its findings. Oddly enough, each of these leans conservative. None of the major establishment media outlets have bothered to so much as comment on the study. Why?
Because they don’t want you to see it.
As most of us know, many journalists are focused on promoting a political agenda, not exposing Americans to the truth. Conservatives are typically opposed to the progressive ideas the press wants to make dominant in American society. This makes any well-known person on the right the enemy. That’s why they don’t find it necessary to correct the record when it comes to false narratives spread about right-wing figures: The lies benefit the progressive cause.
By letting people believe that even mainstream conservative pundits share responsibility in hate crimes – especially mass shootings – progressives make it easier to make their case for restricting expression. The media’s willingness to ignore this study shows how far the hard left will go to get their way.