“Vietnam Vet” — that was published by the mainstream media. But the Native American wasn’t a Vietnam vet. He never left the US and, in fact, was AWOL twice. The media used “Vietnam vet” to elicit sympathy, but it wasn’t even factually accurate. The actual facts were ignored in order to promote a particular bias. “AWOL soldier” doesn’t have the same emotional value to the narrative as does “Vietnam combat vet.” The history of the Native American, including past protests and confrontations was highly relevant to the story but instead, the media focused on the the teenagers rather than the professional agitator as well as the hate-group the Black Israelites.[1]
The Covington story was “privileged, white teenage, racist Trump supporters got in a confrontation.” However the facts had to be massaged in order to sell that fiction was what happened. We all know that was the intent of the media and to suggest the reporting was either factual or objective is nonsensical. It’s delusional to suggest that the media treats Trump supporters objectively. Look, for example how the New York Times classifies Joe Biden’s repeated sexual harassment as “tactile politics,” while anyone affiliated with Trump gets no such delicacy in headlines.
It’s absurd to suggest that the Covington story was anything except the media attempting to make those kids look like evil puppy-killers. The vile, racist comments of the Black Israelites on the scene were ignored for the most part and instead media talking heads spent hours analyzing the alleged “smirk” of the white kid with the MAGA hat.
There is a narrative and any reasonably intelligent person can clearly see it.
[1] https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/intelligence-report/...