Something many don't know about the media, though I doubt it will shock anyone, is that journalists aren't experts at literally any subject they cover unless they go out of their way to become one or were an expert before becoming a journalist.
Their job is to convey the information to ordinary people from experts, not to be one themselves.
This wouldn't be much of an issue if they actually understood that and had the humility to recognize that. The problem is that they don't, most of the time.
In the wake of the assassination of Charlie Kirk, that was blindingly obvious.
Over at Ammoland, Dave Workman goes into some of it/
Second, once again the establishment media’s lack of firearms knowledge was in the spotlight. Until last week, most—if not all—of the talking network heads had probably never heard of a Mauser 98, a bolt-action rifle of such reliable design that Mauser notes on its own website, “The MAUSER 98 action is regarded as the forefather of all modern bolt action rifles. Built in the millions, copied in the thousands, never matched.” Until now, they’ve been content to demonize semi-auto AR-type rifles, chambered for the “powerful” .223 Remington, a varmint cartridge. Now they have a new firearm to denigrate.
Early in the coverage of Kirk’s assassination in front of an estimated crowd of about 3,000 people, it was reported that the rifle used in this crime was a bolt-action .30-06, which seemed to confuse some of the network talking heads. The Mauser 98, originally chambered for the 8×57 Mauser cartridge, offered a bolt face which was immediately adaptable to domestic calibers because the cartridge base shares the same 0.473-inch diameter as the ’06 and various other popular American big game hunting calibers including, but not limited to, the .308 Winchester, .257 Roberts, .284 Winchester, .300 Savage, and so forth. Countless Mauser 98 actions were simply re-barreled and adapted to North American hunting calibers. Compared to the .223 Remington/5.56mm for which most modern semi-auto rifles are chambered, well, the big game calibers are “high powered.”
The media initially relied on some “experts” who declared that the estimated 200-yard shot had to have been fired by someone with special training. That continued until outdoorsmen and women, especially those living west of the Mississippi River, made it clear that 200-yard shots with a .30-06 rifle are commonly made every fall on deer, elk, bighorn sheep, mountain goats, caribou and other big game.
You should go and read the whole thing, but the overall gist of it is that the media really didn't know what was going on because it didn't fit their preconceived notions that were based on an anti-gun agenda, rather than an understanding of firearms. This is the same mentality that led USA Today, in the wake of Sutherland Springs, to think that chainsaw bayonets were a typical accessory for AR-15s.
They don't know firearms, for the most part. There are exceptions, of course, but most of them aren't gun people, and I suspect they keep the gun people well away from gun stories whenever possible.
Assuming they don't just usher them out the door upon learning they're gun people.
Kirk's assassin didn't do anything particularly special. 200 yards isn't a chip shot, necessarily, but it's not a particularly long one for many experienced hunters who take game in wide-open spaces. I've never had to make a shot like that, but Georgia hunting is mostly in the woods or on fields that may not allow you to even see the animal at that range.
But out west, as Workman notes, things are different, and these shots are typical. It's not special.
Yet the media and their so-called experts--people who really aren't experts on guns, shooting, or anything of the sort--were convinced this was a trained sniper, that this was either a professional hit or someone who served in the military. Only, based on who they arrested, it wasn't. The alleged killer was a kid who just grew up around guns.
I don't mind the media getting stuff wrong from time to time. People make mistakes, and it happens to everyone. I've done it here more times than I care to count.
The difference between me and them is that I'll acknowledge my mistakes when they're brought to my attention, even if it's uncomfortable for me to do so. I own those mistakes, even though I'd rather not have to. I do it because integrity matters to me. I'm not perfect, and there are probably a lot of positions I hold on a great many topics that may be drastically wrong. I know this and try to be humble enough to accept that I got it wrong on those topics when I'm aware of it.
Which is probably why I would never make it in the mainstream media. They can't.
They're clueless on a great many topics, and they're too arrogant to understand that they are.
