In Florida, a court challenge to the hotly contested Parental Rights In Education Act has ended with a settlement reached between the plaintiffs and the state. You can read through the media reports about this conclusion and see the bias plainly on display. 

The Associated Press talked of “the fallout from Florida’s settlement.” The New Republic claimed the “settlement has curtailed the ‘Don’t Say Gay' Law”. The Miami Herald, in imbalanced thinking, declares “DeSantis’ homophobic law doesn’t survive court challenge intact.”

These are all very dramatic interpretations of a court agreement where the law in question was, in reality, completely upheld. 

What we see on display here is the very same news outlets’ partisan reframing - that is to say in another fashion, the press was lying - about the law for years. It was probably the biggest myth spun in the press in 2022, the collective misrepresentation in the press to call this the “Don’t Say Gay Law.” This lie was so uniformly delivered that it can only be described as an act of collusion. 

To display what is taking place today one only needs to do something the press refuses to do – look at this court decision objectively. For all the desire to declare DeSantis lost, and the law was “curtailed” and “doesn’t survive,” those claims are waved off quicker than a vape cloud with one reality: Not a single thing about the law was affected. No elements were moved, no content was altered – not a single word has been changed. So just what are the journalism geniuses claiming?

To see how vacant these claims are, we need to look at the case. This suit was brought by the organization Equity Florida, and it had been joined by no fewer than 16 states in an amicus brief, completely challenging the law. This new court decision has to then be regarded as a complete failure. Not only was the law upheld but no portion of it has been struck down. The settlement that was reached can better be described as a “Clarification."

What has been agreed upon is essentially what the law does not say. Reuters, for example, declared that teachers would now be allowed to say “gay” in the classroom (They were never forbidden from saying such). At the South Florida Sun-Sentinel, they covered “What’s Now Allowed” and “A Legal Settlement Brings Changes,” which makes zero sense in that not a single aspect of the law was altered.

“A parental rights law may soon lose a lot of the controversial elements,” lies Scott Travis, and he then goes on to contradict himself in the same article: 

While the original language in “Parental Rights in Education” never specifically banned gay-straight alliances, library books with gay characters or class projects on LGBTQ subjects, the law’s vague language led to different interpretations and inconsistent enforcement.

That last sentence is the key to all of this hysteria for the past two-plus years. With a similar blind eye, another piece from the AP details what is perceived to have changed. 

Opponents of the law said it created a chilling effect in classrooms. Some teachers said they were unsure if they could mention or display a photo of their same-sex partner in the classroom. In some cases, books dealing with LGBTQ+ topics were removed from classrooms and lines mentioning sexual orientation were excised from school musicals.

The Sun Sentinel posed a series of Q&As to further clarify what will be permitted, from dances and on-campus clubs centered on LGBT𝜋 issues, as well as teachers being permitted to put a pride sticker on doors, and such. Here’s what is very lightly addressed, if it is at all – each of those details was already permitted. The law concerned classroom instruction and curriculum items; all these "new" permissions entail items beyond formal teaching, which were always permitted.

While there were stories of schools banning certain activities scattered about, those were decisions made on the local level and not mandated by the law. Almost every aspect they are celebrating as being permitted today can be traced back to one cause, and that is the hysterical push to label this a “Don’t Say Gay Law”. That cloud of fear and oppression led to many making these overwrought decisions and hysterical accusations.

After years of the press claiming the law banned the word “gay” (which was asinine on the surface as the word itself was nowhere in the legislation) you can see where some teachers might think they were banned from having a photo of their gay family or censored from declaring they had a same-sex partner. But these are people who bought into the word "gay" being banned, while never stepping back and noticing no one was ever punished for saying the word.

While representatives from Equity Florida pointed at the vague language of the law leading to some using it oppressively, the fact is the false negative reporting on the law created that atmosphere. Claims about the restrictions that did not exist led to adverse reactions in some areas, and it was all rooted in a lie. This is proven in the settlement terms.

The opponents are cheering all of the things they are now permitted to do today as a result, but this is coming about without having changed a single aspect of the law - meaning that all of those items were originally permitted. Yet today we have the press cheering they are allowed to do what they had always been allowed to do, and they are claiming victory while nothing has changed.

Those who refused to read the language of the law are now refusing to read the language of the settlement, and as a result, they are cheering wholesale changes taking place when they have the very same legislation in place that they had years ago. The deluded thinking is a marvel to behold.