People don’t really trust the media much anymore, and for good reason. Besides the inaccurate reporting too often heavily laden with blatant, but denied bias, it’s rife with sensationalistic wording to the point where absurdity doesn’t begin to cover it.

Examples arise aplenty, especially in the age of the internet. Any Republican victory can be made out to seem like the end of the world has arrived. Take for instance the complete panic that ensued upon the destruction of Net Neutrality, or the ridiculous wailing and gnashing of teeth over Kennedy’s announcement that he was retiring. Diane Feinstein (D-Calif) warned that people would DIE if the government shuts down. Nancy Pelosi (D-Crazytown) is so prone to sensationalism to the point of embarrassment, that Trump labeled her his “secret weapon.” 

Nevermind the left’s ridiculous hysterics about SCOTUS pick, Brett Kavanaugh…

I wonder if I should start taking the left seriously toda- https://t.co/DNviXzJJrm

— Brandon Morse (@TheBrandonMorse) July 17, 2018

The left’s gameplan seems to be to make the tallest of mountains out of any molehill they stumble upon, whether it’s worthy of concern or not.

Trump’s recent verbal snuggles with Russian President Vladimir Putin have both sides angry without a doubt, but the left itself has taken it to mean that the world is literally going to end.

And if they aren’t taking it that far, then they’re making ridiculous comparisons like the one Politico’s Mark Hertling made during his piece titled “Putin’s Attack on the U.S. Is Our Pearl Harbor.”

The piece takes a very long time to essentially call Russia’s attempt at hacking the 2016 election the equivalent of an attack that leftover 2,400 dead and over 1,100 wounded. To sweeten the deal, he also equated it to the terrorist attacks on 9/11, which left over 3,000 dead and 6,000 injured.

Firstly, I expect a certain level of sensationalism in the media. Hell, I expect sensationalism from individuals in everyday conversation. We in the comfy first world have a bad habit of attempting to make our lives seem more dynamic than they are. However, there’s a certain line you draw when it comes to how extreme you want to convey a worldly event.

Hertling found that line, got a running start, and leaped straight over it.

Russia hacking the elections was indeed a bad thing, however, there hasn’t been mass destruction or tanks rumbling down previously civilian trafficked avenues. Thousands are not dead.

To suggest that Russian hacking is the equivalent of thousands dying is an insult to those who lost their lives and the families of those who passed. Furthermore, it seems rather asinine for Hertling to compare the hacking to such events, when by his own recollection, these events triggered American wars, one of which saw hundreds of thousands more dead.

I doubt that Hertling wants us to go to war with Russia. I’m more sure that his intent was to make it seem like Russia’s meddling was such a high-profile crime that it should reflect devastatingly on Trump.

The only problem is that the hacking didn’t occur under Trump’s watch. It did so under former President Barack Obama’s. I don’t see many people currently stomping their foot about Russian hacking bringing up the fact that Obama was in charge at the time at all.

Regardless, the sensationalistic descriptions of world events by the left are doing more harm than good. It causes ignorance driven panic, sometimes to the point of violence against the left’s political opponents. I need only point to Antifa as a great example.

The leftist press and politicians need to stop putting on Chicken Little personas every time something happens. Yes, something can be a bad event, and it should be acknowledged as one, but acting like we’re all going to die every time the breeze gently blows in a direction you wish it wouldn’t is only hurting more than it’s helping.