I am always fascinated by who is often presumed to be innocent.

“ The Null brothers didn't seem like the kind of people interested in instigating violence against anyone, no matter how angry they were about their God-given rights.” https://twitter.com/abcnews/status/1315056485257289728

This bias, is not only in the media, it is everywhere. These layers of biases are what lead to things like NZ white supremacist massacre treated as a surprise. Yet, there are elements of surprise and elements of bias that fails, and continues to fail, to treat far right...

white supremacy seriously. This includes authorities buying into far rights extremists ideologies or treating them as ‘innocent’ for example, Aus federal politicians supporting a whites supremacist slogan, Home Affairs Ministers supporting the notion of South Africa...

white genocide or minimising ASIO reports about rise in far rights extremism by claiming an equivalent left wing violence, the media giving platform to far right personalities, or opinions like this, where even when across the world we are seeing rise in far rights violence...

we are invited to think something innocent maybe taking place. We have seem many of these pieces, even here in Australia. Notice how you never see such pieces about Islamic terrorism, instead, whole communities are assumed to be guilty by the expectation to condemn such act.

These pieces also make another mistake. They expect obvious acts of violence or intimidation (KKK like conduct). Extremists are change and modifying, in fact they have said this themselves. Wearing suits, avoiding overt representation of Nazi tattoos and e.t.c

This is an excellent video about how they far rights group rebrand to attract more supporters:

I wonder ASIO reports on the rise of far rights extremism is partly because they are now focusing on them more. Far rights groups in Australia for example have been harassing minorities groups, storming a place of worship, crushing community events, harnessing African, do you...

think if any group of black or brown men did this, they would be walking free or be free to organise online. No. For example, a recording studio was shut down when a group of young men made a satirical video about police. It was seen as incitement.

(Sorry for the typos).

The media can’t be objective, that is not attainable, but it can be fair. For examples, one can asked themselves, if I was covering a story about ISIS, would I write it like this? If this story involved a white boy, would I mentioned his race? If not, why not?