Beck’s Website Calls Trayvon Martin “The Aggressor”

An undated photo of Trayvon Martin. Courtesy Martin family

Get your news from a source that’s not owned and controlled by oligarchs. Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily.


The right-wing reaction to the shooting of of Trayvon Martin has been mercifully muted. George Zimmerman, who followed Martin through the streets of an Orlando suburb believing he “was up to no good,” claims he was acting in self-defense. But the evidence suggest that Zimmerman provoked a confrontation with the unarmed Martin, who was out to grab a snack while watching the NBA All-Star game.  

As my colleague Kevin Drum notes, Fox News has almost completely avoided the story, doing one segment between Martin’s death and March 19. National Review published a thoughtful piece this morning by Robert VerBruggen calling for Florida’s self-defense laws to be altered so they protect individuals genuinely acting in self-defense rather than vigilantes. 

Yet The Blaze, the website started by former Fox News host Glenn Beck, has lived up to its founder’s penchant for reactionary racial paranoia. One post attacking Al Sharpton for criticizing local police for not arresting Zimmerman posits that Martin was once suspended from school for being tardy. The post then speculates that Martin could really have been suspended for any number of reasons, and offers a list that includes “armed robbery,” “arson,” “kidnapping” or “sexual battery” among others. (Perhaps even for Beck’s audience a black kid being late to school may not be enough to justify summary execution.) While Zimmerman stated at the very beginning of his call to the police that Martin “looks black,” the Blaze post interprets this to mean that “the audio weakens the racism charge, as it shows that Zimmerman was already suspicious of the teen before he could tell what race he was.” The post goes to excruciating lengths to rationalize away the possible racial elements at play, while groping for some implicit justification for Martin’s death.

The post’s original URL (tawana-brawley-2-0-al-sharpton-sides-with-aggressor-in-self-defense-case) refers to Martin as the “aggressor,” despite the fact that the police call establishes that Zimmerman chased down Martin rather than the other way around. The post also compares the situation to the 1987 Tawana Brawley case, which involved a young black woman who falsely accused several white men of rape—the incident that first brought Sharpton to national prominence. The comparison implies that the outrage over Martin’s death exists solely to substantiate a groundless charge of racism against white people who are, let’s face it, the real victims here. 

That doesn’t mean The Blaze doesn’t take racism seriously. After all, it does offer a lengthy post, complete with photographs, on the threat by the New Black Liberation Militia (no, I haven’t heard of them before, either) to take Zimmerman into custody and turn him over to federal authorities. Buried down towards the bottom of the post, following several slideshows of black people in uniforms holding guns, is the recognition that “Martin may have been attacked, rather than the reverse.” It’s a matter of priorities—acknowledging the possibility that a teenager might have been murdered because he was black just doesn’t warrant the kind of urgency that mocking Al Sharpton or highlighting a publicity-seeking black militia does. 

The black militia story is only the third most popular story on The Blaze at the moment, however. Ahead of it are two stories on Malia Obama’s trip to Mexico.

Owned by no one—except you.

We just keep seeing it happen: Newsrooms owned by billionaires and corporations are spinning their own narratives, overwriting the truth, following only stories that keep them in the pocket of those with even more power.

Not here. We’re not owned by anyone. We’re not part of any cult that demands our allegiance to a bottom line. We’ve spoken up and spoken out while other newsrooms changed their stories—or cut them altogether—to keep the C suite happy.

Our mission is to find the truth and amplify it. That’s why we’re independent, nonprofit, and, crucially, funded by readers. The investigations on our website will always be free to read, watch, and listen to, but our newsroom is powered by readers who pitch in what they can so we can keep asking the hard questions.

Can you chip in today?

Owned by no one—except you.

We just keep seeing it happen: Newsrooms owned by billionaires and corporations are spinning their own narratives, overwriting the truth, following only stories that keep them in the pocket of those with even more power.

Not here. We’re not owned by anyone. We’re not part of any cult that demands our allegiance to a bottom line. We’ve spoken up and spoken out while other newsrooms changed their stories—or cut them altogether—to keep the C suite happy.

Our mission is to find the truth and amplify it. That’s why we’re independent, nonprofit, and, crucially, funded by readers. The investigations on our website will always be free to read, watch, and listen to, but our newsroom is powered by readers who pitch in what they can so we can keep asking the hard questions.

Can you chip in today?

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

INDEPENDENT. BECAUSE OF YOU.

Mother Jones has no billionaires calling the shots—just readers like you making fearless reporting possible

Donate