海角大神

Obama has had a few choice words for reporters recently. He warned graduates at the University of Michigan of the damage the media do by playing up 鈥渆very hint of conflict鈥� to produce 鈥渟exier鈥� stories.

Vilification on both sides, Obama said, 鈥減revents learning 鈥� since after all, why should we listen to a 鈥榝ascist鈥� or a 鈥榮ocialist鈥� or a 鈥榬ight-wing nut鈥� or a 鈥榣eft-wing nut鈥�?鈥�

It鈥檚 a lesson that the slew of reporters who have recently cited the spring 2010 report of the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), 鈥淩age on the Right: The Year in Hate and Extremism,鈥� should have taken to heart.

The SPLC, known for monitoring hate groups, warned of a resurgent tide of a right-wing movement that in the 1990s 鈥減roduced an enormous amount of violence.鈥� 鈥淧atriot groups 鈥� militias and other organizations that see the federal government as part of a plot to impose 鈥榦ne-world government鈥� on liberty-loving Americans,鈥� they reported, 鈥渃ame roaring back after years out of the limelight.鈥�

SLPC spokesman Mark Potok was even more explicit in an interview. He told one reporter that today鈥檚 America 鈥渇eels a lot like the run-up to Oklahoma City,鈥� and penned an opinion article to that effect on the 15th anniversary of the bombing.

Citing the SPLC data, Australia鈥檚 The Age described a US 鈥渙n the edge of upheaval,鈥� like 鈥渁n impregnated sky ahead of a thunderstorm.鈥� The Toronto Star asked whether America is losing its 鈥済rip on reality.鈥� The Guardian, The Straits Times, and Sydney Morning Herald ran similar pieces, while Newsweek, USA Today, and MSNBC each placed the law center prominently in stories on the rise of right-wing hate.

There鈥檚 only one problem: the SPLC report is deeply flawed.

The news sources all referenced the SPLC鈥檚 claim of a 244 percent rise in patriot groups and militias. This represents an increase of 363 groups in 2009, but a side by side comparison with SPLC鈥檚 2008 data shows inflated numbers. For instance, 102 of these new groups are chapters of 鈥淲e are Change,鈥� a 鈥済rassroots peace and social justice movement,鈥� according to the organization鈥檚 own website. Their founding member, Luke Rudkoswki, was included in the SPLC鈥檚 April 鈥淢eet the Patriots鈥� list of enablers of right-wing extremism. 鈥淚t was weird,鈥� Mr. Rudkoswki said, 鈥渢he SPLC specifically interviewed me for this report, we spoke about nonviolence, Gandhi, Dr. King鈥� as well as raising funds for 9/11 first responders, toy and clothing drives, and helping the homeless. 鈥淭hey didn鈥檛 even mention any of it.鈥�

Another 48 of these new groups are chapters of 鈥淲e the People,鈥� who pledge 鈥渋f necessary, to participate in coordinated, nonviolent, legal and Constitutional civic actions.鈥� Another 30 are the Republic of Texas secessionists 鈥� a group that鈥檚 been around for over a decade. (Michigan鈥檚 Hutaree militia, arrested in March for a plot to kill policeman, was not even included in SPLC鈥檚 2008 list).

Anyone who did their homework could see that this is not a new phenomenon for SPLC. The organization has a track record littered with red flags (or red herrings). They seem to consistently exaggerate conservative threats as a tool for publicity and fundraising 鈥� essentially, to scare up liberal dollars. Since 1994, when the Montgomery Advertiser ran a Pulitzer-nominated series 鈥淐harity of Riches,鈥� exposing SPLC鈥檚 highly questionably practices, journalists have painstakingly reported exactly how the organization operates.

In March, Ken Silverstein of Harper鈥檚 put it in plain terms. The law center, he said, regularly exaggerated the powers of "far-right wing groups to make it appear that the country is teetering on the brink鈥� of revolution. He called the SPLC a 鈥渇raudulent organization.鈥� Alexander Cockburn has written that SPLC was using 鈥渢he election of a black president鈥� to exaggerate hate and solicit donations.

To be fair, by most accounts the SPLC once did, and in some areas still does, valuable work. And they do include disclaimers in their reports as to who exactly is promoting violence 鈥� entirely insufficient as they are. But their exaggerations, and reporters鈥� more-or-less intentional acquiescence, are deeply counterproductive. They smear Americans who are merely exercising their right to free speech, and sap funds from other organizations and issues that are much more critical to promoting tolerance.

Exaggerations like the SPLC鈥檚 help stifle rational debate. That, as President Obama pointed out in Ann Arbor, Mich., is exactly what 鈥渃an send signals to the most extreme elements of our society that perhaps violence is a justifiable response.鈥�

We would all do well to take reports of rampant extremism in the United States with a grain of salt 鈥� after all, Barack Obama鈥檚 election was a signal of increased tolerance, not hate. The SPLC, for their part, should figure out how to better mobilize its massive resources. The group has the potential to be a helpful watchdog, but is squandering that chance with skewed reports.

Meanwhile, Obama has a point about reporters. No matter how difficult times are for them, journalists must remember to always think critically: An easy story, or a high traffic story, is not necessarily a true story, regardless of whether there are 鈥渄ata鈥� to push it.

Jamie Holmes is a research associate at New America Foundation.