Daily Mail Details Campus ‘Rocked’ by Conflict No One Knew About Until Its Report

Seyma Bayram via AP

The Daily Mail delivers a breathless account of a university embroiled in a disturbing furor – according to the Daily Mail. A supposed clash took place, and it is said the confrontation makes for high drama among the student body. This might have been the case, if anyone on campus had actually noticed.

That is to say, few, if any, were actually aware of this hyperbolic turmoil until it was reported on by the outlet; but take their word, the campus is rendered as a result of…heckling.

There is quite a bit to untruck with this one, so let’s piece through it all. First, it all surrounds an event held by Charlie Kirk’s Turning Point USA at the University of Minnesota. Riley Gaines was speaking at the gathering, and a crowd arrived to protest because this is a college campus, and that is compulsory behavior these days.

During a moment when competing groups were squaring off with each other, a young woman was captured on video saying, “Go back to your own country!” This is said to be the action that has “rocked” the campus of the University of Minnesota, according to the Daily Mail.

If you think that is a rather tepid dose of outrage, it turns out to be far less. This verbal confrontation did not lead to anything further, based on the lack of reporting. And there was no severe controversy – or any controversy at all – until the next day, when the video of this exchange was posted on social media. So few in attendance at the event were even aware this had transpired.

To further show the lack of campus strife and anxiety, this all played out on Wednesday, October 14. Barely anyone at the school, beyond those witnessing things, were even aware of these supposed tremor-inducing words until the report was made on Monday this week. But sure, the campus was “rocked” by this unsettling conflict.

It is a classic case of an online manufactured controversy. The young woman involved is not a student at this school, but attends a neighboring Catholic university. The Daily Mail does everything to out this woman and see she is cancelled. It confirmed she attends the nearby school, and while she is not named, the paper delivers no fewer than five photographs of her. It also does everything to generate online outrage.

The report goes into deep detail about the Instagram account of the individual who recorded this brief fusillade of five words, and it is clear they want this girl punished. The article has the account holder urging people to contact her school, and some of the trademarked unhinged comments typical of comment sections are displayed.

There is even an apocryphal comment by the video host that alumni of the nursing school where the featured female attends are claimed to be saying they will no longer be donating to that institution. This is all regarding the “racist” words she said. We see how this is getting to be a completely pre-fab outrage effort by the Daily Mail.

Hold on a tic: What specifically was “racist” about her words? What is notable is that few, if any, details are provided about what possibly provoked her outburst, let alone who they were directed towards.

Saying someone should return to a country of origin is not in itself racist, and it certainly sounds like something spoken prior might have indicated hostility towards the U.S. This blonde (as she is described and featured) is the entire focus of this weak-tea targeted effort, and nothing much is detailed about anyone else involved.

You get the sense of the entire intent of this piece from the closing line by the reporter:
“If you or someone you know is a student at the university and has more information about the reaction to the video on campus, please reach out.” Yes, please provide any content, as we need something tangible for this controversy to hold up!

UPDATE:
While compiling this column, the Daily Mail has put out a follow-up report on this dire incident that “rocked” the University of Minnesota (while hardly anyone, if any, on campus were even aware). This arrives from a different reporter at the paper, one who seems in tune with the practice of actually compiling facts.

It turns out the individual who was on the receiving end of the controversial (we guess) comments is a white male from Russia. That would appear to be a crucial detail to provide in the initial reporting, would it not? Ah, but that would derail much of the astroturfed strife:

A nursing student filmed screaming ‘go back to your own country’ shouted the insult at a white provocateur from Russia who was hurling vulgar insults, it has emerged. Other footage from the event unearthed by Alpha News showed that [the male protester] had been shouting at attendees and waving a sign that said ‘C**T’ before the woman commented. [The protester], who was adopted from Moscow and reportedly has a ‘strong accent,’ regularly frequents protests in the Twin Cities and is known for his expletive-filled confrontations, the outlet reported.

So this is what is considered journalism these days. The Daily Mail strove to create a campus uprising at the University of Minnesota over two people who do not even attend the school, who had a brief verbal clash. It was not even a case of protesters squaring off; the girl who was the initial focus was only on her way into the event when she was confronted by this Russian protester and goaded into making her comment.

The paper also attempted to demonize a young woman over a mostly innocuous comment, all while ignoring that a more inciting and vulgar protest sign was displayed at the scene by a protester it now admits is a regular provocateur. This is the type of information that should have been ferreted out for that initial report, but it seems clear the outlet was content to target this female with a throwaway comment.

How else are we to interpret that an aggressive activist on site, who is a known entity in the region, was not considered a component in what played out? This is a man known for being consistently aggressive and delivering invectives far worse than “Go back to your country.” How does one overlook this behavior while trying to gin up outrage over words far less aggressive in nature?

What is obvious is that the first reporting was based on the social media content alone, which was pushing spurious claims. The declared claim of alumni from a nursing school withholding benefactor support is near laughable, but what of the lack of comprehensive research? How do you claim to be a journalist and focus on the woman’s comment without considering that something provoked it?

And why insist that the school is embroiled in upheaval over this verbal fracas when none of the players attend, and the exchange was unknown to most on campus? This entire pathetic attempt by the paper is regarding a confrontation that lasted all of maybe one minute, involving outside figures, and few were bothered.

This is journalistic desperation of the lowest order. Instead of playing along with the attempt at generating outrage, it is best to just sit back and laugh at the pathetic display from the Daily Mail.

This is an opinion piece. The views expressed in this article are those of just the author.

New: The Mediaite One-Sheet "Newsletter of Newsletters"
Your daily summary and analysis of what the many, many media newsletters are saying and reporting. Subscribe now!