Imagine this: a small apartment building houses 10 low-income families.
There have been no code violations, but the building is old, outdated, and inefficient. The owner also wants to help more people, but renovation isn't enough — it needs to be rebuilt.
So the owner makes the difficult decision to temporarily relocate the families, tear the building down, and start fresh. The goal? A modern, cleaner, safer complex that will house 35 families, more than three times the original capacity.
However, the building owner happens to be a Republican running for a state Congressional seat. So, here are the headlines:
“GOP candidate evicting ten families.”
“Affordable housing destroyed by GOP candidate.”
“Rich GOP developer profits while vulnerable people suffer.”
The media runs story after story of the demolition. They show footage of the rubble, quote heart-wrenching interviews with displaced tenants (“What about the children?”), and attack the motives of the builder. There’s little mention of the 35-unit expansion, the safety upgrades, the environmental improvements, or the vision.
No discussion of the families who will eventually benefit. Just a steady stream of outrage. The narrative is set: this GOP candidate is an evil villain.
Democrat strategists kick off the next phase, the lawfare campaign, protests are organized, and every angle is worked to delay permits and create chaos for the project. Environmental objections are raised. Civil complaints are filed. Political pressure mounts. With enough disruption, the project could be delayed indefinitely and eventually canceled altogether, with the chance to house 35 low-income families lost for good.
But the media doesn’t mention those risks, and instead, the latest headlines become:
“Court hearing environmental case against GOP developer’s demolition project.”
“Community groups challenge housing plan tied to GOP candidate.”
But as luck would have it, months later, after the lawsuits are dismissed or settled, the new building opens.
The original 10 families return, now living in safer, healthier, more modern housing. Twenty-five additional families move in, grateful for this opportunity. Everyone in the complex loves it. The complex is a success.
But there’s no follow-up story, no front-page article celebrating the achievement.
Instead, the headlines shift:
“Affordable housing project opens after bitter legal battle.”
“Hundreds applied, many denied.”
“Lawsuit filed over housing selection process.”
No admission of success. No mention of the lives improved. Just a continued effort to cast the builder and the project in the worst possible light. Success becomes invisible. Good intentions and positive results are ignored. All that remains of this highly successful opposition marketing and messaging is a distorted public narrative — one that rewards outrage over outcomes and vilifies effort instead of honoring results.
This isn't just about one building, or one state’s media coverage. It's a model of how supposed news organizations cover many GOP initiatives. They act as super PACs in disguise. They monetize and market division by amplifying political agendas for their favored political candidates and party. They earn revenue through lies and distortions. They attack public figures who happen to be opposition candidates and hide behind free speech protections granted to defamers in New York Times v. Sullivan.
Meanwhile, real progress is messy. It takes vision. It takes time. It takes patience. But if we never allow room for context, for outcomes, for the full arc of the story, we severely punish those who try to fix things if they are members of the opposition party — and we teach others not to try or disrupt the status quo. Whether it’s housing, trade, energy, education, or tariffs, the legacy media is quick to spotlight the demo and rubble – but rarely follow up on a successful rebuild.
We heard about the stock market drop in April, but not many headlines celebrating the rapid recovery. We’re flooded with fear porn about tariffs leading to crashing markets, higher prices, closed businesses, reduced inventories, empty shelves, and other upcoming disasters.
But don’t let the lying media corporation propagandists, providing valuable and expensive in-kind campaign donations of print and airtime to the Democrat party that far exceed campaign finance law donations, distract you from simple facts.
Sometimes the rubble isn’t the end of something good.
It's the beginning of something better.
Charlie Rose is a retired civilian who served for more than 30 years with the United States Army.
Image: Library of Congress, via Picryl // No known restrictions