Nah, this would never happen.......it has.

[SkyDekker 1,130]

Quote

They're not doing it because they hate cops, they're doing it because it's controversial and incendiary which increases reaction on both sides which increases views which increases profits.

That is capitalism. Always amazes me when I see staunch republicans complain about capitalism.

Again, stop blaming other people and fix your own issues.

[turtlespeed 212]

SkyDekker

Quote

They're not doing it because they hate cops, they're doing it because it's controversial and incendiary which increases reaction on both sides which increases views which increases profits.

That is capitalism. Always amazes me when I see staunch republicans complain about capitalism.

Again, stop blaming other people and fix your own issues.

Actually, it is dishonesty. Claiming one thing, like being fair and balanced, is a fallacy.

The news media has a responsibility to be unbiased.

They all fail at that. Because they do, they are, by default, untrustworthy.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[SkyDekker 1,130]

Quote

The news media has a responsibility to be unbiased

No it doesn't. The Fairness Doctrine was removed by the FCC under Republican leadership.

Quote

They all fail at that. Because they do, they are, by default, untrustworthy.

Uhm no. Unbiased and untrustworthy are not the same thing.

[Bolas 5]

turtlespeed

***

Quote

They're not doing it because they hate cops, they're doing it because it's controversial and incendiary which increases reaction on both sides which increases views which increases profits.

That is capitalism. Always amazes me when I see staunch republicans complain about capitalism.

Again, stop blaming other people and fix your own issues.

Actually, it is dishonesty. Claiming one thing, like being fair and balanced, is a fallacy.

The news media has a responsibility to be unbiased.

They all fail at that. Because they do, they are, by default, untrustworthy.

It's not true capitalism as the press has certain protections not only from government but from civil suits as well.

This isn't a matter of trust, it's a matter of gross negligence.

Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting
If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

[SkyDekker 1,130]

Quote

it's a matter of gross negligence

Total and utter bullshit.

The quote you provided is factually correct. You clearly don't understand gross negligence. You have to take that paragraph, add a heaping tablespoon of assumptions to get to the "outrage" you have displayed over multiple posts.

And what protections are you talking about? Reporter's privilege? That whole concept has nothing to do with unbiased reporting and everything to do with investigative journalism.

Like I said, stop blaming other people and take some responsibility for your own actions.

[winsor 186]

SkyDekker

Quote

They're not doing it because they hate cops, they're doing it because it's controversial and incendiary which increases reaction on both sides which increases views which increases profits.

That is capitalism. Always amazes me when I see staunch republicans complain about capitalism.

Again, stop blaming other people and fix your own issues.

If capitalism was at work, the Weekly World News would still be in business. That was the only news outlet that would publish which presidential candidate was supported by Space (not illegal, mind you) Aliens. Now we are stuck with Rasmussen and Gallup for prognostications.

[Bolas 5]

SkyDekker

Quote

it's a matter of gross negligence

Total and utter bullshit.

The quote you provided is factually correct. You clearly don't understand gross negligence. You have to take that paragraph, add a heaping tablespoon of assumptions to get to the "outrage" you have displayed over multiple posts.

And what protections are you talking about? Reporter's privilege? That whole concept has nothing to do with unbiased reporting and everything to do with investigative journalism.

Like I said, stop blaming other people and take some responsibility for your own actions.

No it's not factually correct. It may have been at the beginning when little was known but now it's completely inaccurate. The gross negligence part comes from cherry picking of information to incite turmoil and riots.

Quote

Brown, an unarmed black teenager, was shot and killed by Wilson in 2014. Four months later, after the prosecutor announced Wilson would not face charges in Brown's death

Pretend for a moment you knew absolutely nothing about the situation other than what is posted above. Would it be fair to say that this paints Wilson as murderering aggressor who got away with it?

Now add that most people know Wilson was a white cop and this article does nothing to educate nor remove any preconceptions.

Whenever something happens, people tend to rush to preconceived judgements rather than wait for all the information. Some even when given the information challenge or dispute it but it still needs to be presented, even in a quick synopsis:

Brown, a teenager who assaulted Officer Wilson after a robbery was shot and killed.

Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting
If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

[normiss 622]

I would say your last sentence shows you doing the same thing.
IIRC, there was no proof of an assault.

[SkyDekker 1,130]

Quote

Pretend for a moment you knew absolutely nothing about the situation other than what is posted above. Would it be fair to say that this paints Wilson as murderering aggressor who got away with it?

No it would require that heaping tablespoon of assumptions. From that sentence that is simply not known.

Wilson did shoot and kill him. Are you claiming that is not correct?

He was unarmed. Are you claiming that is not correct?

The prosecutor did announce Wilson would not face charges. Are you claiming that is not correct?

You need to add your bias and assumptions to get outraged over this factually correct paragraph. Calling it gross negligence is utter and complete bullshit.

[Bolas 5]

normiss

I would say your last sentence shows you doing the same thing.
IIRC, there was no proof of an assault.

http://time.com/3605051/darren-wilson-photos-injuries/

Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting
If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

[skycop 0]

Quote

Calling it gross negligence is utter and complete bullshit.

The First Amendment pretty much prevents it from being litigated as gross negligence. The standard is set very high, and rightfully so.

Now to tackle the subject of ethics and journalistic integrity.
There is a great divergence of opinion regarding this, and it has only grown worse over the 20yrs.

One would expect a lack of standards from "tabloid" type outlets. However with the internet, social media and digital media, the number of outlets have grown exponentially. With that growth, IMHO comes a lack of journalistic integrity. I understand market forces, and what drives views, clicks and so on.

The actual truth seems to mean little, involving police related controversies in the last few years. I'm speaking at a national level, local stations/outlets have immediate repercussions if they take liberties with the truth. National/internet outlets, not so much.

Time after time, that false narratives are being promulgated by the some national media outlets.

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/nbcblk/editorial-where-arc-justice-after-mike-brown-n626516

This is just one example, editorializing in fine, but doing so based on false narratives is simply disingenuous, that comes back to a environment of political influence and lack of objective integrity.

"Just 'cause I'm simple, don't mean I'm stewpid!"

[SkyDekker 1,130]

Quote

...editorializing in fine...lack of objective integrity

I get what you are saying. But this is where you lose me. Editorials are specifically subjective.

Secondly, I stated before. There is a strong perception issue with regards to LEO. The majority of your posts on this subject are towards blaming that on the media. If you think the media is solely responsible for that perception, then you will have a rude awakening in your future.

Unless LEO starts proactively dealing with the issues that DO exist, in stead of continuously claiming it isn't as bad as people think, the struggle will continue.

[Bolas 5]

SkyDekker

You need to add your bias and assumptions to get outraged over this factually correct paragraph. Calling it gross negligence is utter and complete bullshit.

And it does nothing to remove bias and assumptions either.

"A teenage black man was pushed out a plane by an older white man. The black man fell 10,000 feet. The white man landed safely. Video exists. No charges were filed against the white man."

Horrible hate crime or a tandem skydive? All the above is true...

Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting
If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

[SkyDekker 1,130]

Quote

And it does nothing to remove bias and assumptions either.

That is not the media's job. That is up to the person itself to educate themselves. You appear to be trying to blame other people's ignorance on the media, while the problem is the ignorance.

[Bolas 5]

SkyDekker

Unless LEO starts proactively dealing with the issues that DO exist, in stead of continuously claiming it isn't as bad as people think, the struggle will continue.

What makes you think they aren't doing both?

Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting
If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

[SkyDekker 1,130]

Yeah I should have reworded that. They have started doing some. Personally don't think it is anywhere near enough. But, time will tell.

[Bolas 5]

SkyDekker

Quote

And it does nothing to remove bias and assumptions either.

That is not the media's job. That is up to the person itself to educate themselves. You appear to be trying to blame other people's ignorance on the media, while the problem is the ignorance.

It's the media's job to tell the full story and not to fuel that ignorance.

"A teenage black man was pushed out a plane by an older white man. The black man fell 10,000 feet. The white man landed safely. Video exists. No charges were filed against the white man."

For someone who looks for racism in everything, the above is gasoline...

Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting
If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

[skycop 0]

Quote

I get what you are saying. But this is where you lose me. Editorials are specifically subjective.

Exactly,
But if one is going to editorialize, shouldn't the basis of the editorial be factual?

In the case of Michael Brown, the basis of the entire editorial is based on a proven lie.

Quote

The majority of your posts on this subject are towards blaming that on the media.

I absolutely blame the media for spreading false narratives, it falls squarely on their shoulders.
Just like misconduct falls on the cops shoulders, and I've said that repeatedly.

Quote

There is a strong perception issue with regards to LEO.

Again, many of these "perceptions" are simply false, and reported again and again by certain media outlets.

That's my only issue, factual reporting. The cops and media have always had competeting interests, and they always will. But bridging the gap happens all the time locally, nationally hardly ever. The national media have no real interest in bridging the gap, they seek to exploit it.

"Just 'cause I'm simple, don't mean I'm stewpid!"

[SkyDekker 1,130]

Quote

It's the media's job to tell the full story and not to fuel that ignorance.

Right and in the story you quoted, the one you are so upset about, the story was about the man who was with Brown's mother when the decisions was announced not to prosecute Wilson. The part you mentioned was just background information and written to indicate why the mother might have been upset. In that context it makes perfect sense.

Quote

For someone who looks for racism in everything

Right...

[SkyDekker 1,130]

Quote

But if one is going to editorialize, shouldn't the basis of the editorial be factual?

I read the editorial and even though I don't agree with all the aspects of it, what parts of it are factually incorrect? Parts that are at least material to the story.

Quote

That's my only issue, factual reporting.

You do realize that in many cases it is the police who actively try and keep those facts from the media? Chicago is a prime example.

[skycop 0]

Quote

where peaceful protests would be met with local Ferguson police donning millions of dollars in military gear.

Peaceful?

Quote

In the '90s a $5.6B program referred to as 1033 has been quietly equipping local police departments with leftover military gear from combat missions. Everything from vests to rifles to Humvees, to tankers and more—local police departments are receiving all of the military toys without any of the military training or discipline.

Debunked, ad nauseam. Not sure what a "tanker" is, with the add-on "and more"

Quote

Eric Garner, Tamir Rice, John Crawford, Walter Scott, Alton Sterling, Philando Castile and too many more to count, all had their unarmed killings filmed and yet still we wait for justice.

Alton Sterling was armed, Philando Castile was armed. Tamir Rice and John Crawford possessed facsimile weapons.

Walter Scott ran, fought, was tazed, then was ultimately shot unlawfully, the officer is currently in jail awaiting trial on murder charges.

That leaves Eric Garner,we will agree to disagree on his demise.

Quote

too many more to count

Implying "unarmed" killings.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/national/police-shootings/

The facts say otherwise.

"Just 'cause I'm simple, don't mean I'm stewpid!"

[Bolas 5]

SkyDekker

the one you are so upset about, the story was about the man who was with Brown's mother when the decisions was announced not to prosecute Wilson. The part you mentioned was just background information and written to indicate why the mother might have been upset. In that context it makes perfect sense.

So the only way a mother would be upset about her son dieing is if he was innocent?

Do you think Wilson should have been tried?

Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting
If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

[SkyDekker 1,130]

Bolas

*** the one you are so upset about, the story was about the man who was with Brown's mother when the decisions was announced not to prosecute Wilson. The part you mentioned was just background information and written to indicate why the mother might have been upset. In that context it makes perfect sense.

So the only way a mother would be upset about her son dieing is if he was innocent?

Do you think Wilson should have been tried?

The quoted paragraph didn't mentioned innocent or guilty. Again, that is your heaping tablespoon of assumptions leading to your outrage.

What I think about the situation has no bearing on whether the paragraph is factual.

I think the shooting was justified. I think the aftermath was handled as poorly as it could have been. I think one of the drivers of that is the clear racism present within that police organization. Subsequent reports have indicated that.

[SkyDekker 1,130]

Quote

Peaceful?

They started peaceful and they were met by police in military style gear. The writer did continue on to state that the protests devolved. Editorializing the police response had some blame regarding that.

Quote

Debunked, ad nauseam. Not sure what a "tanker" is, with the add-on "and more"

IN essence what is stated there is correct. 1033 Did transfer ownership of excess military equipment to civilian law enforcement agencies. The value I am finding is $5.1 million. Author uses $5.6 billion. Really nothing to get outraged over.

Not sure what is meant by tankers, also not really relevant. The Humvees and more is certainly correct.

Quote

Alton Sterling was armed, Philando Castile was armed. Tamir Rice and John Crawford possessed facsimile weapons.

Alton Sterling was pinned down when he was shot and did not have control of his weapon at that point.

Philando Castille was legal to carry a firearm and had informed the "officer" that he was armed as he was supposed too. When asked to provide his ID he moved and was subsequently shot.

Tamir Rice was 12 years old and the 911 caller had indicated the gun was probably fake. The officer raced in, startled the kid and shot him. Could have been handled much, much better.

Garner was left to die with none of the officers standing around him even trying to perform CPR or offer any help. Nobody lifted a finger after killing him. No help whatsoever.

I think the writer did you a favour by not spelling it all out.

Garner and Brown are prime examples of what the problem is. The actions may have been justified, but how things are handled matters. When somebody is obviously dying, you try and help. That is part of your job. You don't just choke him out and then leave him there. Other than showing you simply don't care about that human life, it is extremely disrespectful.

Quote

The facts say otherwise.

Can't believe you still don't get this. Nobody believes those "facts" because many times once video of the incident comes to light, the "facts" as presented by police aren't really the "facts", they are the story made up to minimize LEO exposure to wrongdoing.

[SkyDekker 1,130]

Here is another real confidence builder:

http://www.post-gazette.com/local/region/2016/09/11/Weirton-fired-officer-who-did-not-fire-at-man-with-gun/stories/201609090080