Kenosha

[MU82]

In the case of Blake, though, a lot of the big media outlets were part of the misinformation. There were a lot of headlines with the word "unarmed" in them even though the facts weren't clear at the time. And then in addition to media outlets running disputed facts that were later proven to be wrong, many political and social leaders repeated the unarmed talking point as well.

Those initial headlines and stories were a big part of the huge national response to this story. If the story was about an armed man with a warrant who had been shot, would the Bucks and the NBA have gotten involved? Would people have donated millions of dollars to Blake? Would there have been massive protests? It's all possible, but I've got to think it's much less likely. (To be clear, I'm not saying the protests are the fault of the media, just noting the response probably would have been less significant.)

The two things I see as fair criticisms worth discussing with the media response to stories like this are how they can better handle muddy facts in the initial reporting and then how they can better clarify stories when the reporting turns out to have included errors.

The current business model seems to favor speed and hyperbole to drive clicks and get more eyeballs on a story. And the impact of the first impressions of a story seem to be way stickier than any correction or edit made after the fact. Case in point - even after the Kenosha DA laid out all the facts that were uncovered after a lengthy investigation, most people's reactions were based on their initial understanding of the situation, which was based on disputed/incorrect points.

Once the facts did come out, most notably that Blake did have a knife, there was little to no coverage of this very important detail now being confirmed. I think Washington Post was one of the big outlets that still used the word unarmed in a headline after the DA's decision, almost as if the writers there didn't listen to the press conference that laid out all the information that had been gathered. Any correction that came once the facts were clear was much quieter, much less impactful than all the initial, misleading coverage. Shouldn't the truth be the biggest story? Or is it OK to just move on without ensuring that the public really does get the whole truth?

It's not fair to expect perfection from journalists, because they're human, and they'll make some mistakes here and there. But outside of the Rolling Stone debacle, how often do we hear about the correction making the same splash as the error? There has to be a way to do this better, to hold up the facts higher than the splashy headline, right?

Some definitely fair in there criticism, ski.

I do not know the play-by-play of the Blake case, but you seem well-versed on it, so I thank you for providing the facts and opinions you did. As you can see, rocky and others (including Blake) challenge some of those facts, so there seems to be room for different interpretations.

Certainly, over the years and decades and centuries, there have been many cases where those working for the legitimate news media should have done better, as is the case in any profession. And because they have such a great responsibility, I'd argue they have to be even better.

The competition to get the news out first has always been a thing, but in today's world - when a "scoop" lasts all of about 30 seconds - it definitely can lead to errors, as you pointed out. And when errors are made, it is incumbent on the legitimate news media to correct them.

I nonetheless stand by what I said earlier about their vital role in our great democratic republic, and I am especially grateful for their tireless vigilance these last 4 years.

[rocket surgeon]

Personally, I think if the cop hadn't shot Jacob Blake in the back 7 times that would have prevented a lot more death, injury, and destruction than anything the media did.

well then, let's take this one more step back; if blake would have heeded the cops commands, he would not have been shot in the back 7 times and that would have prevented a lot more death, injury and destruction the media would have had to do to perpetrate it's agenda

[wadesworld]

well then, let's take this one more step back; if blake would have heeded the cops commands, he would not have been shot in the back 7 times and that would have prevented a lot more death, injury and destruction the media would have had to do to perpetrate it's agenda

There should be a lot of dead or paralyzed white people out in Washington DC right now, then.

[rocket surgeon]

There should be a lot of dead or paralyzed white people out in Washington DC right now, then.

maybe, but the media you guys rode in on could tell us a lot more.  at least they seem to be arresting and prosecuting more rather than arresting and promptly allowing them to leave out the back door to rejoin their fellow anarchists.  the media we are left with is all wearing the bumbling biden and heels up harris jerseys so don't expect too much from their side.  it is funny how BLM and antifa like the cops and national guard now though as they were just last week fryin em like bacon.  if trump had 25-30,000 troops on capital grounds they'd be excoriating him for being a chinese, nope, russian dictator showing off it's military in red square. 

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

maybe, but the media you guys rode in on could tell us a lot more.  at least they seem to be arresting and prosecuting more rather than arresting and promptly allowing them to leave out the back door to rejoin their fellow anarchists.  the media we are left with is all wearing the bumbling biden and heels up harris jerseys so don't expect too much from their side.  it is funny how BLM and antifa like the cops and national guard now though as they were just last week fryin em like bacon.  if trump had 25-30,000 troops on capital grounds they'd be excoriating him for being a chinese, nope, russian dictator showing off it's military in red square. 

There wouldn't be need for that many troops in DC had not the current commander in chief, his political allies, and associated media, not spent months spreading misinformation about the legitimacy of an election.

But sure...blame Anifa and BLM. 

And anyway, I would argue that invading and trashing the capitol, and seeking out lawmakers to harm in the process, is a much, much more harmful offense than the vandalism and looting around the BLM protests this summer, and therefore SHOULD be prosecuted more harshly.

[Uncle Rico]

maybe, but the media you guys rode in on could tell us a lot more.  at least they seem to be arresting and prosecuting more rather than arresting and promptly allowing them to leave out the back door to rejoin their fellow anarchists.  the media we are left with is all wearing the bumbling biden and heels up harris jerseys so don't expect too much from their side.  it is funny how BLM and antifa like the cops and national guard now though as they were just last week fryin em like bacon.  if trump had 25-30,000 troops on capital grounds they'd be excoriating him for being a chinese, nope, russian dictator showing off it's military in red square.

Deflecting from the real issues

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

well then, let's take this one more step back; if blake would have heeded the cops commands, he would not have been shot in the back 7 times and that would have prevented a lot more death, injury and destruction the media would have had to do to perpetrate it's agenda

I don't have the same expectation for a criminal and a cop. I expect the criminal to do things wrong.  I expect the cop to do things right even when the criminal is doing things wrong. I don't think that's an unreasonable expectation.

Blake should have been held accountable. He shouldn't have been paralyzed by a cop.  I don't know if it's a legal issue or an incompetence issue but I do know it's an issue. You will never convince me that the best possible outcome in that situation is Blake getting shot in the back seven times.

[naginiF]

Police killing citizens = very bad
Police killing POC (specifically black people) at disproportionate rates = unconscionably bad
Citizens storming the US Capitol in order to overturn a fair and free election = terrorism bad
Inciting citizens to terrorize elected officials by lying to them = treason bad
Believing the obvious lies that the election was stolen but NOT committing insurrection = sad
Looting and destroying property in the name of equality = bad
Celebrating or defending a random citizen who kills because of riots = believing human life < property (also bad)
Protesting against a system that doesn't treat its citizens with equality or respect = very good

Doesn't seem that hard

[mu_hilltopper]

This part was interesting:
The one thing that the video is clear about, is that after opening the car door - Blake did no lunging or "driving a knife" at a police officer.  Watch the video again yourself. 
https://twitter.com/davenewworld_2/status/1297698630875385856

Explained by the Kenosha DA, entered in evidence is not just the officer's view that Blake reached left with an object, but also a bystander who saw the exactly that.   The DA explains the angle of the video and how it misses this movement.

I beg of anyone who speaks of this episode to watch the Kenosha DA painstakingly go through all the evidence they gathered.  All the other anecdotes, media, newspaper, TV are simply non-authoritative blather.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6m0CRt0_vYg

[tower912]

Great.  Now even the mods are arguing.

[MU82]

maybe, but the media you guys rode in on could tell us a lot more.  at least they seem to be arresting and prosecuting more rather than arresting and promptly allowing them to leave out the back door to rejoin their fellow anarchists.  the media we are left with is all wearing the bumbling biden and heels up harris jerseys so don't expect too much from their side.  it is funny how BLM and antifa like the cops and national guard now though as they were just last week fryin em like bacon.  if trump had 25-30,000 troops on capital grounds they'd be excoriating him for being a chinese, nope, russian dictator showing off it's military in red square.

rocket:

To pay homage to Dr. King, rather than get into a war of words with you, I simply will present a couple of reactions of Black leaders to what took place at the U.S. Capitol. I urge you to read them, and I encourage you to try to put yourselves in other people's shoes.

Rev. Chalice Overy, pastor of Pullen Memorial Baptist Church in Raleigh:

As she watched what took place Jan. 6, what she saw was white people releasing the anger that began welling up with the election of President Barack Obama in 2008, his reelection in 2012 and the fanning of racist resentment throughout the four years of the Trump administration.

“There is really no other explanation for the reason why all those people would feel comfortable enough to scale walls, knock down barriers and walk into the Capitol at a time when some of the most important work of democracy was taking place,” said Overy, a programming coordinator at Pullen. “Attempting to derail that and believing that ultimately they would be OK — not fearing the repercussions that might come — that is white supremacy.”

Some of what was on display during the riot, Overy said, “was some people’s reaction to feeling that something is slipping away from them, and I believe that is white supremacy, the ability to legislate in a way that is unjust.”

Rev. Dr. Anthony T. Spearman, president of the N.C. NAACP:

“One of the things that was infuriating each time I heard it was when a reporter would refer to those people as protesters. That’s not protesting. That is straight-out terrorism.”

He has heard the comparisons to protests held by followers of the Black Lives Matter movement last summer. According to the U.S. Crisis Monitor, there were more than 7,750 demonstrations across the U.S. linked to the BLM movement, which rose up against police brutality and racism. Violent or destructive behavior was associated with 220 of those protests, the research group found.

“How dare you?” Spearman asked. “How dare you frame what was happening [at the Capitol] as protest? That’s trying to understand it as something that was allowable or permissible. To me, to even say the words ‘armed protest’ is a dichotomy. What do you mean, ‘armed protest’? If people are armed, it’s terrorism. This is the divide that we are seeing play itself out.”

rocket, please take a little time to separate yourself from the politics and think about the way folks who are different from you viewed what happened on Jan. 6. Months after Black protesters (some violent, but the vast majority peaceful) routinely met significant resistance from huge law-enforcement teams, white protesters - some of whom meant to commit violent acts against members of Congress at the U.S. Capitol - met almost no resistance at all.

On Dr. King's day, please think about that, and about how it makes many of our Black brothers and sisters feel.

Personally, I will take it a step further. I think it should make all Americans feel sick to our stomachs.

May you have a peaceful MLK Day, one in which you reflect on how race relations in our great democratic republic have progressed.

Peace,
Mike

[mu_hilltopper]

Great.  Now even the mods are arguing.

Nah, he set the ball so I could spike it!

[GOO]

well then, let's take this one more step back; if blake would have heeded the cops commands, he would not have been shot in the back 7 times and that would have prevented a lot more death, injury and destruction the media would have had to do to perpetrate it's agenda

We had a revolution in this country about reducing the ability of the government to do things like this... we have a constitution that limits the governments right to act as you appear to suggest.  Let's not forget that, or I can write a 5 page diatribe about how the constitution works, etc.

Very radical of you to suggest otherwise.  If you don't like it, seek an amendment to the constitution, thereby overturning one of the primary reason we had a revolution and ended up with a constitution that limited the power of the government and executive branch/law enforcement. 

As I told a racist person I know who says the same type of things.. what if it is a white kid, in a polo shirt with his collar up, shooting a bb gun at street signs... should the cops roll up and if the kid doesn't obey and runs... then shoot the kid.  He of course is like well, well... because I just described the type of behavior that I'm sure he participated in as a kid. And, I am not calling you a racist, but just hope you'd apply that equally to all races.

[skianth16]

Explained by the Kenosha DA, entered in evidence is not just the officer's view that Blake reached left with an object, but also a bystander who saw the exactly that.   The DA explains the angle of the video and how it misses this movement.

I beg of anyone who speaks of this episode to watch the Kenosha DA painstakingly go through all the evidence they gathered.  All the other anecdotes, media, newspaper, TV are simply non-authoritative blather.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6m0CRt0_vYg

The DA's detailed explanation of known facts and what led to the decision to not charge Reskey has 18K views. I did a quick search on YouTube for Jacob Blake and saw that the video of the shooting had 3.6M views and Trevor Noah's segment from August has 3.5M views. The Michael Strahan interview with Blake where he discusses the events of that tragic day? 58K views.

This is far from a scientific approach, and I know Trevor Noah will always get more attention than Wisconsin PBS, but it seems like there was a lot more interest in the the initial reports than the detailed versions of events coming from Blake himself and from the investigation into the case. It seems kind of crazy to me that after the initial outrage and coverage, so few people came back to these sources to better understand the full story.

This is where I'll go back to my prior questions about the role we should expect our media to play. When new facts come to light, shouldn't there be a way to lift them up above initial, flawed reports to make sure the truth is known? And maybe the bigger question - should there be a responsibility to do this? Using the Trevor Noah example, I searched the Daily Show's YouTube page and website for Jacob Blake to see if there was a video posted following the DA's announcement or following the interview with Blake from GMA, but there hasn't been anything posted since September on the topic. So while Noah shared what he believed to be true at the time, does he have a responsibility to address this again now that more information has been uncovered? What should we expect from our sources of news in situations like this?

[forgetful]

maybe, but the media you guys rode in on could tell us a lot more.  at least they seem to be arresting and prosecuting more rather than arresting and promptly allowing them to leave out the back door to rejoin their fellow anarchists.  the media we are left with is all wearing the bumbling biden and heels up harris jerseys so don't expect too much from their side.  it is funny how BLM and antifa like the cops and national guard now though as they were just last week fryin em like bacon.  if trump had 25-30,000 troops on capital grounds they'd be excoriating him for being a chinese, nope, russian dictator showing off it's military in red square.

Rocket. Remember Benghazi? Where the GOP held 18-billion investigations and claimed that the president/Hillary were responsible because there was chatter about a possible attack leading up to the attack. And blaming them, because military died?

Well, the FBI, Trump, and capital police were well aware of a planned attack on the capital. Yet they didn't provide protection, or act on it. Instead, former members of the Trump campaign that were funneled 10's, 100's of thousands of dollars planned and organized the "rally".

Then, they denied request for more forces. Even after they were attacking the capital, they denied requests for the national guard to step in. Trump said they were great people that he loved very much...after they attacked the capital and killed police.

Then, instead of holding people accountable, the GOP tried to claim it was really "antifa." The Foxnew's and Newsmax, and OAN supported these claims. Supported the idea that this was a "spontaneous" event. If you are looking for a biased media causing problems in this nation, you are looking at the wrong people re. the Blake incident. I followed that media pretty well, and the stories they put out then, reasonably match what we are hearing now.

They presented the "unarmed case" based on eye-witness accounts, that refuted the presence of a knife. They tried to interview the police who refused to tell their story/disclose information. That's how journalism works. Interview those present, present that information, indicate when others refuse to make statements. If you have a problem, then, with the "unarmed case," take it up with the police and have them tell their story, with body-cams recorded and released to the public right away so that there is transparency.

tldr: There is a difference between media sources deliberately pushing provably false narratives (e.g. Newsmax/OAN/Foxnews) and media sources telling the story as it stands due to eye-witness accounts and indicating the absence of statements from the police to support their accusations (e.g. the rest of the media re. Blake).

[mu_hilltopper]

The DA's detailed explanation of known facts and what led to the decision to not charge Reskey has 18K views.

 What should we expect from our sources of news in situations like this?

We can expect our media sources to continue to try their best to capture the attention of their customers.  We can expect activists to continue to push their own reality that helps their narratives.

What should we expect they do?   Strive for accuracy and seek a common truth. 

They won't.  We're screwed.  Arby's.

[rocky_warrior]

Explained by the Kenosha DA, entered in evidence is not just the officer's view that Blake reached left with an object, but also a bystander who saw the exactly that.   The DA explains the angle of the video and how it misses this movement.

I beg of anyone who speaks of this episode to watch the Kenosha DA painstakingly go through all the evidence they gathered.  All the other anecdotes, media, newspaper, TV are simply non-authoritative blather.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6m0CRt0_vYg

No offense, but you're putting too much trust in the Police and the DA.  I mean, I agree that it would be difficult to file charges against the officer from the state's perspective.  However, that doesn't mean that the information released  by the police / DA / "bystander" is 100% on the up & up.

Watch making a murderer.  Forget the latest conviction, Avery sat in jail for 18 years because the police/DA were convinced he was a bad  dude and raped/attempted to murder a woman.  I generally trust police, but I can't particularly blame people that don't.  When the police and prosecutors are aligned, rightly or wrongly, it's really difficult to overcome that.

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

No offense, but you're putting too much trust in the Police and the DA.  I mean, I agree that it would be difficult to file charges against the officer from the state's perspective.  However, that doesn't mean that the information released  by the police / DA / "bystander" is 100% on the up & up.

Watch making a murderer.  Forget the latest conviction, Avery sat in jail for 18 years because the police/DA were convinced he was a bad  dude and raped/attempted to murder a woman.  I generally trust police, but I can't particularly blame people that don't.  When the police and prosecutors are aligned, rightly or wrongly, it's really difficult to overcome that.

MOD FIGHT!!!!

[forgetful]

What should we expect they do?   Strive for accuracy and seek a common truth. 

They won't.  We're screwed.  Arby's.

This may be the single most succinct and accurate analysis of the world today.

[TSmith34, Inc.]

What should we expect they do?   Strive for accuracy and seek a common truth. 

They won't.  We're screwed.  Arby's.

This. So very much this.

The Bush-era quote, assumed to be from Karl Rove, shows that the right-wing had exactly the opposite in mind:

"The aide said that guys like me [Suskind] were "in what we call the reality-based community," which he defined as people who "believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality." I nodded and murmured something about enlightenment principles and empiricism. He cut me off. "That's not the way the world really works anymore," he continued. "We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality — judiciously, as you will — we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out."

The right-wing, through 1,500 AM radio stations and cable news, have very successfully created a non-reality-based reality for their followers, one on which Hillary murdered Vince Foster, Obama was born in Kenya, and Benghazi was a plot by, again, Hillary Clinton. The last four years have massively accelerated the disinformation to the point where now the perceived enemies of the right-wing are said to be cannibalistic pedophiles engaged in a worldwide trafficking ring to drink the blood of children and 30% of Republicans believe it.

Millions have been brainwashed. Ashli Babbitt got sucked into this alternate reality and died because of it. A 22-year old who stormed the Capitol and stole either a laptop or hard drive from Pelosi's office is on the run from authorities; her mother said she started acting strangely after participating in far-right message boards. Just two of the millions of victims.

Sacha Baron Cohen of all people said (perhaps quoting someone else, I am not sure),"Democracy, which depends on shared truths, is in retreat, and autocracy, which depends on shared lies, is on the march."

This is a massive, massive issue for the United States.

[JWags85]

This. So very much this.

The Bush-era quote, assumed to be from Karl Rove, shows that the right-wing had exactly the opposite in mind:

"The aide said that guys like me [Suskind] were "in what we call the reality-based community," which he defined as people who "believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality." I nodded and murmured something about enlightenment principles and empiricism. He cut me off. "That's not the way the world really works anymore," he continued. "We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality — judiciously, as you will — we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out."

The right-wing, through 1,500 AM radio stations and cable news, have very successfully created a non-reality-based reality for their followers, one on which Hillary murdered Vince Foster, Obama was born in Kenya, and Benghazi was a plot by, again, Hillary Clinton. The last four years have massively accelerated the disinformation to the point where now the perceived enemies of the right-wing are said to be cannibalistic pedophiles engaged in a worldwide trafficking ring to drink the blood of children and 30% of Republicans believe it.

Millions have been brainwashed. Ashli Babbitt got sucked into this alternate reality and died because of it. A 22-year old who stormed the Capitol and stole either a laptop or hard drive from Pelosi's office is on the run from authorities; her mother said she started acting strangely after participating in far-right message boards. Just two of the millions of victims.

Sacha Baron Cohen of all people said (perhaps quoting someone else, I am not sure),"Democracy, which depends on shared truths, is in retreat, and autocracy, which depends on shared lies, is on the march."

This is a massive, massive issue for the United States.

Congrats on missing his point and falling into the easy “it’s clearly just the other side’s fault”. Very on brand and emblematic of the sh**show this country is in, beyond just the most recent fiasco.

[Galway Eagle]

Congrats on missing his point and falling into the easy “it’s clearly just the other side’s fault”. Very on brand and emblematic of the sh**show this country is in, beyond just the most recent fiasco.

You're right it's not just "the other side's fault" however, nothing he said in his post is false either. Eventually the right has to have a reckoning with its disinformation and conspiracy side.

Just as the left needs to have a reckoning with its huge cancel culture problem that alienates moderates or those who hold one or two right of center beliefs but are left overall.

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

"Cancel culture problem" really isn't a problem.  But I get your point.

[mu_hilltopper]

No offense, but you're putting too much trust in the Police and the DA.

I agree it's possible officials who are supposed to be neutral, seeking the truth, are not. 

But since we (you and I, and every consumer of media) can't take 1000 hours to capture and digest data, we need someone else, some party who can do it for us, objectively, impartially.   Who are you going to pick?  I-Team 4?  Al Sharpton?  Breitbart?   60 Minutes?  No, no, no, and no.

I watched the Kenosha DA's presser.   And sure, I'm OK with triple checking a County DA's work with a state or federal examiner.   

The DA also contracted with an (African-American) use-of-force expert to review the case.   He was given unfettered access and gave independent conclusions.  The results agreed.

It's a huge problem that .. if the results don't reach the conclusion "we" want them to be .. it's easy to suggest bias, incompetence, etc.   No offense either, but I'm guessing you didn't watch the video presentation.  And you jump to "whataboutism" linking in a completely different case (Avery) to justify your doubts. 

It's not impossible the DA is screwing up the investigation.  But to date, his process is -- by a factor of a million -- better than anyone else's.

[Galway Eagle]

"Cancel culture problem" really isn't a problem.  But I get your point.

Well it is if you're losing members to online nut job forums and conspiracies. Take the Ashli Babbit who died, she was an ardent Obama supporter who felt alienated by the party. Same with the mother of that 18yr old in Massachusetts who turned her into the feds. If your options are "chill and understand that people have different world views and political leanings are a grey scale not black & white" or "you aren't liberal enough so GTFO" then those people then go off the deep end.

Well I'd take the first option.