The Petito Story

[StillAWarrior]

We've been an abhorrent species for a long time.

I think that this is nonsense...although I suppose it does explain your enthusiasm for torture (which I, and apparently several others here, find "messed up," "disgusting," and dare I say "abhorrent").

There have been examples of abhorrent members of our species since the beginning of time. That doesn't make the species abhorrent. I see examples of kindness, empathy, and compassion far more often than I see examples of abhorrent behavior. For example, you're love and compassion for animals.

[Galway Eagle]

CNN just posted an article about the frustrations of minorities over "missing white woman syndrome". Seems odd to write about it when they helped create it in the first place. I mean I wouldn't have known about this case if I didn't get a CNN alert on my phone.

[Golden Avalanche]

CNN just posted an article about the frustrations of minorities over "missing white woman syndrome". Seems odd to write about it when they helped create it in the first place. I mean I wouldn't have known about this case if I didn't get a CNN alert on my phone.

Because they got push back. The "be quiet and take it" media consumer doesn't exist anymore thanks to social media. CNN, and other outlets, have likely been bombarded for the last week over their coverage of Petito when they've never come close to that level with a person who didn't fit the MWWS framework.

They all have social media curators. They all recognized the pushback buzz. The editors decided we need to address it. Rinse and repeat.

[jficke13]

CNN just posted an article about the frustrations of minorities over "missing white woman syndrome". Seems odd to write about it when they helped create it in the first place. I mean I wouldn't have known about this case if I didn't get a CNN alert on my phone.

Or they write about it because they think they can capitalize on the story and drive more traffic from it.

[JWags85]

As the Petito case grips the nation, families of color say their missing loved ones matter, too

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2021/09/22/missing-persons-families-seek-help-after-gabby-petito-death/?utm_campaign=wp_the7&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&wpisrc=nl_the7&carta-url=https%3A%2F%2Fs2.washingtonpost.com%2Fcar-ln-tr%2F34c244e%2F614c5e819d2fda9d41df27a2%2F5f8d147cae7e8a56e5b732a4%2F17%2F38%2F614c5e819d2fda9d41df27a2

The last time Kimberly Bryan spoke to her sister, Tiffany Foster was showing off her new car. Bryan cracked some jokes about how it was about time but also told her big sister how proud she was. Foster was getting close to graduating from college, and everything seemed to be lining up for her.

That was more than six months ago. Foster, a 35-year-old Black mother of three from Newnan, Ga., has not been seen or heard from since March 1.

Bryan and her family handed out fliers, spoke at news conferences and hosted rallies to draw attention to Foster’s disappearance, but the case has remained mostly unknown outside their home state. So when Bryan saw the surge of interest in the Gabby Petito case, the difference was impossible to ignore.

“It does make you feel, you know, ‘Well, what about us?’ ” Bryan said. “When are we going to get her face out nationally? When are we going to get the FBI come in and help us out? We didn’t get that, and I’m asking my mom, ‘Well, why?’ And it’s no answers. We have a lot of questions with no answers.”

In the weeks since Petito was reported missing during a cross-country trip with her fiance, her story has captured national and international attention, dominating TikTok and other social media networks and garnering around-the-clock national news coverage. Partly due to the tremendous public awareness, tips flowed to the FBI and other law enforcement agencies, and the body of the 22-year-old woman was discovered Sunday near Wyoming’s Grand Teton National Park.

A manhunt for fiance Brian Laundrie, whom authorities named a “person of interest” in the case, continues. News outlets and social media users continue to track every development.

The groundswell of concern for Petito has revived perennial questions about why some missing-person cases attract such a dedicated response while others barely draw notice with many observers seeing a racial disparity at play. Between 2011 and 2020, at least 710 Indigenous people were reported missing in Wyoming, the same state where Petito, who is White, was lost and found within a matter of days.

Bryan doesn’t understand why the story of her sister, a Georgia Military College student with dreams of becoming a police officer, has not spread as widely. But, she noted, “I do feel like it could possibly be because my sister doesn’t have blond hair and blue eyes.”

Research suggests that victims who are White, attractive, young and seemingly “innocent” gain more traction in the media, said Michelle N. Jeanis, an assistant professor of criminal justice at the University of Louisiana at Lafayette who studies the relationship between crime and news and entertainment media.

Sad story and I feel for her family, but there is myriad reasons why the Petito story is different and more unique than her sister's disappearance, and they aren't racially based.  Its not like the FBI jumped in because she was an attractive white woman.

[dgies9156]

Brother Mu:

Interesting perspective. While I'll acknowledge that some newspapers still do great investigative work -- the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel with its coverage of Great Lakes water quality, the Chicago Tribune on how guns from Superior, WI kill people in Chicago or the Indy Star on Larry Nassar -- these initiatives are few and far between. Newspapers and television are far too stressed to put someone on a Nassar investigation, for example, for six months or more and don't have the time or money to do this.

Frankly, these investigations don't bring new consumers or keep existing consumers.

There's no IRE (Investigative Reporters and Editors) today the way there was beginning in 1979. That came about when a Phoenix reporter's car was turned into a car bomb by those who did not like his reporting. It lasted about 10 years until its funding dried up around 1990.

As to media bias, when you can stand up and tell me on these pages that Fox News is objective the way CBS or NBC used to be, I'll buy your argument. Ditto for any conservative who can stand up on these pages and say CNN is today's Walter Cronkite or Huntley-Brinkley! When a New York Times editor gets blackballed and run off the property because they printed an op-ed piece from Senator Tom Cotton, who is a Republican leader no matter how much you might dislike him, then there's a problem with media bias.

I admit I'm a media junkie. I actually worked in the media for a decade. What's happening today is a far cry from the 1970s and 1980s (and I might add, the 1960s as well). In those days, objectivity was everything. Because we're human and have feelings, we're not always objective, but back then, the media tried. Plus the number of editors and copy editors between the reporter and the printed or broadcast report was far greater than today.

Your comment about the difference between commentators and reporters was an interesting one. Yeah, there's many conclusions about media bias being drawn by whether your favorite commentator is Rachel Maddow or Sean Hannity. But I submit that the lines between reporting and commentating have been blurred, if not erased. One of the foundation principles taught to us back in the day (God, I'm sounding old) is never inject yourself into your reporting. Using the personal pronoun "I" was an automatic "F" with an optional re-write in Marquette's College of Journalism. Today's College of Communications probably encourages it!

No Brother, we're not seeking the truth in today's media. We're doing what I once said about Crain's Chicago Business: "Never let the facts get in the way of a good conclusion!" 

Last thought as it  relates to media morals: When the News with Rob and the Lovey Allison is broadcast (or whatever the equivalent in Charlotte might be), what would you rather watch: 13 minutes of exploitative reporting on the Petito story or some local version thereof, or 13 minutes on Illinois' insufferable public pension deficit and what can be done about it.

The American people have voted on that one with their eyes and ears.

[jsglow]

Well done degies.

Today it takes so very much effort to understand the 'truth'.  It's really quite easy to spot the bias if one has a discerning, analytical mind.  What frightens me is that most folks just lap it up allowing their own biases to be reinforced by media simply interested in clicks.

A free, independent and highly skeptical press committed to challenging and honestly testing any story is critical for a functioning democracy.  We're in a very bad spot with respect to that unfortunately.

[Galway Eagle]

Well done degies.

Today it takes so very much effort to understand the 'truth'.  It's really quite easy to spot the bias if one has a discerning, analytical mind.  What frightens me is that most folks just lap it up allowing their own biases to be reinforced by media simply interested in clicks.

A free, independent and highly skeptical press committed to challenging and honestly testing any story is critical for a functioning democracy.  We're in a very bad spot with respect to that unfortunately.

I think both sides have the highly skeptical portion down when it comes to reporting the other side

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

I don't think traditional media has gotten more biased than it was in the 70s or 80s. I think now there is more "new media" that is extremely biased that makes a point to point out the more subtle bias in traditional media that has always existed (but only on the opposite side of their political leaning of course).

The rise of this extremely biased "new media" also gives consumers permission to dismiss anything they hear that they don't like as "bias" even when it is factual. That is the crux of the problem, not media bias.

[Billy Hoyle]

Sad story and I feel for her family, but there is myriad reasons why the Petito story is different and more unique than her sister's disappearance, and they aren't racially based.  Its not like the FBI jumped in because she was an attractive white woman.

Nope, everything can be blamed on racism now. Forget the fact that the girl was a well known "vlogger" and people on social media sites like Tik Tok helped this story explode (like they did the Asian woman who disappeared at the Cecil Hotel)  or that Joy Reid has never bothered to cover any of the missing Black or minority women, it's easier for her to scream "racism" and stir up racial tensions instead of doing what she is accusing the media of not doing.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Nope, everything can be blamed on racism now. Forget the fact that the girl was a well known "vlogger" and people on social media sites like Tik Tok helped this story explode (like they did the Asian woman who disappeared at the Cecil Hotel)  or that Joy Reid has never bothered to cover any of the missing Black or minority women, it's easier for her to scream "racism" and stir up racial tensions instead of doing what she is accusing the media of not doing.

1. Petito was not a well known vlogger. This was debunked earlier in this thread.
2. Elisa Lam (had to look up the name) didn't get nearly this level of media coverage
3. Reid and others should do more to cover other missing women. That doesn't mean that young pretty White women don't get more attention when they go missing

Look it's undeniable that what Petito looks like is a factor in why so many people are paying attention. It's not the only factor, it doesn't make anyone who's interested in the case but not others bad people, it's just a reality. Pointing it out is important so hopefully now and in the future, more missing women get the same level of or at least more attention.

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

1. Petito was not a well know vlogger. This was debunked earlier in this thread.
2. Elisa Lam (had to look up the name) didn't get nearly this level of media coverage
3. Reid and other should do more to cover other missing women. That doesn't mean that young pretty Women don't get more attention when they go missing

Look it's undeniable that what Petito looks like is a factor in why so many people are paying attention. It's not the only factor, it doesn't make anyone who's interested in the case but not others bad people, it's just a reality. Pointing it out is important so hopefully now and in the future, more missing women get the same level of attention.

You forgot

4. No one is "screaming racism."

They are pointing out bias.

[dgies9156]

I don't think traditional media has gotten more biased than it was in the 70s or 80s. I think now there is more "new media" that is extremely biased that makes a point to point out the more subtle bias in traditional media that has always existed (but only on the opposite side of their political leaning of course).

The rise of this extremely biased "new media" also gives consumers permission to dismiss anything they hear that they don't like as "bias" even when it is factual. That is the crux of the problem, not media bias.

Brother TAMU:

I respectfully disagree. I'll concede your point about cable networks, podcasts and a host of similar media outlets that have emerged since 1980. Unfortunately, the mainstream networks and news publications have to compete. They see the edginess and assertiveness of Fox or CNN and basically say, "if you can't beat 'em join 'em.

Another thing that is often forgotten is that networks and television stations were governed by the fairness doctrine for many years. The fairness doctrine probably was blatantly unconstitutional but was never tested. As a consequence, TV and radio stations feared FCC action and tended to present "all sides" of an issue. More than a few times, the Nixon Administration threatened CBS because they didn't like Dan Rather.

For newspapers, the issue is demographics. If your precious readership (shrinking by the hour) likes slanted crime stories, you give them slanted crime stories. If your readership is a limousine liberal from the Upper East Side, you make sure Tom Cotton isn't on your editorial pages and you worship at the altar of AOC. Gone are the days when newspapers sold to everyone and tried to cover the major issues affecting a community on a day-in, day-out basis.

And, if your readership is government employees in Virginia, Maryland and the District, elected officials and lobbyists, you make damn sure you're reflecting their vision of the world in your news and your commentary.

Yeup, I'm cynical!
 

[Jockey]

As a VERY not religious person I'll say that I don't know any atheists that would wish "for evil people to suffer excruciating pain". Empathy or morality or compassion or etc shouldn't be attributed to simply being religious. As was discussed in the Texas thread (i think), being religious can and is used to justify non empathetic/moral/compassionate all the time. It is used to motivate empathy/moralistic/compassion all the time too, but religion should not be tied to someone taking, or not taking, the moralistic high road.

Just from personal experience (being raised in a very conservative religion), I would agree 100%.

[Billy Hoyle]

You forgot

4. No one is "screaming racism."

They are pointing out bias.

yeah, that's what a no-talent hack like Joy Reid is screaming. "Bias."

And, like I said, the story was further amplified by other social media bloggers. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/crime/gabby-petito-van-wyoming-blogger-b1923783.html

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

yeah, that's what a no-talent hack like Joy Reid is screaming. "Bias."

I have no idea who Joy Reid is and don't really care.  You get too caught up in what the fringes are yelling and presenting anecdotal stories as fact.  Be smarter.

[Babybluejeans]

I have no idea who Joy Reid is and don't really care.  You get too caught up in what the fringes are yelling and presenting anecdotal stories as fact.  Be smarter.

He is absolutely obsessed with race. It must suck walking around angry all the time but best to ignore it.

The NYT magazine a couple weeks ago had a great piece about an FBI counterterrorism agent who leaked information about unlawful conduct the FBI was doing, ostensibly in the name of counterterrorism. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/01/magazine/fbi-terrorism-terry-albury.html. A fascinating moment comes when the piece explains how the story, which was explosive, broke in winter 2017 but was completely swallowed by breathless reactions to the president's latest shenanigans. That's a failure of media to sufficiently report on something big, that impacts everyone and highlights serious civil rights violations going on in our government, in view of just garnering larger audiences. One of many such examples. 

[Jockey]

On your last point, what does "there's no morals in the media" even mean? Which media? All media? And who gets to decide what these "morals" are or should be?

As for journalism's "heyday" ...

Journalists pursued the truth before the 1970s and they're still pursuing the truth today. The methods are different, the forums have changed, the kind of competition has changed, etc. But there's still a lot of tremendous (and often important) journalism taking place.

It was the investigative reporting of the Indianapolis Star that ended Larry Nassar's reign of terror. The journalists who worked tirelessly on that series are in "the media." So is Jeanine Pirro, but her brand of "media" is a tad different, no? Another: Last year, the Charlotte Observer did an award-winning series on the corruption, greed, politics and abusive treatment taking place inside North Carolina's prisons. The work by "the media" in that situation led to changes in the system. Another: ESPN's Adrian Wojnarowski is an outstanding journalist; he's well-connected, has a ton of sources, and is quite often the first to break significant news on his beat. If folks lump him in with MSNBC's Lawrence O'Donnell because both are in "the media," that's on the lumpers, not the lumpee.

"Media" is a big term. Sean Hannity, Rachel Maddow, Jeremy Schaap, Dickey Simpkins, the Channel 2 weatherman and the guy who writes a dozen articles a week for my local weekly newspaper are all part of "the media." But their jobs aren't exactly the same, are they?

What I've found is that when most people criticize "the media," they actually are criticizing:

++ Well-known TV personalities, such as the Fox News, MSNBC and CNN prime-time yakkers. People praise "the media" who agree with their POV, criticize those who don't.

++ Major metro newspapers, especially if the ideology (or perceived ideology) differs from their own.

++ TV opinion-givers and newspaper columnists. Many consumers of news do not know the difference between opinion-givers and reporters.

++ Those in the sports media, mostly TV but sometimes print, who supposedly "hate" the favorite team or supposedly "love" the rivals.

++ Pretty much anybody in "the media" who doesn't confirm a given news consumer's own beliefs.

I'm with you completely, 82. People pretend (or just are uninformed) that the media was honorable in the past. Just look back 100 years to the media landscape in NYC, Dozens of papers and they all looked for success by being more sensational than the next guy.

But I ALWAYS disregard people who equate everyone in the media. They simply are not bright enough to discuss the subject.

[forgetful]

yeah, that's what a no-talent hack like Joy Reid is screaming. "Bias."

And, like I said, the story was further amplified by other social media bloggers. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/crime/gabby-petito-van-wyoming-blogger-b1923783.html

The "other" social media bloggers didn't amplify it. They added to the narrative after this was already huge. It was only because of the massive around the clock media coverage that these "other" social media bloggers even realized they crossed paths with them.

Gabby had 1000 instagram followers before the media blew things up. She started her youtube channel/videos in mid August. She barely even started vlogging before she went missing.

[Frenns Liquor Depot]

My guess is Woodward and Bernstein’s reporting would be received completely differently today even if done in the exact same manner. 

We’ve changed as much if not more than ‘the media’.

[jficke13]

I'm with you completely, 82. People pretend (or just are uninformed) that the media was honorable in the past. Just look back 100 years to the media landscape in NYC, Dozens of papers and they all looked for success by being more sensational than the next guy.

But I ALWAYS disregard people who equate everyone in the media. They simply are not bright enough to discuss the subject.

Remember the Maine

[MU82]

My guess is Woodward and Bernstein’s reporting would be received completely differently today even if done in the exact same manner. 

We’ve changed as much if not more than ‘the media’.

Outstanding point, FLD.

It's been an interesting discussion about the media here, and I'm glad we're having it even though I disagree with quite a bit of it.

IMHO, we have a little too much romanticizing the past, and we have way too much generalizing about the present.

Great journalism, even important journalism, is taking place every single day. It's happening in large newsrooms and in small community settings. It's happening in fully online operations and even still in print/broadcast areas. The Associated Press, one of my former employers, is still a beacon of truth and objectivity.

But yes, there is a lot of non-objective, often entertainment-based media. And yes, many lines have gotten blurred over the years. And consumers

Tribal behavior has always existed -- my tribe is right, and yours is wrong; our viewpoint is truth, and yours is filled with lies -- but it's turbocharged now. And many media outlets are expressly designed to take advantage of it.

I agree with much of the criticism of much of the media. But I continue to say that the lumping together of Tucker, Morning Joe, Bayless, Stephen A, and award-winning journalists as "the media" -- and then extending that to say "the media sucks" -- is inaccurate, lacking in context and over-the-top generalizing.

[dgies9156]

I'm with you completely, 82. People pretend (or just are uninformed) that the media was honorable in the past. Just look back 100 years to the media landscape in NYC, Dozens of papers and they all looked for success by being more sensational than the next guy.

But I ALWAYS disregard people who equate everyone in the media. They simply are not bright enough to discuss the subject.

First of all, you guys missed the nuance in what I said. Yes, bias in the media always has been there. The Spanish-American War was fought over hysteria created by sensationalist media. William Randolph Hearst tried to be President through his newspapers (didn't work). Col. Robert McCormick was one of the most biased newspaper publishers this country has ever seen.

The nuance was that from the 1960s through the 1980s, there was much more of a focus on trying to be a complete source of news. Objective, clear and concise. As one of the Houston newspapers said, "Written and edited to merit your confidence.." Brother MUs own Daily Hearld had a slogan, "fear God, Tell the Truth and Make Money (not necessarily in that order.)" Kinda describes what used to be.

While I don't disagree there are some truly great journalists today, as I noted earlier, the cost of good journalism in an era of fewer readers/viewers and shrinking ad bases is prohibitive. My "hometown" newspaper, the Tennessean is a rag compared to what John Seigenthaler published back in the day. Yes, it was badly overwritten but the Tennessean was an incredible newspaper. The Chicago Tribune turns out an occasional story worthy of its recent past but by and large, it looks and reads like the Dubuque Telegraph Herald circa 1980.

People who read papers and watch television want crap. Period. By and large, that's what they get. That's why Dateline went from being a 60 Minutes clone to being all crime all the time. Ditto for 20/20. That's why Petito is a big deal.

As I said before, the market speaks! 

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

First of all, you guys missed the nuance in what I said. Yes, bias in the media always has been there. The Spanish-American War was fought over hysteria created by sensationalist media. William Randolph Hearst tried to be President through his newspapers (didn't work). Col. Robert McCormick was one of the most biased newspaper publishers this country has ever seen.

The nuance was that from the 1960s through the 1980s, there was much more of a focus on trying to be a complete source of news. Objective, clear and concise. As one of the Houston newspapers said, "Written and edited to merit your confidence.." Brother MUs own Daily Hearld had a slogan, "fear God, Tell the Truth and Make Money (not necessarily in that order.)" Kinda describes what used to be.

While I don't disagree there are some truly great journalists today, as I noted earlier, the cost of good journalism in an era of fewer readers/viewers and shrinking ad bases is prohibitive. My "hometown" newspaper, the Tennessean is a rag compared to what John Seigenthaler published back in the day. Yes, it was badly overwritten but the Tennessean was an incredible newspaper. The Chicago Tribune turns out an occasional story worthy of its recent past but by and large, it looks and reads like the Dubuque Telegraph Herald circa 1980.

People who read papers and watch television want crap. Period. By and large, that's what they get. That's why Dateline went from being a 60 Minutes clone to being all crime all the time. Ditto for 20/20. That's why Petito is a big deal.

As I said before, the market speaks! 

You are spending way too much time worried about media that is delivered via traditional formats.  Those formats have died because they are largely inconvenient and relatively expensive.  IMO there is A LOT of good media out there on the ole internet, but we are also inundated by so much junk because the barrier to entry is near zero and no one is regulating the truth.  (Which is absolutely fine BTW.)  It calls upon the reader to be skeptical and not simply consume what is put in front of them.

[MU82]

Brother MUs own Daily Hearld

If you're referring to me, I never worked for the Daily Herald; and I didn't live in its delivery area, so I rarely read it. I subscribed to the Tribune and Sun Times when I lived in Chicago. I did have many friends who worked in the Herald's sports department, though, most notably Tim Sassone, Mike Imrem and Bruce Miles.

And I still think you are making way too many generalizations. There is a lot of great journalism produced by objective, talented reporters every day. And thank goodness for that.