Shame on the American Media - Shame !

1. 0

   ahorsebackposted 8 years ago

   All of this  racial controversy today is just  machine -gun media- tactics !     Take one incident and beat it to death ,  MSNBC , FOX NEWS , CNN  all of them  !  Throwing gasoline  on a burning match  , for what ? For selling  internet hits ?  Wild west news papers ?   I am so ashamed of todays professional media !   What ever happened to integrity , honesty , objectivity ?   
   
   The American media is more responsible for  hate , for a more divisive  American culture   and for  actually inciting riot , than at any other time in history !  Nightly news- meet the wild , wild west !

   replyreport
   1. 60

      KFlippinposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      I don't think it's just ratings at all.  I think there is an agenda, something directing this incitement to riot -- a comfort level with it that is astounding among those talking heads.  Even today when one would expect coverage equally of the very many newsworthy events of the past few days --  on CNN they just didn't stop it, they are still pushing discord and even trying to justify/explore intellectually? the punching of a cop in NY during the current protests -- no doubt they did on CNBC as well, couldn't stomach that network today.  Yet, on Fox, they covered the normal newsworthy events of today that were noticeably absent from the agenda and politically driven coverage on CNN and no doubt the 3 networks . . . this is all politically directed at this point -- quite clearly, no other explanation beyond extreme ego.  To what end?  Under what threat?  It gives me great angst for the future to contemplate what is clearly most logical to conclude.

      replyreport
   2. 86

      oceansnsunsetsposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      Its one of the parts of our society, that equally doesn't stand up against or fight hate, or division, or self indulgence, etc.  Yes, a lot is inciting more heat, and some spokespeople in particular are piling on the heaping loads of _______, by the bucketful!  Its getting stinky, and fast! 
      
      Saddest part is, that some are still so young and fragile  and innocent in their hearts, spirits and minds.  They are seeing all of this too, and how crazy, and even frightening at times!  They can't possibly be properly processing all of this crud, in a way that makes sense and brings about more good, etc.  God help us!  Speaking out against it is good.  Seeking truth in matters is good, as is encouraging better for all.  Keeping level heads amidst the crazy tide of stuff, its time for some sanity.  I truly believe the majority want racism to die.  Some can't or won't let it!  Lets all assume the best about some others once in a while, for goodness sake!
      
      Media is part of it, and they are reporting it.  They are not alone, not by a long shot, imo.

      replyreport
   3. 73

      rhamsonposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      It is news entertainment rich with the hooks to get you to sit through 5 minutes of commercials before a half a$$ed report of a story is reported with virtually no facts. The need to garner ratings is only surpassed by the lousy content we are fed. What do you expect when the news is now a corporate machine that wants to further their other enterprises in bending the truth. It is all smoke and mirrors and the government is complicit in the access it allows for favorable reports. Only when the government turns on itself such as the CIA torture report scandal do we ever find anything out and that is mostly questionable.

      replyreport
   4. 82

      Don Wposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      I know what you mean! Damn all these uppity people. Don't they know their place? Haven't they learned yet that when a police officer says "jump", the correct response is "how high officer?". The incorrect response is to say "I can't breathe", or "don't shoot" as that's liable to lead to a use of force that will cause their death. Surely they should know this by now. Why won't these people ever learn? All they need to do to avoid being killed is obey everything a police officer commands them to do, at all times, in all locations. Is that too much to ask? Damn modern communications media for making people aware of things.

      replyreport
   5. 55

      Shinkickerposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      I watch a 3 way interview from the 80's with Frank Zappa, Donny Osmond and a member of the PMRC. The anchor man was terrific. Very calm, reasonable and asking intelligent questions to encourage an informed discussion.
      
      The contrast with charlatans like O'Reilly and Hannity was stark. They purvey shock value to create unnecessary conflict and controversy for gullible viewers who want political titillation instead of progressive debate.
      
      News has become entertainment not journalism

      replyreport
2. 87

   perryaposted 8 years ago

   I tend to agree. Fox is to the right, CNN tries to be in the middle but usually is pro left depending on the announcer and MSNBC is so to the left, it is sickening, even when they are wrong. Now, go to BBC America is more balanced or Deutch world in English is also objective. Some say Bill O'Reilly is far right, I tend to think he tells it like it should be told most of the time.

   replyreport
3. 0

   ahorsebackposted 8 years ago

   I know it , I always tended towards conservatism  , yet ALL  the media reps are slanted unbelievable towards selling  views or hits ,  It's dime store novels all over again .   While government just feeds on it's own stink , but , what do we do ?

   replyreport
   1. 79

      Kathryn L Hillposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      We just need to wake up. I think there is an upcoming divide… and it has nothing to do with racial issues, or sexual orientation issues, or political party issues. I think it will have to do with determining what is reality versus what is illusion. I think today's children and the incarnating souls will surprise us with common sense and realistic insights. Don't worry, they will bring us out of the darkness. They will resist all we are now steeped in. Proof? I see how quick, intelligent and aware they are, as I am in a position to observe children of all ages through my work. Even new parents are surprised by their own babies and express this when I stop and talk to them in markets and other public places. Try talking to new parents...and see for yourself!
      
      Or maybe this is just wishful thinking.
      
      It is frustrating to not know who the enemy is yet.
      
      What is the best guess?

      replyreport
4. 0

   ahorsebackposted 8 years ago

   I believe the American family's quality of  lifestyle  and culture is in moral and social decline , talk to youth for ten minutes , listen to grown adult parents for five ! And you come away with the  distinct impression  that we are devolving into a godless , immoral , selfish society . I truly understand that through evolution  all cultures  fluctuate in morals , in religious influences , in cultural qualities , yet it's not hard to look at Americans and feel that you are  a watching  an overall ethical and   moral  decline .  We no longer respect  the authority of parents or  of the structured society . The quality of our  families , schools , our colleges , our churches . our elected  leadership , our media  has declined and continues to do so  in leaps and bounds , what do you think !

   replyreport
5. 0

   ahorsebackposted 8 years ago

   I think you should try being objective in  considering  the perpetration  of  all crime in the streets , and the  distinctly similar attitude towards unwanted authority  , like the inner city immaturity that comes with a culture that doesn't want or need to better itself !   One or two  wrongful cases taken out of context ,   a million police officers in this country and  a couple of bad apples mean the world is falling apart ?  I think not , and the rest of a reasonable populace think not as well !... Take a poll  or listen to real news programs and stop acting like a frat kid on his first month away from home  like the rest of the protesters .

   replyreport
   1. 82

      Don Wposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      I think you need to take your head out of the sand. All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. It is not "one or two" wrongful cases. Every day black people are unfairly treated by law enforcement officers around the country. The fact each and every example does not make the national news does not mean it's not happening. And if by "the rest of the reasonable populace" you mean the majority of white people who are unaffected by racism, yep those people don't think there is a problem, but that's due to ignorance not reasonableness. Ignorance is nothing to boast about. Those protesters are doing something to end inequality. They and I don't buy this "color no longer matters" fantasy you and others are peddling, where racial bias by police is just "one or two" cases. They live in the real world. When a young black kid can walk down a street without a white cop stopping and frisking him for no good reason (in breach of his constitutional rights - remember those!) then I might start to think that color doesn't make a difference (maybe). Until then, I am asking the same question as you: what ever did happen to integrity, honesty, objectivity?

      replyreport
      1. 79

         Kathryn L Hillposted 8 years agoin reply to this

         The truth is, every day anyone can push an officer's buttons and demean him with an arrogant attitude, (as what happened with me.) What's a cop supposed to do to maintain law and order? Hand him/her a teddy bear? 
          
         One time, after rolling through a stop, an officer ticketed me. Afterwards, he actually handed my young daughter a new teddy bear! (Instinctively, however, she never liked that teddy bear.) Perhaps he thought he was contributing toward a positive image for the youth in preventing them from hating policemen when they grew up… ?
         
         Wrongful cases should be taken care of fairly in courts. If this is not happening, it is a problem. It has nothing to do with racial issues… police must be held accountable for misjudgments and overstepping boundaries with any individual of any race.

         replyreport
      2. 0

         ahorsebackposted 8 years agoin reply to this

         More than likely its the head in the sand of the inner city anti- establishment  youth culture at fault ,  The liberal media and  the ultra- liberal education system that's at fault for directing  a orchestra of  youthful  culture of , "lets buck up against all authority"  No my friend, its the very "head in the sand" of a supporting media  that's at fault !  Cops have far , far more to do  .than to single out and harass black kids . But you go ahead and support the anti- authority cause .  That's getting pretty old though !   You must have been "educated" in the sixties .

         replyreport
         1. 82

            Don Wposted 8 years agoin reply to this

            I'm no defender of mainstream media. I think the media have a lot to answer for. But the issue of racial inequality is not a media invention, and it does you no credit to try to use issues with the media as a way to ignore facts about racial bias in society.
            
            It is not a media invention that black men receive sentences which are 20% longer than white men, for the same crime. 
            
            It is not a media invention that black children are excluded from schools (and pre-schools) more often than white children, for the same behaviour.
            
            It is not a media invention that Citigroup charged African Americans a higher rate 3.38 times more often compared to other borrowers; J.P. Morgan 2.21 times more often; Wells Fargo 2.28 times more often.
            
            It is not a media invention that in NY 57.5% of black people stopped by police were searched, and only 44.2 of white people stopped were searched, even though 1.8% of the black people searched had weapons, and 3.8% of the white people had weapons.
            
            It is not a media invention that in Ferguson searches of vehicles driven by black people accounted for 92% of vehicle searches, even though only 22% of black people searched resulted in the discovery of contraband, compared to 34% of white people searched.
            
            
            No my 'friend' racial inequality in America is not a media invention. The facts speak for themselves, and are available for anyone to see. It is a fact that 60 years after the civil rights movement, the 'establishment' still inflicts injustices on black people, and strips people of color of their dignity. Unfortunately there are sections of white society who believe that post civil-rights society is color-blind. But you took the time to actually listen to the people who are most affected by racial inequality, you might learn something about the so-called color-blind society you think you live in. Try this to start.

            replyreport
            1. 60

               KFlippinposted 8 years agoin reply to this

               You failed to cite the actual crime rate among blacks and white, big miss on that.  Without that critical component, none of the rest has consequence when taken out of full context -- instead leaves it much like media spin.

               replyreport
               1. 82

                  Don Wposted 8 years agoin reply to this

                  1) Did you read the article? If not, I recommend it, you might learn something.
                  
                  2) Please explain how the crime rate among white and black has anything to do with the fact that black men receive prison sentences that are 20% longer than white men, for the same crime, or that black children are more often excluded from school than white children for the same behaviour, or that even though in two different places more white people who were searched had weapons or contraband, black people continued to be searched more often than white people in those places.
                  
                  3) What does the media have to do with any of these statistics, which are all based on freely available data?

                  replyreport
                  1. 95

                     wildernessposted 8 years agoin reply to this

                     2)  You can start with multiple offenses result in heavier sentences.  So does a past history of criminal activity. 
                     
                     While I don't doubt for a moment that there is racism involved in some sentencing, it isn't nearly as bad as your stats seem to show as they fail to include pertinent data.

                     replyreport
                     1. 60

                        mishpatposted 8 years agoin reply to this

                        As an add on and not a critique..
                        
                        The court system was revised from a "recommended by court officers" system some years back.  It is now a "guidelines" system.  The parameters have various criteria, none of which is allowed to address gender or ethnicity.  But then tweaking was done to allow judges some latitude.  On the surface the guidelines have remained unchanged as to gender and ethnicity.  The level of the crime, as seen by the judge, may push the edges of the guideline, though the judge may be called to question on his sentencing.
                        
                        This supposedly eliminated "racial profiling" in the court room.
                        
                        While we are here, can anyone explain the "real" difference between "policing experience and common sense" and "racial profiling."  Many years back the race of a person was removed from the physical ID of ones drivers license as being "racially profiling."  It took years for the "dull witted" action to be corrected.  People of all races with the same name and approximate build and age were affected adversely.

                        replyreport
                     2. 82

                        Don Wposted 8 years agoin reply to this

                        Crime rate is not a reliable indicator and neither is number of previous offenses. Previous offenses means previous arrests. Previous arrests depends on the way law enforcement does its job. E.g. if law enforcement targeted people with tattoos more aggressively than people without, then more crime committed by people with tattoos would be detected and more arrested as a result. Does that mean people with tattoos commit more crime? It could. It could also be the case that people with and without tattoos commit crime proportionate to their total, but because law enforcement disproportionately targets people with tattoos, a greater proportion of tattooed people are caught (and therefore recorded in statistics). In short the "crime rate" that KFlippin is so interested in says nothing useful.
                        
                        I'm still interested to know how these statistics are an example of media spin. None of them originate from within the media. And why are so many people trying so hard to deny that racial bias actually exists? Are all of these statistics lies? Every single one of them?

                        replyreport
                        1. 95

                           wildernessposted 8 years agoin reply to this

                           You missed (or ignored) the entire meaning.
                           
                           Prior crimes will often result in a stiffer sentence for a current crime.  You complained that blacks get heavier sentences; blacks on the average commit more crimes; more crimes per person is a reasonable assumption.  And more crimes per person results in heavier sentences, which is what you complain is unfair.

                           replyreport
                           1. 82

                              Don Wposted 8 years agoin reply to this

                              Nope:
                              
                              ". . . controlling for other factors, including severity of the offense and prior criminal history, white men aged 18-29 were 38 percent less likely to be sentenced to prison than black men of the same age group." (my emphasis)
                              
                              And:
                              
                              "Young black and Latino males tend to be sentenced more severely than
                              comparably situated white males;
                              
                              Unemployed black males tend to be sentenced more severely than comparably situated white males.
                              
                              Whites receive a larger reduction in sentence time than blacks and Latinos for providing “substantial assistance” to the prosecution;"
                              
                              
                              So at which point should we accept that something is true? Should we pick and choose depending on what we like and don't like? Or should be objective and look at what the evidence is telling us. In this case the evidence is overwhelmingly telling us that if you are a black man, you are more likely to go to prison than a white man, for committing the same crime and with the same criminal history. To continue to deny that in the face of all evidence is an abandonment of reason.
                              
                              Whether we like it or not, the amount of melatonin a man has in his skin can determine whether or not he goes to prison. That isn't spin, or a big media conspiracy it's just what the data tells us, and it is shocking.

                              replyreport
                              1. 95

                                 wildernessposted 8 years agoin reply to this

                                 Ah.  New information.  Although the two comments on the "situation" of the perpetrators is more than a little vague; the second one seems to have something to do with employment, not prior records or the situation of the crime itself. 
                                 
                                 But the 38% is indeed shocking, especially if true.  While I do not doubt there is racism in our court system (and the police force) I do find that number outlandish.  Was the financial condition of the person considered as well?  Although it is absolutely wrong, IMO, we all know that money buys freedom and that blacks as a group don't have that resource to the extent that whites do.  But that isn't racism - it is a built in fault of the system and the way the game of court is played.  That there is a correlation between melatonin and financial resources does NOT indicate racism on the part of cops or courts.

                                 replyreport
                                 1. 82

                                    Don Wposted 8 years agoin reply to this

                                    "Comparably situated" includes economic status as well as criminal history, age and type of offense under consideration.
                                    
                                    Racial bias does not necessarily imply malice. That is something we have to get to grips with. If I say a judge is racially biased, that does not mean I think he consciously hates black people and deliberately sets out to harm them. We make underlying assumptions about everything. That's how human beings work. Our decisions and behaviour are based on those assumptions. Sometimes people make a negative assumption based on someone's race (stereotyping). There are lots of reasons for this. They is not always malicious. Here is one hypothesis offered to explain the sentencing data:
                                    
                                    "[This] hypothesis contends that rather than judges viscerally and indiscriminately sentencing young, black and Latino males to harsher sentences, they seek to assess the real threat that a particular offender presents to society. As judges possess imperfect information, however, they develop a “perceptual shorthand” that is informed by stereotypes about race, age, and gender. In the interest of protecting society, sentencing judges will therefore sentence the offender based, in part, on stereotypes about perceived antisocial and incorrigible natures of young black and Latino males."
                                    
                                    So judges may well be doing what they think is best for society in good faith. However, if their decisions are based on negative assumptions about race, then those decisions will negatively impact people in that group.
                                    
                                    This is called systemic racial bias, or institutionalised racism. The aim of highlighting this sort of thing is not to brand every judge, lawyer and police officer a racist (although of course some are) it is to identify the "built in fault of the system" as you call, and fix it.
                                    
                                    The root of the built-in faults of the justice system stem from racist historic practices in housing, education, finance etc. right the way back to slavery. These practices have been catastrophic for black people on a social, economic and political level. That has led to the development of underlying assumptions about black people that are so ingrained that they distort the fundamental social systems we rely on for a stable society, such as the justice system.
                                    
                                    Highlighting these issues is not about name calling or blaming, but trying to get people to understand so we can see where the faults in the system are, and fix them.

                                    replyreport
                                    1. 95

                                       wildernessposted 8 years agoin reply to this

                                       I like your quote and find a lot of truth in it.  We all carry bias of some kind, and many have that built-in bias as to color (not to say it is all black, though).  It takes a conscious effort to minimize it and even then it doesn't always work.
                                       
                                       However.  There are things in the country - education, housing, finance for instance, that ARE tied to higher crime rates for blacks whether they actually are the cause or not.  The result WILL be more jail time, on the average, for blacks than whites but it is NOT from racism (intended or not) in the judicial system. 
                                       
                                       I can and do agree with your quote that the judicial system has built in racism, but simply cannot agree that it is causing that huge disparity in sentencing.  38% is beyond anything I can accept from that source, although I would believe that the total of all causes might result in such a huge figure.
                                       
                                       That is not to say that corrections need to be made, but that corrections are going to be necessary from all over the place.  The cops, the judges, the juries, schools, employers and yes, the citizens themselves are all guilty of causing a part of that number and all need correction.

                                       report
   2. 60

      KFlippinposted 8 years agoin reply to this

      Well said.  Somehow rational thought or discourse is so lost in the wind . . .  Neither incident had to do with race, could have happened to a white or pink or purple person.  Plenty of other races or colors encounter the same thing, particularly if they don't mind the cops, just doesn't make the news.  Sad days in America.

      replyreport
6. 60

   mishpatposted 8 years ago

   Remember when the news was 15 minutes long at 11:pm, and that included the weather and sports?  Then the screen pattern went on and we went to bed.  But it was 15 minutes of news, important to America's everyday life.  Now we have personalities and "beautiful people" who speak about what the "American people want."  Sorry, but they haven't spoken for America since John Cameron Swayze.

   replyreport