Author Topic: Post-Verdict Media Coverage  (Read 10307 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline RickyJim

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1576
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Post-Verdict Media Coverage
« Reply #45 on: August 14, 2013, 09:38:38 AM »
Here is the first, I have seen, of what I expect to be a slew of historical-critical accounts of the entire case and its media coverage.  Notice that the author and website are South African.  I did not find, off hand, any glaring errors.  We will know that a corner has been turned when the MSM in the US begins to publish similar articles. 
« Last Edit: August 14, 2013, 09:42:35 AM by RickyJim »

Offline DebFrmHell

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 954
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Post-Verdict Media Coverage
« Reply #46 on: August 14, 2013, 03:08:49 PM »
IANAL:
For MSM to admit they made errors in reporting, that would open them up to potential suits from Zimmerman, wouldn't it?  Until that is all settled, I don't expect any of them will do an accurate reporting or admitting that they had not properly vetted the evidence they got from Team Crump.

It is a good article.  The analysis section raised some questions with me, however.

Quote
The Trayvon Martin story is a case study in how, even in the modern day, an advanced industrialised democracy can completely lose its senses; and how difficult it is for it to then recover them. In this particular matter a whole society seemingly fixed its mind on the one object of having George Zimmerman arrested, convicted and sent to jail for life, in reckless disregard of the evidence and the law. The mainstream media, so-called civil rights organisations, the Democrat President of the US, the US Attorney General, the Republican Governor of Florida and his Attorney General, and State Attorney Angela Corey all combined forces in an effort to destroy a single, isolated individual.

Are they making a judgment to a "Whole Society" as being those of all races or are they referring to the AA community?  In either case, it doesn't seem right to me and that negates the factual reporting they were doing in the upper part of the editorial.

Offline unitron

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1060
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Post-Verdict Media Coverage
« Reply #47 on: August 14, 2013, 03:36:46 PM »
When they use the noun "Democrat" when they should be using the adjective "Democratic", that's a sure sign they're Frank Luntz-trained partisans with an agenda.

Offline RickyJim

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1576
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Post-Verdict Media Coverage
« Reply #48 on: August 14, 2013, 04:03:59 PM »
Weren't the MSM part of the cheering section leading up to the Iraq War?  If the New York Times (Judy Miller's employer) and similar organizations could change their point of view on that issue, I don't see why not about Zimmerman.  I think legal liability might only apply to very few news organizations. 

Offline DiwataMan

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 141
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Post-Verdict Media Coverage
« Reply #49 on: August 14, 2013, 05:49:40 PM »

It is a good article.  The analysis section raised some questions with me, however.

Are they making a judgment to a "Whole Society" as being those of all races or are they referring to the AA community?  In either case, it doesn't seem right to me and that negates the factual reporting they were doing in the upper part of the editorial.

I haven't read the article but just from what you quoted here is the qualifier as it pertains to the case itself: The mainstream media, so-called civil rights organisations, the Democrat President of the US, the US Attorney General, the Republican Governor of Florida and his Attorney General, and State Attorney Angela Corey all combined forces in an effort to destroy a single, isolated individual.

It's not literally the "whole" society as it's qualified with "seemingly" and it's not just the AA community.

I agree with the authors sentiment in that regard. I've often commented to the same. It's amazing to step back and look at the forces that aligned themselves against an unknown citizen involved in a local matter, the author only named a few.

Of course there were those who spoke to the contrary but we are a minority and the majority of other people who are in agreement, the silent majority, didn't/don't want to speak out because of the racial aspect.

Offline unitron

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1060
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Post-Verdict Media Coverage
« Reply #50 on: August 14, 2013, 09:36:32 PM »
I haven't read the article but just from what you quoted here is the qualifier as it pertains to the case itself: The mainstream media, so-called civil rights organisations, the Democrat President of the US, the US Attorney General, the Republican Governor of Florida and his Attorney General, and State Attorney Angela Corey all combined forces in an effort to destroy a single, isolated individual.

It's not literally the "whole" society as it's qualified with "seemingly" and it's not just the AA community.

I agree with the authors sentiment in that regard. I've often commented to the same. It's amazing to step back and look at the forces that aligned themselves against an unknown citizen involved in a local matter, the author only named a few.

Of course there were those who spoke to the contrary but we are a minority and the majority of other people who are in agreement, the silent majority, didn't/don't want to speak out because of the racial aspect.


I see Luntz has taught you well.

Offline DiwataMan

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 141
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Post-Verdict Media Coverage
« Reply #51 on: August 15, 2013, 08:11:30 AM »

I see Luntz has taught you well.

The extent of my knowledge of Luntz was flipping through the news channels one day and seeing him doing some election thing for a few minutes I think on FOX so I guess he's republican. I have no idea what that has to do with what I said regarding George Zimmerman. ::) Try addressing the substance of what I say next time so I don't have to waste my time on nonsense.

Offline DebFrmHell

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 954
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Post-Verdict Media Coverage
« Reply #52 on: August 15, 2013, 09:25:38 AM »
I haven't read the article but just from what you quoted here is the qualifier as it pertains to the case itself: The mainstream media, so-called civil rights organisations, the Democrat President of the US, the US Attorney General, the Republican Governor of Florida and his Attorney General, and State Attorney Angela Corey all combined forces in an effort to destroy a single, isolated individual.

It's not literally the "whole" society as it's qualified with "seemingly" and it's not just the AA community.

I agree with the authors sentiment in that regard. I've often commented to the same. It's amazing to step back and look at the forces that aligned themselves against an unknown citizen involved in a local matter, the author only named a few.

Of course there were those who spoke to the contrary but we are a minority and the majority of other people who are in agreement, the silent majority, didn't/don't want to speak out because of the racial aspect.

I agree with the last sentence.  It is the one that I bolded that set me back.

Offline SuzieTampa

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 104
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Post-Verdict Media Coverage
« Reply #53 on: August 15, 2013, 01:11:48 PM »
Weren't the MSM part of the cheering section leading up to the Iraq War?  If the New York Times (Judy Miller's employer) and similar organizations could change their point of view on that issue, I don't see why not about Zimmerman.  I think legal liability might only apply to very few news organizations.

I'm not a lawyer, but the media would probably argue that GZ was a public figure because he had killed someone and was being investigated. I think GZ's lawyers would have to prove that journalists had malice toward GZ and that they ran with information they knew to be wrong. That's a very high bar.

White liberals don't want to be accused of racism. The NYT and other media would risk that if editors changed their minds.

Offline DebFrmHell

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 954
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Post-Verdict Media Coverage
« Reply #54 on: August 15, 2013, 03:03:46 PM »
Zimmerman was not a public figure until the media decided he should be.  That pretty much opened the gates for whatever "misinformation" they cared to spread.    They wanted to capitalize on ratings or selling more papers and advertising dollars.   

Feeding the frenzy and disgusting.

Just IMO.

Offline DiwataMan

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 141
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Post-Verdict Media Coverage
« Reply #55 on: August 15, 2013, 05:40:59 PM »
I agree with the last sentence.  It is the one that I bolded that set me back.

Yes that was what I was addressing, perhaps not clearly. I was saying that part was qualified. It was qualified simply with the word "seemingly" so he is not literally saying the "whole" society. But it's also elaborated which is a qualifier as well.

You asked and stated:
"Are they making a judgment to a "Whole Society" as being those of all races or are they referring to the AA community?  In either case, it doesn't seem right to me and that negates the factual reporting they were doing in the upper part of the editorial."

I'm wondering why for you even if it were not just a judgement but a condemnation why it would not seem right to you and how it would negate anything. IMO opinion the author of that article is too PC and concentrates too heavily on the media and barely touches on "the crowd" at all.

Offline nomatter_nevermind

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5447
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Post-Verdict Media Coverage
« Reply #56 on: August 15, 2013, 05:49:29 PM »
I have no idea what [Frank Luntz] has to do with what I said regarding George Zimmerman.

Unitron was talking about the Democrat/Democratic thing. It's a sore point for some people.

It actually predates Luntz by decades. I think I was in junior high school the first time I heard it.

Offline DiwataMan

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 141
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Post-Verdict Media Coverage
« Reply #57 on: August 15, 2013, 05:51:45 PM »
Unitron was talking about the Democrat/Democratic thing. It's a sore point for some people.

It actually predates Luntz by decades. I think I was in junior high school the first time I heard it.

I still have no idea what that has to do with what I said.

Offline nomatter_nevermind

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5447
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Post-Verdict Media Coverage
« Reply #58 on: August 15, 2013, 06:42:57 PM »
I still have no idea what that has to do with what I said.

I haven't read the article but just from what you quoted here is the qualifier as it pertains to the case itself: The mainstream media, so-called civil rights organisations, the Democrat President of the US, the US Attorney General, the Republican Governor of Florida and his Attorney General, and State Attorney Angela Corey all combined forces in an effort to destroy a single, isolated individual.

Emphasis added.

I guess that's a verbatim quote, but it's not marked as such. I think that's what unitron was reacting to.

Offline DiwataMan

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 141
  • Rate Post +0/-0
Re: Post-Verdict Media Coverage
« Reply #59 on: August 15, 2013, 06:53:41 PM »
Emphasis added.

I guess that's a verbatim quote, but it's not marked as such. I think that's what unitron was reacting to.

Ah, I see now, yes I should have put quotes around that, I thought after it was too late to edit that I should have but didn't think too much of it as it's also quite obvious I was not the author of it since it's exactly the same. Seems like such a silly thing to get hung up about especially in the larger context of it all anyway as I don't see how it relates to the substance of what is being said by either me or the author.

 

Site Meter
click
tracking