this is what real journalism looks like the mainstream media literally erased the black israelites from their reporting
Of course anyone who is so mentally fragile that they are "triggered" by a political baseball cap, especially one as innocuous as these are, has something mentally very wrong with them.
That was a very edgy post you made there. I am sure that anyone aspiring to be an edgelord would be quite proud at having made such a post.
Cause you aren't projecting. Also nice "probably" to excuse yourself of having to actually support a statement so obviously made up.
No, it's not. Real journalism is about reporting facts. The facts is: there was a stand off between a group of kids and a group of Native Americans. The other fact is: CNN got parts of the story wrong (by not corroborating whether "build the wall" slogans were really shouted at the native Americans and whether Philips was a Vietnam veteran in the full sense of the term - news outlets later update their stories and publish new stories to reflect those facts correctly). The video you are referring to appears to be a PR video from Sandmann PR firm that has nothing to do with journalism. It doesn't add any new relevant facts to the story and it appears to misrepresent Philips who said that he wanted to deescalate the situation, but the video suggests that he just wanted to get to the top of the memorial. Should Black Israelites be mentioned as the people who incite passersby in a plublic venue in a news report? If you answered "Yes", then you should also agree that it means that news organizations should also mention/investigate why a very large group of out of town teenage boys should be at a public space, virtually unchaperoned, participating-in/coming-from a political rally. That latter type of situation has much more of an explosive, trouble-causing, predisposition than the former type of situation (small group of adults agitating passersby with pseudo political speech at a place where such speech is expected).
Real journalism requires verification, it also includes a sense of ethical behaviour, particularly when dealing with children, which quite literally states to prioritise a child's welfare over all other considerations. While one could understand that some cases, verification could be so cumbersome or difficult that errors could be made. This is not one of those cases, this is not even close to one of those cases, on top of that, their behaviour towards the children was completely unethical. But no one is really surprised that CNN would do things, that were a) unethical, and b) unverified, it's who they are, it's who they have been for a while now, but your defense of an unethical peddler of fake news is somewhat disturbing.
Projecting? Am I a contrarian? If anything, I thought you would peg me as a mainstream shill. Made up? It's what I consider as the definition. You can discuss your definition. I've noticed so far every response to my discussion of MAGA hats are cute one liners trying to poke holes. No one is up for an hoesnt and sincere discussion. It's a one way street with you guys. You keep on telling us "understand why middle America hates Hillary. Understand why they are so exited for Trump type rhetoric. Don't insult. Be understanding!" or why middle America despised "coastal elites". Well, instead of just expressing your opinions of "triggered sjws" in short meme format that leads to no discussion, maybe try to genuinely understand why a black person might be "triggered" about a person who entirely dismisses their life interaction with law enforcement or understand why a brown person might be "triggered" over someone who believes that their type of people should not immigrate to this country. Maybe try unferstanding?
Way to put words in my mouth. I didn't defend CNN. I refuted a point by a poster here implying that the video he commented on was "journalism" when it was an obvious hack job. And again, maybe those kids shouldn't be at the most public forum in the United States MARCHING in support of a POLITICAL agenda if they don't want attention drawn to them. The unethical treatment starts with their parents and educators first and foremost. CNN being the opposite extreme of the emotional news reporting specturum across from FOX news is just another side to the problem that this episode is clearly displaying.
A Sandmann lawsuit preview https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2019/02/a-sandmann-lawsuit-preview.php
Red hat? Native American? Drum? Confrontation? Regrettable social media posting? Looks like South Park is still ahead of the curve — by 2 years.
a lengthy and very thorough analysis of what's at stake for the media in the pending lawsuit brought by the Sandmann family against dozens of media entities. Here is just the intro to the piece, the rest is well-worth reading: The Biggest Threat To Press Freedom Is The Media Itself Major media organizations are about to be sued for irresponsibly turning innocent Covington Catholic school boys into objects of national hatred. A lack of standards threatens to open the media to all kinds of legal liabilities. By Mark Hemingway FEBRUARY 8, 2019 While the outrage over the Covington high school kids in MAGA hats may have blown over online, the story is far from over. On February 1, an attorney retained by the family of Nicholas Sandmann, the 16-year-old who allegedly “smirked” at the Native American activist banging a drum in his face, released a video that succinctly explained the broader context of what happened. Suffice to say, the video is a damning indictment of how many media outlets and personalities led a social media-fueled outrage mob and wrongly rushed to smear Sandmann and his fellow students. On Monday, Sandmann’s legal team told the Cincinnati Inquirer that more than 50 letters had been sent to various organizations and people that are likely to precede defamation and libel lawsuits. A host of elite media outlets received some of these letters, including The New York Times, Washington Post, CNN, The Atlantic, TMZ, National Public Radio, The Guardian, and Conde Nast. A number of prominent reporters also received letters individually, such as Maggie Haberman, Chuck Todd, Savannah Guthrie, Erin Burnett, David Brooks, and Andrea Mitchell, among others. Media organizations and reporters have traditionally been given extremely wide latitude by courts in the name of protecting free speech, so at first glance it may seem absurd to sue America’s biggest media organizations en masse for defamation and libel. But for those who have been paying attention, for decades now, courts have been trying to balance privacy concerns with rapidly evolving technology that allows for dissemination of information at a rate that far outpaces editorial judgment. Far from endorsing a maximalist vision of what journalists are allowed to get away with, relevant court decisions have trended toward winnowing the definition of what journalists are allowed to print. Further, the people wronged by the media in the Covington case were not public figures who have to clear a high legal bar of proving actual malice. They were, in fact, children. Further, a majority of the public distrusts the media — and that distrust didn’t start in 2016, despite the media trying to define this distrust as a wholly Trump-related phenomenon. To the extent that politicized charges of “fake news” do enter the picture, can anyone honestly say there isn’t good reason to suggest that elite media are overwhelmingly biased against certain political and religious viewpoints? The media response to public anger at the media thus far amounts to little more than a condescending chorus of complaints that half the country doesn’t know “the facts” and lacks the sophistication to appreciate the editorial worldview being foisted on them. But that flippant dismissal could have painful consequences for the media, because media protections ultimately depend on a societal consensus that they are working in the public interest. Put another way, if you were a lawyer who had to represent CNN and The New York Times in the Covington case, how apprehensive would you be about defending the honor and integrity of the media before a Kentucky jury? The incident with the Covington high school students could well prove to be a perfect storm that forever reshapes how we view media rights and responsibilities, as well as the consequences of social media mobs. At the bottom of the Covington case is a truth the media don’t want to confront: The greatest threat to First Amendment freedoms might be irresponsible journalists. http://thefederalist.com/2019/02/08/the-biggest-threat-to-press-freedom-is-the-media-itself/
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/i...ncoln-memorial-incident/ar-BBTxIto?li=BBnb7Kz An investigation released Wednesday into an encounter between Covington Catholic High School students and Native American activists at the Lincoln Memorial last month largely supports the students’ accounts of the incident, which prompted immediate and widespread condemnation of the boys after a video of the encounter went viral. Subscribe to the Post Most newsletter: Today’s most popular stories on The Washington Post A short video clip showed Nathan Phillips, playing a traditional drum, in an apparent standoff with student Nick Sandmann, who was wearing a “Make America Great Again” hat. The Diocese of Covington and Covington Catholic High School, which arranged the trip, were among those who initially condemned the boys’ actions in the video. The report, prepared by Greater Cincinnati Investigation, Inc. and dated Feb. 11, employed four licensed investigators for approximately 240 hours to take statements from students and chaperones, as well as to interview third-party witnesses and review about 50 hours of video. Investigators were not able to interview either Phillips or Sandmann in person and instead reviewed the student’s written account. The investigators said they found no evidence that the students responded in an offensive manner to the black Hebrew Israelites or that they chanted “build the wall.” After asking chaperones, they performed a school cheer, according to the report, to drown out the black Hebrew Israelites. Other key findings include testimony that the students felt “confused” when Phillips approached them. Investigators said they found no evidence of “racist or offensive statements by students to Mr. Phillips,” though some performed a “tomahawk chop.” According to the report, one of the chaperones told students that if “they engaged in a verbal exchange with the Black Hebrew Israelites, they would receive detention when returning to school.” According to the report, most boys bought the red hats bearing President Trump’s MAGA slogan in Washington on the day of the March for Life, an annual antiabortion rally that they attended. In previous years, some students bought “Hope” hats in support of President Obama, the report says. The Bishop of Covington welcomed the report in a statement on the diocese’s website. Roger Foys wrote that he was pleased “that my hope and expectation expressed in my letter to you of 25 January that the results of our inquiry ... would ‘exonerate our students so that they can move forward with their lives’ has been realized.” The day after the march, the diocese denounced the boys’ behavior in a joint statement with the school, calling it “opposed to the Church’s teachings on the dignity and respect of the human person.” “We condemn the actions of the Covington Catholic High School students towards Nathan Phillips specifically, and Native Americans in general,” the statement read. Foys later wrote that he was “bullied and pressured into making a statement prematurely” and that it is “important for us to gather the facts that will allow us to determine what corrective actions, if any, are appropriate.” The report does not provide any recommendations for future changes, such as banning political attire or changes to chaperone protocol. Many people were critical that the adults in charge of the students did not intervene more forcefully to avoid or end the interactions. The report also does not address underlying issues of diversity at the school that were raised by local NAACP leader Jerome Bowles and others. Before the report was released, Bowles said the missteps occurred before the students left for the Washington trip. “There has to be a look at diversity in the diocese in general. Covington Catholic is a very academically proficient educational institution; no one questions that,” he said. “But is the school totally preparing students for the workforce and a diverse world?”
I do think this whole thing was much ado about nothing - but an investigation conducted by the school can not be considered unbiased
I've already made numerous posts on the video earlier in this thread. I don't think there's a need to rehash it
We are on the same page here. I guess that is why the lawsuits are being filed. The media shat the bed in this situation. It was nothing that ended up being front page news.
