Fair coverage: Duke rape case vs real crime by DhaeruvusRavenshadow

REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

Fair coverage: Duke rape case vs real crime

POSTED BY: DHAERUVUSRAVENSHADOW
UPDATED: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 07:40
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 3074
PAGE 1 of 1

Sunday, May 20, 2007 7:19 AM

I'm sure most of you have never heard of this case as it has not been covered by the major news outlets, liberal or otherwise. I'm posting this to spread the awareness of this tragedy and to see what everyone thinks.

http://www.snopes.com/politics/crime/newsom.asp

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, May 20, 2007 8:42 AM

MURKYMERC

What do I think?

I think that in reporting crime, the media makes decisions on what will sell papers. Dog bites man...no, man bites dog...yes. Black on black crime...no, white on crime....no, white on black crime...yes, black on white crime...depends on whether it defies the public perceptions. (Consequently, not that it changes anything for me, but articles in this morning’s paper are already saying that the sexual mutilation didn’t happen)

What do I think?

I think this is a case of taking a single case study and projecting as an absolute. Before jumping to conclusion I would like to see the percentage of black on white vs. white on black crimes that make the front page. I fully expect that you will see that white on black gets more coverage, but this e-mail intends to give the belief that black on white crime is never covered.

What do I think?

I think that this will be used as fodder for ultra conservatives and white supremacist for their own personal agenda. I also fully expect this thread to take a very nasty turn fairly soon.

What do I think?

I think that I am less concerned with media coverage, and more concerned with the perpetrators will be punished accordingly, which in my mind would probably be nothing short of the death penalty.

I may be completely wrong on all points, but that is what I think.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, May 20, 2007 8:53 AM

DHAERUVUSRAVENSHADOW

A well thought out response. I agree with you on the majority of it. This incident happened not far from my neck of the woods (relatively speaking) and gets quite a lot of coverage on conservative talk radio. I would imagine that the disparity regarding whether or not the mutilations occured revolve around the fact that the the court dates were set last week and, I'm sure the perps lawers are trying to cast as much doubt as possible. I have no doubt that this will turn ugly soon, but most threads in RWED do, especially when a few people start threadjacking. And I'm sure, they will blame the mythical "Jew-run Liberal Media". As if there was such a thing in rural Kentucky/Tennessee. And for the record, I'm a Pagan Libertarian, and I think justice should be served with a blowtorch and pliers in some cases.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, May 20, 2007 9:16 AM

KHYRON

Post deleted...

... by the Jew-run liberal media.

Questions are a burden to others. Answers are prison for oneself.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, May 20, 2007 9:20 AM

SOUPCATCHER

I think the snopes writer-upper did a good job of identifying factors influencing whether or not a story gets wide media attention (second to last paragraph). In this particular case there isn't much mystery. A crime was committed. The physical evidence strongly points toward guilty parties. The only point of ambiguity seems to be how much or how little torture.

Media organizations are trying to make money with their news divisions. What keeps viewers coming back to a story, and consequently keeps advertisers happy, is if the story plays out like a mystery novel. The audience gets to watch various clues being uncovered and fill in the blanks. If there are not enough blanks to fill in, if there is limited room for equally valid yet opposite conclusions, the story loses interest from an entertainment viewpoint.

As was pointed out already, there is one audience for whom this story is compelling. And so it's unsurprising that the media most connected with that audience has been running with the story.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, May 20, 2007 4:32 PM

FINN MAC CUMHAL

I vaguely remember this, so I imagine that it did surface in the newspapers where I live, but it’s life was probably brief and I knew that it would never make it to the networks, but it also never made it to the cable news outlets or any of the major papers. There are probably many reasons why this did not receive national coverage, chief among them is the lack of mystery involved in the case. However, to say that crimes this brutal occur frequently is the US is probably not true; in fact, this case probably was unusual specifically because of the brutality. And the argument that the national news agents would “conspire” to avoid this is a strawman that has never been asserted by those arguing a liberal bias.

Liberal bias in the media very likely was a major reason why this never got any national news coverage. Given the brutality of these crimes there is no possible way to present the minorities in this case as anything other then vicious monsters whose victims are completely innocent white people. And such a thing is an anathema in the views of many powerful people in the media and the so-called civil rights organizations. In a society where the livelihood of a person can be completely disrupted by the mere accusation of racism or bigotry against a minority class, it is not hard to imagine that no on would want to touch this case. There is no reason to assert any such conspiracy, and no such conspiracy exists or is argued, but the bias is there, nonetheless.

Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, May 20, 2007 9:11 PM

MISSTRESSAHARA

It's sick regardless why it wasn't covered. Stories like this and the story of that woman who was beaten to death by her family as people recorded it make me heart sick and wonder what the hell is wrong with our society. I don't give a damn if they're black or white, that they can do these horrible things to FELLOW HUMAN BEINGS and casually sit there while the body of one victim rots in their home just shows these 5 people, and the people who beat that woman and videotaped it, aren't human or humane, they're devils and demon's and GOD or whatever force that's out there help them when they die, because I won't shed a tear for them.

My deepest condolances to the victim's family's. NO family should have to face this kind of horror and bury what could have been promising lives.

~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
~*Peter* Peter*; power *re-peater*~
`@/
/Y
/_)

*Petrelli for President. Together we can soar.*
**********~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
**********~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
**********~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
**********~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
**********~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

HEROE'S IS MY CRACK!
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, May 20, 2007 10:02 PM

FREMDFIRMA

Bah, subversion of the press for personal agenda is a game as old as the press itself.

From the slimy beginnings of W.R. Hearst, to the near total subjugation of MOCKINGBIRD, to R. Murdoch and the present day, the mainstream media does not present, and has never presented, anything even remotely resembling a balanced view or unspun general news.

The closest you'd have ever come to that was AP Wire at the actual press-credentials level when it was simple base information which was then later edited or spun by local media via skew or careful and creative editing.
(MEMRI has always been notorious for 'creative editing' of foreign language news)

So really, nothing has changed except for the fact that the internet allows folk to doublecheck on the shit-shovellers and realise the depth of the lies and distortions.

Nothing of the business has changed, it is our perception of that business that has - we've seen the man behind the curtain, and we know he's fulla shit, is what it is.

People mostly believe what they WANT to believe, and factual information never changes that one way or the other, the 'news' is *entertainment*, not an information service.

Never expect it.
Never forget it.

-Frem

It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, May 20, 2007 10:14 PM

FREMDFIRMA

Quote:
Liberal bias in the media

Excuse me while I laugh till near-asphixiation.
AT you.

Yet another throughly and completely debunked right-wing fairytale.

http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=2560
http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=2447

Some myths just won't die in spite of mountains of evidence against them.

Let's get it straight...
Christians are NOT a persecuted minority.
The media does NOT have a liberal bias.
The government is NOT here to help you.

Quit whinin and get over it, and if you'd like not to be utterly mocked, don't utter a complete fiction as if it were fact, just because you'd like to believe it's true as an excuse.

-Frem

It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, May 21, 2007 5:12 AM

RIVER6213

Quote:
Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
Quote:
Liberal bias in the media

Excuse me while I laugh till near-asphixiation.
AT you.

Yet another throughly and completely debunked right-wing fairytale.

http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=2560
http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=2447

Some myths just won't die in spite of mountains of evidence against them.

Let's get it straight...
Christians are NOT a persecuted minority.
The media does NOT have a liberal bias.
The government is NOT here to help you.

Quit whinin and get over it, and if you'd like not to be utterly mocked, don't utter a complete fiction as if it were fact, just because you'd like to believe it's true as an excuse.

-Frem

It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

Well said.

-River

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, May 21, 2007 7:10 AM

MALBADINLATIN

Quote:
Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
Bah, subversion of the press for personal agenda is a game as old as the press itself. From the slimy beginnings of W.R. Hearst, to the near total subjugation of MOCKINGBIRD, to R. Murdoch and the present day, the mainstream media does not present, and has never presented, anything even remotely resembling a balanced view or unspun general news. The closest you'd have ever come to that was AP Wire at the actual press-credentials level when it was simple base information which was then later edited or spun by local media via skew or careful and creative editing.(MEMRI has always been notorious for 'creative editing' of foreign language news)
So really, nothing has changed except for the fact that the internet allows folk to doublecheck on the shit-shovellers and realise the depth of the lies and distortions.
Nothing of the business has changed, it is our perception of that business that has - we've seen the man behind the curtain, and we know he's fulla shit, is what it is. People mostly believe what they WANT to believe, and factual information never changes that one way or the other, the 'news' is *entertainment*, not an information service.
Never expect it.
Never forget it.
Let's get it straight...
Christians are NOT a persecuted minority.
The media does NOT have a liberal bias.
The government is NOT here to help you.

Frem...I'm not trying to be a brown noser but these words are poetry. But has it always been that way? Even in the days of Murrow and Cronkite? Is that the "AP Wire at the actual credentials level" you spoke of? It seems to me that when it was just CBS, NBC, and ABC, they went after scandals and corruption no matter which political party was responsible. Maybe I was just a kid then didn't see below the surface

There are bad guys who are worse than all the others too! Fox News won't talk about Rupert Murdoch's global campaign of promoting what amounts to state run media. Fox News alone seems to cover stories of republican corruption by making excuses for the republican on the hot seat. Then they demonize and character assassinate whomever makes the charges...they're the equivelant to journalistic gangsters. I feel sorry for people who actualy believe that Fox News is fair and balanced, and that everybody else is part of a liberal media conspiracy

And you can't change that by gettn' all bendy.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, May 21, 2007 12:01 PM

SASSALICIOUS

Quote:
Originally posted by Misstressahara:
It's sick regardless why it wasn't covered. Stories like this and the story of that woman who was beaten to death by her family as people recorded it make me heart sick and wonder what the hell is wrong with our society. I don't give a damn if they're black or white, that they can do these horrible things to FELLOW HUMAN BEINGS and casually sit there while the body of one victim rots in their home just shows these 5 people, and the people who beat that woman and videotaped it, aren't human or humane, they're devils and demon's and GOD or whatever force that's out there help them when they die, because I won't shed a tear for them.

My deepest condolances to the victim's family's. NO family should have to face this kind of horror and bury what could have been promising lives.

~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
~*Peter* Peter*; power *re-peater*~
`@/
/Y
/_)

*Petrelli for President. Together we can soar.*
**********~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
**********~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
**********~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
**********~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
**********~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

HEROE'S IS MY CRACK!
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~

I second the "what the f*** is wrong with society". What makes someone think this is a good idea? What makes someone think it would be a great idea to abduct a stranger, rape the person, and then dump the victim somewhere else (happened twice on campus and to my friends sister in a different city)?

Robbing a bank or stealing, I understand. Senseless violence? It's beyond my perception.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Wisconsin sucks. I don't want to be here.

~Forsaken Forever

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, May 21, 2007 2:01 PM

FREMDFIRMA

Quote:
But has it always been that way?

More or less yes.

Quote:
Even in the days of Murrow and Cronkite?

ESPECIALLY in the days of Murrow and Cronkite, the red scare didn't spread in a vaccuum, the media was entirely complicit, and on top of that you had MOCKINGBIRD, or at least the beginnings of it.

You wanna see just how bad that got ? Glomar Explorer/Project Jennifer.
http://www.fas.org/irp/program/collect/jennifer.htm
One of the most ridiculous, ludicrous, total boondoggles of the military industrial complex, and a blatant sop to Hughes in exchange for throwing his weight around politically.

The alphabet goons took it pretty far trying to keep things quiet, and overplayed their hand in revealing just how far they had suborned many papers and journalists, resorting to even outright blackmail and threats to suppress the story.

Millions and millions of YOUR money, poured down the pisser to steal a demolished russian sub for technology and codes over 20 years out of date, piss off the russians for no good reason and frighten them while they have nukes aimed at us ? GREAT idea, guys.
And this was by far not the worst excess of the period, oh hell no.

Quote:
Is that the "AP Wire at the actual credentials level" you spoke of?

Nah, back when AP was a straight wire service.
http://www.ap.org/pages/about/history/history_first.html

Quote:
It seems to me that when it was just CBS, NBC, and ABC, they went after scandals and corruption no matter which political party was responsible. Maybe I was just a kid then didn't see below the surface

Correct, but see, back at the beginning of things, each paper, each network, instead of pretending balance, generally took a side and pushed it - look at the arguments over the ratification of the US Constitution and the War of 1812, as case examples of this, each side presented it's case, generally in an editorial and in a clean, clear fashion.

The problem that has crept up and bit us on the ass is twofold, one, the remnants and ongoing operations of government fiddling, and two, media consolidation.

Why argue with the competitor when you can just buy them out to shut em up, right ?
And generally conservatives have more money because they are slightly more financially smart than liberals, but moreso because they are amoral and ruthless when it comes to economics.

And the first and worst of these isn't even Fox news, it's Sinclair.

http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1097686240147
http://www.commondreams.org/news2004/1015-20.htm
http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2004/10/b236420.html
http://www.sinclairwatch.net/

Sinclair's actions "lowered the bar" on media decency, leading to Fox News and the like.
And the conservative shills like Ann Clueless, Rush Blowhard, and the like have adapted much of the same tactical offset as used by other notorious forces.

Call Jackson or Sharpton a race-baiting prick ?, then you're a racist.
Question Israels terror campaign on Palestine ?, Anti-Semetic.
Question the sanity or intelligence of Shrub ?, Unpatriotic
Question the use of this asinine war ?, Hate the troops.
And so on and so forth, and "Liberal Media" is just one more dodge to prevent actual discussion, the brick wall with which the media conglomerates instantly stop all questioning of their intent and action - which is bullshit and I give a free pass to no one.

Believe me, Malbad... Fox news is a buncha pikers compared to the shit Hearst and Sinclair pulled in their time - again, you'd just seeing behind the curtain for the first time since you can effectively cross-check the information via the internet these days.

And this, more than anything else, is why the Big Media Congloms wanna strangle it, they want you to believe what THEY tell you, and knowing the truth is cheating them and screwing their agendas and they do not like it.

Even my only real media hero, Sam "The Shovel" Donaldson fell to it, being forced by his producer to skew a certain set of presidential interviews and utter, under force of threat to his career, the line "Now that's commitment".

This ended both the career and reputation of Donaldson, and to his credit he *did* apologise for it after the fact and then had the decency to walk away rather than trash his credibility any more.

Don't get me started on Dan Rather tho, who's career started and flourished with him being a "made man" by strongly pushing the Governments fictional take on what happened to JFK, if there ever was a man who defined the term "Presstitute", it's ole Danny boy.

Everyone in the media has an agenda, it's the ones that hide it or pretend to be fair/balanced that are the worst liars of all - if I wanna read a liberal/progressive take on something, I would like to know in advance that is what I am gonna get, likewise if I wanna read a conservative take on something, and I *do* prefer to read both, cause barring certain overblown damn fools, there's usually useful ideas from either end.

But with playing the pretense of fair coverage while slanting it in any way possible, and then on top of it playing footsie with the guttersweeps of american alphabet agencies, I give all major network news about the same credibility and respect I give the Weekly World News, and that's being polite about it.

They're entertainment, not news - news is information YOU go looking for and read up on cause it matters to you personally.

I don't play fair and balanced, imma Anarchist, and yer gonna get that perspective when I post, and mostly everyone here knows it - wouldn't it be nice to have that kind of honesty in the mainstream media ?

Just a thought.

-Frem

It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, May 21, 2007 2:14 PM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

If it were up to me the media would report crime in two ways:
1) compiled statistics and 2) individual cases with certain details IF the perpetrators are at large, in order to help to catch them or to alert a community.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, May 22, 2007 5:10 AM

MALBADINLATIN

Quote:
Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
wouldn't it be nice to have that kind of honesty in the mainstream media?

Thanks for all the great info Frem. I was also watching McNeill Lehrer the other night thinking this is the scholarly PBS!, Jim Mcneill speaks with an NPR-esque soft sedated tone to his voice...maybe this is the only objective news service. But at the end of the broadcast I decided it's just the BBC without the British accent.

I wonder if you might appreciate a Groucho Marx saying that used to be my signature..."You can believe your eyes, or you can believe me"

And you can't change that by gettn' all bendy.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, May 22, 2007 7:03 AM

KHYRON

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
If it were up to me the media would report crime in two ways:
1) compiled statistics and 2) individual cases with certain details IF the perpetrators are at large, in order to help to catch them or to alert a community.

Seconded.

Questions are a burden to others. Answers are prison for oneself.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, May 22, 2007 7:40 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

One of the most interesting articles on crime was done by the LA Times. They simply took swath of time (a few days, as I recall) and reported ALL murders that occurred, and dsecribed each one with a one-paragraph summary. There were 17, best of my recollection, and they were mainly brown-on-brown or back-on-black. Despite the fact that many happened on the street, or at a party, "nobody saw anything" in most of the cases which leads me to think they were drug/ gang related. Not a pretty picture of our society, but not the slanted view that comes from focusing on one particular crime.

---------------------------------
Always look upstream.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

YOUR OPTIONS

SHARE THREAD

NEW POSTS TODAY

USER	POST DATE

USER

POST DATE