I don’t even understand why they are doing this. Everybody has social media. Everybody knows what happened. It’s like they literally can’t bring themselves to say what’s true.
Inevitable Lies
Opinions, art, debate
Opinions, art, debate
I don’t even understand why they are doing this. Everybody has social media. Everybody knows what happened. It’s like they literally can’t bring themselves to say what’s true.
Clarissa's Blog 
There are still many, many people, my inlaws among them, who prefer a comforting lie, and will not bother to seek out the rest of the story.
That’s why they do it.
LikeLike
You can say that a person was killed, and you can say that another person is a suspect in homicide, but there are legal issues with saying “Person A murdered Person B” before a jury has found guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Journalists are supposed to be careful about this sort of thing.
LikeLike
“legal issues with saying “Person A murdered Person B” before a jury has found guilt”
This. Any news outfit that called this murder would opening themselves up to lawsuits. That said, some of the headlines still seem purposefully misleading… “hit his head”? Trained journalists are repeatedly told to attribute everything new in a news story – “according to police” etc….
I think “Jewish man dead after being struck in head” might be okay since no one is denying that, but attributing it would be better Police – Jewish man dad after being stuck in head (if the police actually said that).
Of the headlines given in the tweet the NYT (bottom left) is the most accurate and least misleading while the worst is NBC (upper right).
LikeLike
Nobody had any problem declaring Derek Chauvin a racist murderer in the absence of any proof and long before the trial.
LikeLike
Another example is the headlines (which were later quietly restracted) that 1/6 rioters murdered police officers.
LikeLike
There’s very clearly a bias here. Withholding judgment is defensible, but they do it selectively. Which is not so defensible.
LikeLike
Exactly. And it’s always like that. Some people are more equal than others, as we well know.
LikeLike
There was video of him kneeling on Floyd’s neck for a long time, while bystanders and Floyd himself begged him to stop. The optics were very bad.
LikeLike
It was explained at trial that Chauvin’s knee didn’t cause the death. Cause of death was not strangulation. But that’s exactly what I was saying the other day. You can creatively edit any clip to make things look a certain way and people keep taking it seriously.
LikeLike
“kneeling on Floyd’s neck for a long time”
From a deceptive angle… video/pics from another angle showed he was not obstructing his breath at all. Police did nothing wrong in the Floyd case.
Floyd, with a history of violence, caused his own death.
Maybe that makes people sad but recasting him as some sort of martyr is incredibly sick and destructive (which is the point).
LikeLiked by 1 person
The guy overdosed. The jury members said that they knew Chauvin’s knee didn’t cause the death. They were looking for a way to render a guilty verdict but nothing occurred to make it possible. Finally, they decided that the guilty act was that Chauvin didn’t call for an ambulance soon enough. That’s what let the jury find him guilty.
This isn’t my opinion, by the way. That’s what the members of the jury said. Everybody knows Chauvin is innocent. Floyd overdosed.
LikeLike
My God, I’m not arguing he was a saint at all. You said “before trial”, and I was talking about the time before the trial, but now you’re bringing up the trial. I said “the optics” were bad – with an emphasis on appearances – not “they were correctly labeling a murderer a murderer” or anything like that.
LikeLike
The optics were what they were because the video footage was carefully edited.
LikeLike
“Nobody had any problem declaring Derek Chauvin a racist murderer”
Lots of people did but the US press was incredibly irresponsible in that case and many people should have lost their jobs over it.
LikeLiked by 1 person