more than enough examples to use on why rushing to judgement often ends up creating a shitshow, yet we continue to do it.
Misreporting initial facts, slanting the story to a certain direction, sensationalizing the events to make it polarizing all come into play. And it far too often is the Media that makes the situation worse.
The Duke lacrosse example was a great model for this. Initially report that a black woman was trapped in a house with testosterone-filled white athletes, being held against her will and repeatedly raped resulted in all sorts of dominoes to follow.
Appearances in Durham by Sharpton and Jackson. Removal of the coach from the team. Scrutiny of how affluent the players were and how their privilege afforded them high-priced counsel.
All things that could have been avoided if the initial story was fact-checked and not blown up to be a major incident until the vetting process was complete. But the Media saw a chance to report a blockbuster and they ran with it, impacting many, many lives in the process.
I don't disagree there is a group with motivations who exploit hot button issues to further agendas.
What I take intellectual exception to is the notion:
Quote:
the politicians, media, athletes, and celebrities all seized on it because they wanted it to be true. It fits their narrative.
That's pretty scary, and unproductive hyperbole to me.
You are entitled to your opinion and I am entitled to mine.
I feel the same way when the tables are turned and it's an issue with someone like say Justin Fairfax or Ralph Northam.
those two people had incidents that turned to be true or likely true, but if they hadn't been true, the opposite to an issue like this one was certainly possible.
I am sure there are other examples. I referenced Charles Stuart earlier in the thread and of course Stuart's crime was not equitable to what Smollett has done in any way, but the reactions by the "power people" were similar.
I don't disagree there is a group with motivations who exploit hot button issues to further agendas.
What I take intellectual exception to is the notion:
Quote:
the politicians, media, athletes, and celebrities all seized on it because they wanted it to be true. It fits their narrative.
That's pretty scary, and unproductive hyperbole to me.
We are starting to tread on dangerous ground, but it is not hyperbole, I find it to be true. Sides look for anything to advance their agenda, and this was prime real estate for some.
Now of course, it fits the other's agenda.....which in turn, leads to hyperbole.
I wonder if we will ever really know the true reason this was staged. On one level I am sad that this was done and angry on another.
As is almost always the case, there are a number of cyncical and productive takes by the media, public personas, and public.
We're in a swing of the pendulum where journalism is being boxed out by sensationalism, and good journalism is being assualted by special interest.
This isn't new or unprecedented -- but it typically doesn't end super well.
The public should be able to believe the facts as presented to the them by the media. When it gets cute, incomplete, or as is the case right now, replaced by anyone with a phone and an opinion, it gets sloppy.
In place of building opinions on facts, too many time it feels like we are building opinions on opinion.
He now has Chicago PD and the Trump administration ticked off at him.
I doubt he see the inside of a jail cell. first he deserves due process, but if he is found guilty of anything, My guess is he claims he's got a substance abuse problem and goes to rehab or a mental issue and seeks professional help and he resurfaces when the dust settles.
with CBS Chief Foreign Correspondent Lara Logan (which is probably going to wind up as career suicide)
Quote:
"Although the media has historically always been left-leaning, we’ve abandoned our pretense. We’ve become political activists, and some could argue propagandists."
The interview was done for the Mike Drop podcast, with Mike Ritland who if you are not familiar is a really good listen and runs a great organization doing something with service dogs who are "retired".
Some of the quotes are from the linked medialite article.
Fact is there is an alarming rise in hate crimes over the last couple of years, this is a real issue that has caused real harm to too many people. This desperate idiot trying to use that for his favor to make himself more popular is not only selfish but dangerous. Fuck this guy and I hope he faces real repercussions from this sad act.
that actually isn't a known fact. According to the FBI--reporting is up, but they also state in some changes in reporting and definitions. The data is inconclusive.
the term "known offender" means the victim said they knew the race (or whatever) of the offender, but does not mean it is verified in any way.
just a quick look at years 2014 to 2017 (the only years I looked at); the white offenders dropped from 52 to 50% if that's the narrative you're going for.
anybody who victimizes another person should be prosecuted, but the supply doesn't meet the demand of the grotesque MSM and if it is actually up--it is being fueled by fake news.
Quote:
Fact is there is an alarming rise in hate crimes over the last couple of years, this is a real issue that has caused real harm to too many people. This desperate idiot trying to use that for his favor to make himself more popular is not only selfish but dangerous. Fuck this guy and I hope he faces real repercussions from this sad act.
that actually isn't a known fact. According to the FBI--reporting is up, but they also state in some changes in reporting and definitions. The data is inconclusive.
the term "known offender" means the victim said they knew the race (or whatever) of the offender, but does not mean it is verified in any way.
just a quick look at years 2014 to 2017 (the only years I looked at); the white offenders dropped from 52 to 50% if that's the narrative you're going for.
anybody who victimizes another person should be prosecuted, but the supply doesn't meet the demand of the grotesque MSM and if it is actually up--it is being fueled by fake news.
So I'm not sure about the "the FBI also states in some changes in reporting and definitions" sentence of your reply. I was going by the statistics from the FBI's website as well. Maybe you could point it out but I couldn't find them specify that there was a change in the way they reported these hate crimes in 2017 compared to previous years.
You ask what my narrative is and point out that the FBI stats show "white offenders" dropping from 52.0% of the overall total in 2014 to 50.7% in 2017 to disprove my point. Ok, I understand that statistic and it's definitely worthy of being pointed out. But I feel like you left something pretty important out of that equation.
Reported Hate Crime data (FBI)
2017: 6,370 offenders -- 7,175 incidents
2014: 5,192 offenders -- 5,479 incidents
That's a 22.7% increase in overall offenders and a 31.0% increase in reported incidents over a 4 year period. These are the highest reported totals since 2008. My "narrative" is that I said that there was an alarming rise in hate crimes over the last few years. I believe those massive jumps in reported numbers qualifies as alarming.
The data the FBI receives from the local level isn't mandated in any Â
Reported Hate Crime data (FBI)
2017: 6,370 offenders -- 7,175 incidents
2014: 5,192 offenders -- 5,479 incidents
That's a 22.7% increase in overall offenders and a 31.0% increase in reported incidents over a 4 year period. These are the highest reported totals since 2008. My "narrative" is that I said that there was an alarming rise in hate crimes over the last few years. I believe those massive jumps in reported numbers qualifies as alarming.
The number of police agencies reporting "hate" crimes increased by over 1000 agencies since 2014. That in itself will skew numbers and makes the numbers go up. And who classifies these criminal acts as "hate."
Personally, I think any personal attack is a hate crime. You don't attack people you like. I despise the term hate crime. It serves no purpose except to make some groups feel protected - like they are receiving special service, which they are not - it is ex post facto. This is certainly not to say that there are people that attack others for ethnicity or religious beliefs.
respect his service and expertise re: K9's. But his ideas outside his area of expertise aren't anything special.
do you listen regularly? He's not super political most of the time or at least not radically political like you may expect from a former Navy Seal. It's usually about dogs, cooking meats, military, etc.
To Lara Logan's point though, I listen often to Mike Drop and pods like that and read sources like that, but just as often I'll listen to Pod Save America or similar pods.
People really need a cross section of sources if they want to avoid an echo chamber and get a better sense of what is actually happening. and some people don't want to avoid an echo chamber and that's fine, but IMO if you want to avoid one seek out many different POV/sources.
respect his service and expertise re: K9's. But his ideas outside his area of expertise aren't anything special.
do you listen regularly? He's not super political most of the time or at least not radically political like you may expect from a former Navy Seal. It's usually about dogs, cooking meats, military, etc.
To Lara Logan's point though, I listen often to Mike Drop and pods like that and read sources like that, but just as often I'll listen to Pod Save America or similar pods.
People really need a cross section of sources if they want to avoid an echo chamber and get a better sense of what is actually happening. and some people don't want to avoid an echo chamber and that's fine, but IMO if you want to avoid one seek out many different POV/sources.
This is my point of view as well. Although I disagree with one side on more topics then the other side I always listen to both sides. And I actually stop and try and change my view point as best as possible to understand where the other side is coming from just too make sure I'm not crazy or, as you put it, stuck in an echo chamber. I have a rule where if I get caught up somehow listening to Maddow or Hannity, I will turn the other one on to get their side of the picture and then I parse out both of their bull shit and see what my thoughts are in the meat of the topic.
respect his service and expertise re: K9's. But his ideas outside his area of expertise aren't anything special.
do you listen regularly? He's not super political most of the time or at least not radically political like you may expect from a former Navy Seal. It's usually about dogs, cooking meats, military, etc.
To Lara Logan's point though, I listen often to Mike Drop and pods like that and read sources like that, but just as often I'll listen to Pod Save America or similar pods.
People really need a cross section of sources if they want to avoid an echo chamber and get a better sense of what is actually happening. and some people don't want to avoid an echo chamber and that's fine, but IMO if you want to avoid one seek out many different POV/sources.
"People really need a cross section of sources if they want to avoid an echo chamber and get a better sense of what is actually happening. and some people don't want to avoid an echo chamber and that's fine, but IMO if you want to avoid one seek out many different POV/sources."
I don't disagree there is a group with motivations who exploit hot button issues to further agendas.
What I take intellectual exception to is the notion:
Quote:
the politicians, media, athletes, and celebrities all seized on it because they wanted it to be true. It fits their narrative.
That's pretty scary, and unproductive hyperbole to me.
From the Washington Post Opt Ed, 02/17/2019
Quote:
If Smollett’s story is found to be untrue, it will cause irreparable damage to the communities most affected. Smollett would be the first example skeptics cite when they say we should be dubious of victims who step forward to share their experiences of racist hate crimes or sexual violence. The incident would be touted as proof that there is a leftist conspiracy to cast Trump supporters as violent, murderous racists. It would be the very embodiment of “fake news.”
And that reason, more than any other, is why I need this story to be true, despite its ugliness and despite what it would say about the danger of the world I live in. The damage done would be too deep and long-lasting. This could be one tragedy that the Lyon family — and more importantly, the ordinary people who loved the show and invested in Smollett and his character — could never overcome.
"Why I need this story to be true". The mask drops again, just like Covington. No matter what the reality, the MSM needs to promote it's narrative, damn the facts, ignore the search for truth, forget about journalistic ethics. Guilt by narrative.
"Democracy dies in Darkness"? Look in the mirror, WaPo...
Here's a good review of the article from Tim Poole
or any other singular source (which I think was someone's point above).
Absolutely. And click through to the source article from that scandalously headlined blog post someone posted on Facebook. It's usually not even close to what the headline states.
Apparently he once gave a false name (his brother's) to police, Â
when stopped on suspicion of DUI in 2007. That's obviously very different from fabricating a threat and assault, but it's another piece of information that paints an unflattering picture of him. (Probably also made for an awkward conversation at the next family gathering). lonk - ( New Window )
I don't disagree there is a group with motivations who exploit hot button issues to further agendas.
What I take intellectual exception to is the notion:
Quote:
the politicians, media, athletes, and celebrities all seized on it because they wanted it to be true. It fits their narrative.
That's pretty scary, and unproductive hyperbole to me.
From the Washington Post Opt Ed, 02/17/2019
Quote:
If Smollett’s story is found to be untrue, it will cause irreparable damage to the communities most affected. Smollett would be the first example skeptics cite when they say we should be dubious of victims who step forward to share their experiences of racist hate crimes or sexual violence. The incident would be touted as proof that there is a leftist conspiracy to cast Trump supporters as violent, murderous racists. It would be the very embodiment of “fake news.”
And that reason, more than any other, is why I need this story to be true, despite its ugliness and despite what it would say about the danger of the world I live in. The damage done would be too deep and long-lasting. This could be one tragedy that the Lyon family — and more importantly, the ordinary people who loved the show and invested in Smollett and his character — could never overcome.
link
"Why I need this story to be true". The mask drops again, just like Covington. No matter what the reality, the MSM needs to promote it's narrative, damn the facts, ignore the search for truth, forget about journalistic ethics. Guilt by narrative.
"Democracy dies in Darkness"? Look in the mirror, WaPo...
Here's a good review of the article from Tim Poole
Far Left BEGGING For Jussie Smollett To Be A VICTIM
Smolette also has ties to Fancy Bear, Konstantin Kilimnik's hacker group that stole Hillary's e-mails. He's beleived to be the real sorce of the Wikileak's dump and is one of the architect's of the fake news about Trump's collusion.
Far left definitely doesn't want that to get out. Media is going to bury this as fast as they can so they can continue to pursue their real agenda.
I don't disagree there is a group with motivations who exploit hot button issues to further agendas.
What I take intellectual exception to is the notion:
Quote:
the politicians, media, athletes, and celebrities all seized on it because they wanted it to be true. It fits their narrative.
That's pretty scary, and unproductive hyperbole to me.
From the Washington Post Opt Ed, 02/17/2019
Quote:
If Smollett’s story is found to be untrue, it will cause irreparable damage to the communities most affected. Smollett would be the first example skeptics cite when they say we should be dubious of victims who step forward to share their experiences of racist hate crimes or sexual violence. The incident would be touted as proof that there is a leftist conspiracy to cast Trump supporters as violent, murderous racists. It would be the very embodiment of “fake news.”
And that reason, more than any other, is why I need this story to be true, despite its ugliness and despite what it would say about the danger of the world I live in. The damage done would be too deep and long-lasting. This could be one tragedy that the Lyon family — and more importantly, the ordinary people who loved the show and invested in Smollett and his character — could never overcome.
link
"Why I need this story to be true". The mask drops again, just like Covington. No matter what the reality, the MSM needs to promote it's narrative, damn the facts, ignore the search for truth, forget about journalistic ethics. Guilt by narrative.
"Democracy dies in Darkness"? Look in the mirror, WaPo...
Here's a good review of the article from Tim Poole
Far Left BEGGING For Jussie Smollett To Be A VICTIM
Smolette also has ties to Fancy Bear, Konstantin Kilimnik's hacker group that stole Hillary's e-mails. He's beleived to be the real sorce of the Wikileak's dump and is one of the architect's of the fake news about Trump's collusion.
Far left definitely doesn't want that to get out. Media is going to bury this as fast as they can so they can continue to pursue their real agenda.
that if it says "op" anywhere near the title of the piece that signifies its an opinion piece. Traditionally all news outlets have these (inclusive of both fox and CNN mind you). While you could banter about the amount of balance of authors within these news outlets, the opinion part of the outlets are kept extremely far from the fact generating aspects. To say XYZ op piece is evidence of bias ignores the fundamental point that they are supposed to be biased opinions. No one ever accused a paper of being a shill to Dear Abby, I am not sure why this understanding has somehow eroded.
He is going to plead not guilty due to temporary insanity. He is going to claim Trump Derangement Syndrome. James Comey and Andrew McCabe will be watching closely.
that if it says "op" anywhere near the title of the piece that signifies its an opinion piece. Traditionally all news outlets have these (inclusive of both fox and CNN mind you). While you could banter about the amount of balance of authors within these news outlets, the opinion part of the outlets are kept extremely far from the fact generating aspects. To say XYZ op piece is evidence of bias ignores the fundamental point that they are supposed to be biased opinions. No one ever accused a paper of being a shill to Dear Abby, I am not sure why this understanding has somehow eroded.
Is this a serious post?
Either you are severely out of touch with how a large portion of society works today to get their news and don't understand how much information is disseminated via social media outlets in tweets and instagram stories (for example) and even still on TV news broadcasts vs actual print media stories. Print media is a dying medium.
Or you just feel like the majority of people cannot differentiate an opinion column vs "the news". Nothing "has eroded" based on the majority of comments I have read from in this thread.
I do agree some individuals go too far with the media criticism and it's not helpful, but that doesn't mean he/they are totally wrong.
Journalistic standards are practically non-existent today for many in the media. Even if you want to give the media a pass on this case (no idea why you would), just look at Convington Catholic, the level of "investigation" (or lack thereof) before stories were published is amazing. The amount of news outlets who just ran that piece and the number of journalists, who commented (not an op-ed, but a news story) is staggering without watching that whole video. And I think the lawsuit has at least a chance of progressing, which is rare. A journalist sharing or tweeting a story on twitter is not an op-ed, it's disseminating information.
The Lara Logan quotes posted above are not about op-ed pieces and as a former chief foreign correspondent for CBS I think she'd know the difference even if you don't think the rest of us mouthbreathing knuckle draggers know the difference.
There must be something especially insidious about CBS news division Â
the thing is he had everyone convinced. Politicians saw an opportunity to comment. Musicians used him as a symbol of modern day hate towards LGBTQ and Race. and the list goes on...
Then he tries to use the most popular symbol of the MAGA stuff and white power.
Its just a very ridiculous thing. I dont think anything he can say now can justify his reasons. NONE.
his actions speak loud to the poor girl bullied for her transition. To the hispanic boy or girl ridiculed for her race. Its just horrible.
This story has brought out some insane things in people. Not just here. It's mind-numbing. If one is a Trump supporter they want the guy tar and feathered. If not? They don't want him going to jail.
Everyone's judgment as to what his fate should be is rooted in politics. If he's guilty, he should of course be punished. But what goes into that punishment is more than how you feel about Donald Trump. Is he a repeat-offender (I read he lied during a DUI once?)? Is there reason to believe he's a danger to society? Did he cooperate with authorities or is he cooperating now?
This story has brought out some insane things in people. Not just here. It's mind-numbing. If one is a Trump supporter they want the guy tar and feathered. If not? They don't want him going to jail.
Everyone's judgment as to what his fate should be is rooted in politics. If he's guilty, he should of course be punished. But what goes into that punishment is more than how you feel about Donald Trump. Is he a repeat-offender (I read he lied during a DUI once?)? Is there reason to believe he's a danger to society? Did he cooperate with authorities or is he cooperating now?
But no... it's all politics.
duh.. its all politics once political candidates began commenting on it.
this is how division is created. But to stay on topic, the guy made a plan of action, went on GMA to double down, and yada yada. He needs jail time.
This story has brought out some insane things in people. Not just here. It's mind-numbing. If one is a Trump supporter they want the guy tar and feathered. If not? They don't want him going to jail.
Everyone's judgment as to what his fate should be is rooted in politics. If he's guilty, he should of course be punished. But what goes into that punishment is more than how you feel about Donald Trump. Is he a repeat-offender (I read he lied during a DUI once?)? Is there reason to believe he's a danger to society? Did he cooperate with authorities or is he cooperating now?
But no... it's all politics.
Seems to me, most want something between being tarred and feathered and no prison tIme. Don’t like to see General statements made based on the views of the fringes.
This story has brought out some insane things in people. Not just here. It's mind-numbing. If one is a Trump supporter they want the guy tar and feathered. If not? They don't want him going to jail.
Everyone's judgment as to what his fate should be is rooted in politics. If he's guilty, he should of course be punished. But what goes into that punishment is more than how you feel about Donald Trump. Is he a repeat-offender (I read he lied during a DUI once?)? Is there reason to believe he's a danger to society? Did he cooperate with authorities or is he cooperating now?
But no... it's all politics.
He needs jail time to prevent other people from doing this in the future and to teach him he cannot get away with this nonsense in a normal society.
What I take intellectual exception to is the notion:
That's pretty scary, and unproductive hyperbole to me.
Misreporting initial facts, slanting the story to a certain direction, sensationalizing the events to make it polarizing all come into play. And it far too often is the Media that makes the situation worse.
The Duke lacrosse example was a great model for this. Initially report that a black woman was trapped in a house with testosterone-filled white athletes, being held against her will and repeatedly raped resulted in all sorts of dominoes to follow.
Appearances in Durham by Sharpton and Jackson. Removal of the coach from the team. Scrutiny of how affluent the players were and how their privilege afforded them high-priced counsel.
All things that could have been avoided if the initial story was fact-checked and not blown up to be a major incident until the vetting process was complete. But the Media saw a chance to report a blockbuster and they ran with it, impacting many, many lives in the process.
What I take intellectual exception to is the notion:
Quote:
the politicians, media, athletes, and celebrities all seized on it because they wanted it to be true. It fits their narrative.
That's pretty scary, and unproductive hyperbole to me.
And pjacs, if that's not what you meant, I get it. But you missed some words in that sentence then.
What I take intellectual exception to is the notion:
Quote:
the politicians, media, athletes, and celebrities all seized on it because they wanted it to be true. It fits their narrative.
That's pretty scary, and unproductive hyperbole to me.
You are entitled to your opinion and I am entitled to mine.
I feel the same way when the tables are turned and it's an issue with someone like say Justin Fairfax or Ralph Northam.
those two people had incidents that turned to be true or likely true, but if they hadn't been true, the opposite to an issue like this one was certainly possible.
I am sure there are other examples. I referenced Charles Stuart earlier in the thread and of course Stuart's crime was not equitable to what Smollett has done in any way, but the reactions by the "power people" were similar.
What I take intellectual exception to is the notion:
Quote:
the politicians, media, athletes, and celebrities all seized on it because they wanted it to be true. It fits their narrative.
That's pretty scary, and unproductive hyperbole to me.
We are starting to tread on dangerous ground, but it is not hyperbole, I find it to be true. Sides look for anything to advance their agenda, and this was prime real estate for some.
Now of course, it fits the other's agenda.....which in turn, leads to hyperbole.
I wonder if we will ever really know the true reason this was staged. On one level I am sad that this was done and angry on another.
We're in a swing of the pendulum where journalism is being boxed out by sensationalism, and good journalism is being assualted by special interest.
This isn't new or unprecedented -- but it typically doesn't end super well.
The public should be able to believe the facts as presented to the them by the media. When it gets cute, incomplete, or as is the case right now, replaced by anyone with a phone and an opinion, it gets sloppy.
In place of building opinions on facts, too many time it feels like we are building opinions on opinion.
I doubt he see the inside of a jail cell. first he deserves due process, but if he is found guilty of anything, My guess is he claims he's got a substance abuse problem and goes to rehab or a mental issue and seeks professional help and he resurfaces when the dust settles.
Most people aren't jailed for their first one or two DWIs and that's extremely dangerous
Fine is most likely, hopefully it is large enough to make him feel it
He probably won't do time but sending death threats through the USPS that require a hazmat response opens him up to prosecution.
The interview was done for the Mike Drop podcast, with Mike Ritland who if you are not familiar is a really good listen and runs a great organization doing something with service dogs who are "retired".
Some of the quotes are from the linked medialite article.
Link - ( New Window )
Fact is there is an alarming rise in hate crimes over the last couple of years, this is a real issue that has caused real harm to too many people. This desperate idiot trying to use that for his favor to make himself more popular is not only selfish but dangerous. Fuck this guy and I hope he faces real repercussions from this sad act.
that actually isn't a known fact. According to the FBI--reporting is up, but they also state in some changes in reporting and definitions. The data is inconclusive.
the term "known offender" means the victim said they knew the race (or whatever) of the offender, but does not mean it is verified in any way.
just a quick look at years 2014 to 2017 (the only years I looked at); the white offenders dropped from 52 to 50% if that's the narrative you're going for.
anybody who victimizes another person should be prosecuted, but the supply doesn't meet the demand of the grotesque MSM and if it is actually up--it is being fueled by fake news.
https://6abc.com/brothers-told-police-smollett-was-upset-threatening-letter-didnt-get-enough-attention-staged-attack/5143364/
Jussie Smollett attack: Brothers tell police that actor staged attacked after threatening letter did not get enough attention
Quote:
Fact is there is an alarming rise in hate crimes over the last couple of years, this is a real issue that has caused real harm to too many people. This desperate idiot trying to use that for his favor to make himself more popular is not only selfish but dangerous. Fuck this guy and I hope he faces real repercussions from this sad act.
that actually isn't a known fact. According to the FBI--reporting is up, but they also state in some changes in reporting and definitions. The data is inconclusive.
the term "known offender" means the victim said they knew the race (or whatever) of the offender, but does not mean it is verified in any way.
just a quick look at years 2014 to 2017 (the only years I looked at); the white offenders dropped from 52 to 50% if that's the narrative you're going for.
anybody who victimizes another person should be prosecuted, but the supply doesn't meet the demand of the grotesque MSM and if it is actually up--it is being fueled by fake news.
So I'm not sure about the "the FBI also states in some changes in reporting and definitions" sentence of your reply. I was going by the statistics from the FBI's website as well. Maybe you could point it out but I couldn't find them specify that there was a change in the way they reported these hate crimes in 2017 compared to previous years.
You ask what my narrative is and point out that the FBI stats show "white offenders" dropping from 52.0% of the overall total in 2014 to 50.7% in 2017 to disprove my point. Ok, I understand that statistic and it's definitely worthy of being pointed out. But I feel like you left something pretty important out of that equation.
Reported Hate Crime data (FBI)
2017: 6,370 offenders -- 7,175 incidents
2014: 5,192 offenders -- 5,479 incidents
That's a 22.7% increase in overall offenders and a 31.0% increase in reported incidents over a 4 year period. These are the highest reported totals since 2008. My "narrative" is that I said that there was an alarming rise in hate crimes over the last few years. I believe those massive jumps in reported numbers qualifies as alarming.
Reported Hate Crime data (FBI)
2017: 6,370 offenders -- 7,175 incidents
2014: 5,192 offenders -- 5,479 incidents
That's a 22.7% increase in overall offenders and a 31.0% increase in reported incidents over a 4 year period. These are the highest reported totals since 2008. My "narrative" is that I said that there was an alarming rise in hate crimes over the last few years. I believe those massive jumps in reported numbers qualifies as alarming.
The number of police agencies reporting "hate" crimes increased by over 1000 agencies since 2014. That in itself will skew numbers and makes the numbers go up. And who classifies these criminal acts as "hate."
Personally, I think any personal attack is a hate crime. You don't attack people you like. I despise the term hate crime. It serves no purpose except to make some groups feel protected - like they are receiving special service, which they are not - it is ex post facto. This is certainly not to say that there are people that attack others for ethnicity or religious beliefs.
do you listen regularly? He's not super political most of the time or at least not radically political like you may expect from a former Navy Seal. It's usually about dogs, cooking meats, military, etc.
To Lara Logan's point though, I listen often to Mike Drop and pods like that and read sources like that, but just as often I'll listen to Pod Save America or similar pods.
People really need a cross section of sources if they want to avoid an echo chamber and get a better sense of what is actually happening. and some people don't want to avoid an echo chamber and that's fine, but IMO if you want to avoid one seek out many different POV/sources.
Quote:
respect his service and expertise re: K9's. But his ideas outside his area of expertise aren't anything special.
do you listen regularly? He's not super political most of the time or at least not radically political like you may expect from a former Navy Seal. It's usually about dogs, cooking meats, military, etc.
To Lara Logan's point though, I listen often to Mike Drop and pods like that and read sources like that, but just as often I'll listen to Pod Save America or similar pods.
People really need a cross section of sources if they want to avoid an echo chamber and get a better sense of what is actually happening. and some people don't want to avoid an echo chamber and that's fine, but IMO if you want to avoid one seek out many different POV/sources.
This is my point of view as well. Although I disagree with one side on more topics then the other side I always listen to both sides. And I actually stop and try and change my view point as best as possible to understand where the other side is coming from just too make sure I'm not crazy or, as you put it, stuck in an echo chamber. I have a rule where if I get caught up somehow listening to Maddow or Hannity, I will turn the other one on to get their side of the picture and then I parse out both of their bull shit and see what my thoughts are in the meat of the topic.
Quote:
respect his service and expertise re: K9's. But his ideas outside his area of expertise aren't anything special.
do you listen regularly? He's not super political most of the time or at least not radically political like you may expect from a former Navy Seal. It's usually about dogs, cooking meats, military, etc.
To Lara Logan's point though, I listen often to Mike Drop and pods like that and read sources like that, but just as often I'll listen to Pod Save America or similar pods.
People really need a cross section of sources if they want to avoid an echo chamber and get a better sense of what is actually happening. and some people don't want to avoid an echo chamber and that's fine, but IMO if you want to avoid one seek out many different POV/sources.
"People really need a cross section of sources if they want to avoid an echo chamber and get a better sense of what is actually happening. and some people don't want to avoid an echo chamber and that's fine, but IMO if you want to avoid one seek out many different POV/sources."
Hear, hear....
What I take intellectual exception to is the notion:
Quote:
the politicians, media, athletes, and celebrities all seized on it because they wanted it to be true. It fits their narrative.
That's pretty scary, and unproductive hyperbole to me.
From the Washington Post Opt Ed, 02/17/2019
And that reason, more than any other, is why I need this story to be true, despite its ugliness and despite what it would say about the danger of the world I live in. The damage done would be too deep and long-lasting. This could be one tragedy that the Lyon family — and more importantly, the ordinary people who loved the show and invested in Smollett and his character — could never overcome.
link
"Why I need this story to be true". The mask drops again, just like Covington. No matter what the reality, the MSM needs to promote it's narrative, damn the facts, ignore the search for truth, forget about journalistic ethics. Guilt by narrative.
"Democracy dies in Darkness"? Look in the mirror, WaPo...
Here's a good review of the article from Tim Poole
Far Left BEGGING For Jussie Smollett To Be A VICTIM
or any other singular source (which I think was someone's point above).
Quote:
.
or any other singular source (which I think was someone's point above).
Absolutely. And click through to the source article from that scandalously headlined blog post someone posted on Facebook. It's usually not even close to what the headline states.
lonk - ( New Window )
Quote:
I don't disagree there is a group with motivations who exploit hot button issues to further agendas.
What I take intellectual exception to is the notion:
Quote:
the politicians, media, athletes, and celebrities all seized on it because they wanted it to be true. It fits their narrative.
That's pretty scary, and unproductive hyperbole to me.
From the Washington Post Opt Ed, 02/17/2019
Quote:
If Smollett’s story is found to be untrue, it will cause irreparable damage to the communities most affected. Smollett would be the first example skeptics cite when they say we should be dubious of victims who step forward to share their experiences of racist hate crimes or sexual violence. The incident would be touted as proof that there is a leftist conspiracy to cast Trump supporters as violent, murderous racists. It would be the very embodiment of “fake news.”
And that reason, more than any other, is why I need this story to be true, despite its ugliness and despite what it would say about the danger of the world I live in. The damage done would be too deep and long-lasting. This could be one tragedy that the Lyon family — and more importantly, the ordinary people who loved the show and invested in Smollett and his character — could never overcome.
link
"Why I need this story to be true". The mask drops again, just like Covington. No matter what the reality, the MSM needs to promote it's narrative, damn the facts, ignore the search for truth, forget about journalistic ethics. Guilt by narrative.
"Democracy dies in Darkness"? Look in the mirror, WaPo...
Here's a good review of the article from Tim Poole
Far Left BEGGING For Jussie Smollett To Be A VICTIM
Smolette also has ties to Fancy Bear, Konstantin Kilimnik's hacker group that stole Hillary's e-mails. He's beleived to be the real sorce of the Wikileak's dump and is one of the architect's of the fake news about Trump's collusion.
Far left definitely doesn't want that to get out. Media is going to bury this as fast as they can so they can continue to pursue their real agenda.
whatever, sheeple...
Quote:
In comment 14299372 christian said:
Quote:
I don't disagree there is a group with motivations who exploit hot button issues to further agendas.
What I take intellectual exception to is the notion:
Quote:
the politicians, media, athletes, and celebrities all seized on it because they wanted it to be true. It fits their narrative.
That's pretty scary, and unproductive hyperbole to me.
From the Washington Post Opt Ed, 02/17/2019
Quote:
If Smollett’s story is found to be untrue, it will cause irreparable damage to the communities most affected. Smollett would be the first example skeptics cite when they say we should be dubious of victims who step forward to share their experiences of racist hate crimes or sexual violence. The incident would be touted as proof that there is a leftist conspiracy to cast Trump supporters as violent, murderous racists. It would be the very embodiment of “fake news.”
And that reason, more than any other, is why I need this story to be true, despite its ugliness and despite what it would say about the danger of the world I live in. The damage done would be too deep and long-lasting. This could be one tragedy that the Lyon family — and more importantly, the ordinary people who loved the show and invested in Smollett and his character — could never overcome.
link
"Why I need this story to be true". The mask drops again, just like Covington. No matter what the reality, the MSM needs to promote it's narrative, damn the facts, ignore the search for truth, forget about journalistic ethics. Guilt by narrative.
"Democracy dies in Darkness"? Look in the mirror, WaPo...
Here's a good review of the article from Tim Poole
Far Left BEGGING For Jussie Smollett To Be A VICTIM
Smolette also has ties to Fancy Bear, Konstantin Kilimnik's hacker group that stole Hillary's e-mails. He's beleived to be the real sorce of the Wikileak's dump and is one of the architect's of the fake news about Trump's collusion.
Far left definitely doesn't want that to get out. Media is going to bury this as fast as they can so they can continue to pursue their real agenda.
Is this a serious post?
Either you are severely out of touch with how a large portion of society works today to get their news and don't understand how much information is disseminated via social media outlets in tweets and instagram stories (for example) and even still on TV news broadcasts vs actual print media stories. Print media is a dying medium.
Or you just feel like the majority of people cannot differentiate an opinion column vs "the news". Nothing "has eroded" based on the majority of comments I have read from in this thread.
I do agree some individuals go too far with the media criticism and it's not helpful, but that doesn't mean he/they are totally wrong.
Journalistic standards are practically non-existent today for many in the media. Even if you want to give the media a pass on this case (no idea why you would), just look at Convington Catholic, the level of "investigation" (or lack thereof) before stories were published is amazing. The amount of news outlets who just ran that piece and the number of journalists, who commented (not an op-ed, but a news story) is staggering without watching that whole video. And I think the lawsuit has at least a chance of progressing, which is rare. A journalist sharing or tweeting a story on twitter is not an op-ed, it's disseminating information.
The Lara Logan quotes posted above are not about op-ed pieces and as a former chief foreign correspondent for CBS I think she'd know the difference even if you don't think the rest of us mouthbreathing knuckle draggers know the difference.
Then he tries to use the most popular symbol of the MAGA stuff and white power.
Its just a very ridiculous thing. I dont think anything he can say now can justify his reasons. NONE.
his actions speak loud to the poor girl bullied for her transition. To the hispanic boy or girl ridiculed for her race. Its just horrible.
This story has brought out some insane things in people. Not just here. It's mind-numbing. If one is a Trump supporter they want the guy tar and feathered. If not? They don't want him going to jail.
Everyone's judgment as to what his fate should be is rooted in politics. If he's guilty, he should of course be punished. But what goes into that punishment is more than how you feel about Donald Trump. Is he a repeat-offender (I read he lied during a DUI once?)? Is there reason to believe he's a danger to society? Did he cooperate with authorities or is he cooperating now?
But no... it's all politics.
Quote:
are absolutely bat shit crazy...
This story has brought out some insane things in people. Not just here. It's mind-numbing. If one is a Trump supporter they want the guy tar and feathered. If not? They don't want him going to jail.
Everyone's judgment as to what his fate should be is rooted in politics. If he's guilty, he should of course be punished. But what goes into that punishment is more than how you feel about Donald Trump. Is he a repeat-offender (I read he lied during a DUI once?)? Is there reason to believe he's a danger to society? Did he cooperate with authorities or is he cooperating now?
But no... it's all politics.
duh.. its all politics once political candidates began commenting on it.
this is how division is created. But to stay on topic, the guy made a plan of action, went on GMA to double down, and yada yada. He needs jail time.
Quote:
are absolutely bat shit crazy...
This story has brought out some insane things in people. Not just here. It's mind-numbing. If one is a Trump supporter they want the guy tar and feathered. If not? They don't want him going to jail.
Everyone's judgment as to what his fate should be is rooted in politics. If he's guilty, he should of course be punished. But what goes into that punishment is more than how you feel about Donald Trump. Is he a repeat-offender (I read he lied during a DUI once?)? Is there reason to believe he's a danger to society? Did he cooperate with authorities or is he cooperating now?
But no... it's all politics.
Quote:
are absolutely bat shit crazy...
This story has brought out some insane things in people. Not just here. It's mind-numbing. If one is a Trump supporter they want the guy tar and feathered. If not? They don't want him going to jail.
Everyone's judgment as to what his fate should be is rooted in politics. If he's guilty, he should of course be punished. But what goes into that punishment is more than how you feel about Donald Trump. Is he a repeat-offender (I read he lied during a DUI once?)? Is there reason to believe he's a danger to society? Did he cooperate with authorities or is he cooperating now?
But no... it's all politics.
He needs jail time to prevent other people from doing this in the future and to teach him he cannot get away with this nonsense in a normal society.