How does vandalism and looting accomplish anything???

[Donna3271]

I have a close friend who was, actually. He posted a video on twitter and instragram which I would be happy to link you to if I thought you actually cared

Please post this link. I am very interested in seeing it.

 

[Geoff_M]

I still say they shouldn't be allowed to say "Media, you go here and you can't leave" unless they are doing that to the public. If you're ok with them doing that, are you ok with them creating a "media center" 5 miles away? What about 10 miles? 30 miles? The media should be allowed to go anywhere the public is allowed. Period.

I wasn't addressing the location of any "media center". My statement was in response to your expression "I do think the police can say 'leave this area at your own risk'." You seemed to be expressing the notion that in exchange to being allowed to go wherever they wanted, the police could warn them that they'd be outside of the scope of the police's protection. Just like the idiots that disregard posted warnings to not try and cross flooded roadways, when people do so and find themselves in dire situations the fire/police are still obligated to assist them when able.

The concern from the police's perspective is that they don't want to be put into a situation whereby they have to chose between having a squad either protect a local store from looters or try and rescue a CNN crew from rock throwing protesters.

 

[pat fan]

It's in the news.

I *know* there are some that don't think the Daily Mail is "credible" but this piece is the most concise about ISIS. It's credible enough.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...extremism.html

http://wtvr.com/2014/08/13/fbi-warns...e-in-ferguson/
__________________

I saw nothing that links the NBPP with ISIS. Did I miss it?

 

[OceanAnnie]

I saw nothing that links the NBPP with ISIS. Did I miss it?

No. I don't think I mentioned they were working in concert together, just that they are inserting themselves. Separate entities.

Chilling.

 

[skater]

Yeah that's a common complaint. Facts aren't always black and white and those that are can often be boring to listen to and/or unimportant . With things like news and current events, its really history in the making. If you think of it like that then you'll see how the analysis, interpretation, outcome..all that type of stuff is what is important.

But some of them are black and white. I enjoy analysis - when its clear that it is opinion. Analysis reported as fact is what bothers me.

 

[skater]

The problem with reporting ALL the facts is the amount of time it would take up. Obviously someone needs to decide what's important to the story and what's not. Is that decision being made because of bias? Possibly.

Okay. How about just the basic facts .

 

[skylizard]

Perception is the driving force of the protestors. Not facts. How can anyone be sure of "factual" information with bits and pieces being put forth? Isolated analysis is not context. Context does matter.

It does look very bad on the surface. But this thing is being tried in the public sphere, not a court of law.

The benefit of the doubt should go both ways. Innocent until proven guilty (for the victim and the police). If you are willing to believe one scenario without all the facts, you should be open/willing to believe there are other plausible scenarios within the realm of possibilities.

Perception is driven by many things. The overriding perception generated by the protestors and thus the news is the police officer is guilty.

But what if the police officer was attacked and Michael Brown tried to take his gun? What if Michael Brown charged the police officer? What happens if the police officer is innocent? Will people believe the facts if they are in the police officer's favor? Where will all the anger and hostility go?

I have read blurbs about ISIS and the black panther involvement. What a an awful mess.

Well said. And yes, it's very scary how ISIS is inserting itself and taking advantage of the situation to recruit new members.

 

[OceanAnnie]

Well said. And yes, it's very scary how ISIS is inserting itself and taking advantage of the situation to recruit new members.

Thanks. It got my attention. They don't need to team up to be a threat (either entity). That's for sure.

 

[sam_gordon]

I wasn't addressing the location of any "media center". My statement was in response to your expression "I do think the police can say 'leave this area at your own risk'." You seemed to be expressing the notion that in exchange to being allowed to go wherever they wanted, the police could warn them that they'd be outside of the scope of the police's protection. Just like the idiots that disregard posted warnings to not try and cross flooded roadways, when people do so and find themselves in dire situations the fire/police are still obligated to assist them when able.

The concern from the police's perspective is that they don't want to be put into a situation whereby they have to chose between having a squad either protect a local store from looters or try and rescue a CNN crew from rock throwing protesters.

Sorry, when I said the "at their own risk", I wasn't saying police would sacrifice them. BUT, police would not dedicate to protecting them. Does that make sense? Again, the media should be allowed where the public is allowed. By allowing police to "segregate" the media, you lose some oversight, and open up the possibility of censoring what the public can see in the name of safety.

Okay. How about just the basic facts .

OK. Who decides what's a "basic" fact? Someone needs to make the decision on what's included in a story and what's not. Sometimes that is the reporter, sometimes a producer, sometimes news management.

 

[Gumbo4x4]

There is also Fox 2 News, KTVI which is linked with KPLR.

How about this nugget of news? The KKK is planning a gathering in Sullivan, Mo.

Talk about flame fanning, with regards to getting attention.

The KKK actually had an active group in Sullivan when I was in HS. So pathetic. Mostly good folks there, but their presence always tainted everyone's opinion of the town.

 

[JanaDee]

Agreed, and the threats being made against the media are a despicable display of power. Chris Hayes from MSNBC was threatened with mace, an Argus Radio photog was told he'd be shot if he didn't move, and many more are being detained for simply doing their job: reporting on the chaos.

IMO, some of the media is contributing to the chaos, not reporting on it.

 

[brunette8706]

MSN Reporters hit with ROCKS!

http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-TV/2014/08/18/MSNBC-Crew-Hit-With-Rocks-During-Live-Coverage

 

[sunshinehighway]

But some of them are black and white. I enjoy analysis - when its clear that it is opinion. Analysis reported as fact is what bothers me.

I think most people who think they want the news to just be a reading of facts, wouldn't really like that if they got it. It's one of those things that sounds better than it actually would be.

 

[JanaDee]

The problem with reporting ALL the facts is the amount of time it would take up. Obviously someone needs to decide what's important to the story and what's not. Is that decision being made because of bias? Possibly.

"Possibly"? There is no doubt pieces are left out due to bias. That applies to both sides, not just one.

 

[CPT Tripss]

Still don't buy that the officer did anything wrong. You are so into blaming him without due process.

Just as you are "so into" exonerating him prior to a complete investigation. A lot of information is missing.

You give the cop benefit of the doubt with no basis other than your opinion of cops in general reflected against your opinion of urban black young men. That's your world view - not right not wrong, not fact just opinion. It simply is the way to look at the situation.

Facts will come out, at some point, hopefully. A grand jury and perhaps a petit jury will make a decision and the principles - the family, the police and the citizens of Ferguson will have to deal with the all that has happened . . .

 

[skater]

OK. Who decides what's a "basic" fact? Someone needs to make the decision on what's included in a story and what's not. Sometimes that is the reporter, sometimes a producer, sometimes news management.

I understand that. But haven't you ever watched or read a story and wondered where the who was? Or the when or how?

And I think we agree at least a little that those decisions on what's included and what' s not included can be biased. Thankfully, we have access to so many sources - local, national and international. If you have the time, you can piece everything together, and at least have the main parts of a story. But if you don't have time or if you're lazy or somewhat illiterate, the one news outlet you listen to, is the one you believe. And it just may be the one that left out the part of the story that includes that one fact that may change your opinion. The one fact that may help you decide to stay home instead of throw something at police. Or the one fact that may help you decide to make a sign and stand up for what you believe is right.

And if we think about it, I think we can tell which stories have facts left out because of bias. There are networks on the left and on the right who blatantly include only those details which support their views. And IMO, the potential is there for those details (or lack of details) to fuel extreme choices in uninformed citizens.

 

[sam_gordon]

"Possibly"? There is no doubt pieces are left out due to bias. That applies to both sides, not just one.

When I say "possibly" I'm referring to a specific reporter.

Jane Doe is reporting a story for the local television station.
John Smith is reporting the same story for a network news show.

They both have the same set of information ("facts"). They can't report everything, so they have to edit. Can you tell me they both use bias to determine what information they use?

You're talking about a group, I'm talking about the individuals.

 

[skater]

I think most people who think they want the news to just be a reading of facts, wouldn't really like that if they got it. It's one of those things that sounds better than it actually would be.

Perhaps you're right . But I do like to be educated and informed. Not misled and misinformed. I have to admit though, the opinions and the left out details provide me some entertainment when I point them out to my kids!

 

[CPT Tripss]

The KKK actually had an active group in Sullivan when I was in HS. So pathetic. Mostly good folks there, but their presence always tainted everyone's opinion of the town.

Yet, the "good folks" of Sullivan didn't stop the Klan from doing their evil . . .

 

[TLSnell1981]

Just as you are "so into" exonerating him prior to a complete investigation. A lot of information is missing.

You give the cop benefit of the doubt with no basis other than your opinion of cops in general reflected against your opinion of urban black young men. That's your world view - not right not wrong, not fact just opinion. It simply is the way to look at the situation.

Facts will come out, at some point, hopefully. A grand jury and perhaps a petit jury will make a decision and the principles - the family, the police and the citizens of Ferguson will have to deal with the all that has happened . . .

Police officers are supposed to protect and serve. The majority do a fine job, so I do give them the benefit of the doubt. There is always an investigation when a firearm is used. Why stomp up and down the street, calling the LEO a murderer, BEFORE the facts are known? Perhaps, it's because the community is taught to disrespect and distrust LEO?