How does vandalism and looting accomplish anything???

[Gumbo4x4]

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

All evil needs is for good men to do nothing.



Or something like that

 

[EMAW_KSU]

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

This made me think of this.

 

[Mokat76]

Agree. I grew up in North County btw, near that area. I am sure residents are living in fear. It is just awful.

Me too. This is just sad. The poor folks who just want peace and quiet and safety are victims, as are the kids who will now miss an entire week of school. My heart breaks.

 

[skater]

This made me think of this.

Love this!

 

[asta]

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 . . .

What you are missing is that our country's legal system is based on the principle that you are innocent until proven guilty. Those of us giving the officer the benefit of doubt do so because he is due that under our system. The mobs in the streets have convicted the officer without due process.

It all comes down to whether you believe our system of government or you want to be ruled by the insanity of a mob.

 

[sunshinehighway]

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?

I have a feeling the initial reaction in the community had a lot to do with the poor relationship between law enforcement and the community. There seems to be a lack of trust and disrespect towards one another on both sides. The shooting didn't cause that, it just brought it to a head.

 

[LBIJim]

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.

Last night I read that The Grand High Exaulted Mystic Ruler of the regional KKK has disavowed this gathering, claiming it's an offshoot group and not a "legitimate" KKK event.

 

[skylizard]

What you are missing is that our country's legal system is based on the principle that you are innocent until proven guilty. Those of us giving the officer the benefit of doubt do so because he is due that under our system. The mobs in the streets have convicted the officer without due process.

It all comes down to whether you believe our system of government or you want to be ruled by the insanity of a mob.

Exactly.
More violence does not solve the problem.

 

[TLSnell1981]

I have a feeling the initial reaction in the community had a lot to do with the poor relationship between law enforcement and the community. There seems to be a lack of trust and disrespect towards one another on both sides. The shooting didn't cause that, it just brought it to a head.

Maybe...maybe not, but this isn't just a Ferguson issue. It appears to be a fairly common sentiment in the black community.

 

[olwyngdh]

What you are missing is that our country's legal system is based on the principle that you are innocent until proven guilty. Those of us giving the officer the benefit of doubt do so because he is due that under our system. The mobs in the streets have convicted the officer without due process.

It all comes down to whether you believe our system of government or you want to be ruled by the insanity of a mob.

But the same innocent until proven guilty is supposed to apply to Brown as well, and I don't see a lot of that from the group that refers to him as "thug." No one knows for sure what happened---both parties should be assumed innocent until such time as all the information is gathered and presented to a jury. I see a bit of that mob mentality on both sides.

Personally, I think they both overreacted and we are left with the situation of a dead college kid and a police officer whose life has been destroyed. I think there is likely fault on both sides.

 

[Disneychick75]

Chris Hayes also recklessly tweeted that there was a dead body in the street. For simply doing his job, he knows how to incite chaos. The tweet was uncorrected until then day. Turns out it was a car accident victim who was not dead.

I don't think all the media is their to simply do their job. I think they are there for only one story and will do what they can to make that narrative remains true. So, some are just contributing to the chaos.

This is definitely true with some of them. I have 4-6 different feeds going of the protests at night. The MSM is fine. Some of the independent online news I've seen have smart alecky kids who discuss how they're going to act to the police. They definitely have an agenda (calling the police "pigs") and I haven't heard Mike Brown's name once. It's like Ft. Lauderdale moved to Ferguson for Spring Break.

It does make me curious about how the community has been handled by police leading up to all of this. Clearly there is a great divide there. Taking the troublemakers out of the equation for a minute, the community is frustrated, angry and just fed up.

The Ferguson PD were not the ones making reporters move. I saw Trooper written on apron things over their uniforms. I also saw Swat and National Guard. I'm sure they were mixed in amongst the others but I didn't see their uniforms.

How is it the "whole truth" if they leave certain facts out that don't benefit one news network's particular side or view point? Sometimes its almost impossible to even get all the what, who, why, how, etc. questions answered from one source.

I was in journalism classes in the 70's. If there was even a hint of our own opinion, we got an "F". We were reporters not entertainers.

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.

No, and the media center is right in the center of the protests. The reporters I was posting about were wandering through neighborhoods. They didn't bother keeping their voices down. It's a tense time. How might a home owner react if a stranger is going through their neighborhood at 1 or 2 in the morning?

Part of being an informed citizen is listening to different sides and then making up your mind. If you want to make an informed opinion you need to seek out the information. In this day and age information is at your fingertips.
Putting whole trust in one group or person to give you the straight up facts without any type of slant is a bad idea.

Back in the day, you didn't need to listen to several channels. They all said the same thing. It was more a cult of personality. My grandparents loved Huntley Brinkley and my parents watched Walter Cronkite.

I wonder if you'd do better to look at local coverage of a story. Instead of watching CNN/MSBNC/FOX, how about KMOV, KSDK, or KPLR (first three I found). The local reporters aren't beholden to the network news management.

They kind of are beholden because they're all affiliates.
KMOV-CBS
KSDK-NBC
KPLR-CBS/CW/UPN/Time/Warner
KTVI- Fox

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.

Excellent post

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.

Yes, KKK, New Black Panthers, Revolution, Nation of Islam, all are there with agendas.

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.

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.

Yes and if reporters are shot at or burned, people will say the police didn't do enough to help them.

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

Yes, they are. There was one feed that I stopped watching cause the guy was telling protesters, "do this" and "do that" in order to tick off the police.

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.

It worked for years.

Me too. This is just sad. The poor folks who just want peace and quiet and safety are victims, as are the kids who will now miss an entire week of school. My heart breaks.

Yes, Mike Brown has become nothing but a reason for rioting, looting, and inciting hatred, for some of these people. It's become an out of control Mardi Gras minus bosoms, beads, and floats.

 

[sam_gordon]

No, and the media center is right in the center of the protests. The reporters I was posting about were wandering through neighborhoods. They didn't bother keeping their voices down. It's a tense time. How might a home owner react if a stranger is going through their neighborhood at 1 or 2 in the morning?

If reporters are "disturbing the peace" (which is what they would be doing if they weren't keeping their voices down), then arrest them. If it's not illegal for you or me to walk through a neighborhood at 1 or 2 in the morning, then it's not illegal for the media.

They kind of are beholden because they're all affiliates.
KMOV-CBS
KSDK-NBC
KPLR-CBS/CW/UPN/Time/Warner
KTVI- Fox

No, they're not beholden because they're affiliates. CBS is not calling KMOV and saying "spin the story this way". KMOV only has to answer to CBS if they pre-empt too many network shows (for the riots, tornados, snow storms, whatever).

ETA: "Affiliation" <> "Ownership". The reporters have to answer to the News Director. The News Director has to answer the GM. The GM has to answer the Board of Directors/Owners.

Yes and of reporters are shot at or burned, people will say the police didn't do enough to help them.

Of course people will say that. They'll also say that if the public is shot at or burned. You can not restrict the media when you don't restrict the public. Period.

 

[robinb]

Me too. This is just sad. The poor folks who just want peace and quiet and safety are victims, as are the kids who will now miss an entire week of school. My heart breaks.

I just heard this morning that the kids were supposed to start school but did not. I think that was a poor decision on the part of the city. There is no better way to encourage the community to start to return to normal than the routine of back-to-school for those kids.

 

[sam_gordon]

I just heard this morning that the kids were supposed to start school but did not. I think that was a poor decision on the part of the city. There is no better way to encourage the community to start to return to normal than the routine of back-to-school for those kids.

I'm not sure. I assume at least some busses would need to go through the areas where these protests are happening. I don't know if the area could be easily avoided. Would you feel safe with your child on a school bus driving through the protest areas?

 

[robinb]

I'm not sure. I assume at least some busses would need to go through the areas where these protests are happening. I don't know if the area could be easily avoided. Would you feel safe with your child on a school bus driving through the protest areas?

During the day? Yes. At midnight? No.

 

[Disneychick75]

If reporters are "disturbing the peace" (which is what they would be doing if they weren't keeping their voices down), then arrest them. If it's not illegal for you or me to walk through a neighborhood at 1 or 2 in the morning, then it's not illegal for the media.


No, they're not beholden because they're affiliates. CBS is not calling KMOV and saying "spin the story this way". KMOV only has to answer to CBS if they pre-empt too many network shows (for the riots, tornados, snow storms, whatever).

ETA: "Affiliation" <> "Ownership". The reporters have to answer to the News Director. The News Director has to answer the GM. The GM has to answer the Board of Directors/Owners.


Of course people will say that. They'll also say that if the public is shot at or burned. You can not restrict the media when you don't restrict the public. Period.

1. Cause the police don't have better things to do than answering disturbing the police calls, when there are gunshots and fires breaking out.

2. Ok

3.The protesters are restricted to a main area at least they were.

 

[Geoff_M]

During the day? Yes. At midnight? No.

The bottom line is that schools aren't going to do anything that might expose them to any liability if something were to happen, either directly or indirectly, if they opted to open the schools.

 

[robinb]

The bottom line is that schools aren't going to do anything that might expose them to any liability if something were to happen, either directly or indirectly, if they opted to open the schools.

Yes. they are covering their political and legal butts. That doesn't make it right for the community. Do you agree that opening the schools would create a sense of normalcy that is sorely needed?

 

[mom2rtk]

Yes. they are covering their political and legal butts. That doesn't make it right for the community. Do you agree that opening the schools would create a sense of normalcy that is sorely needed?

It's hard to say. While I agree in theory, I would not send my child if their bus had to drive through that area. If too many people held their kids home, the schools might not get enough funding to pay their costs.

 

[sam_gordon]

1. Cause the police don't have better things to do than answering disturbing the police calls, when there are gunshots and fires breaking out.

The fact still remains, if the public (ie: you or me) can legally go somewhere, so can the press.

3.The protesters are restricted to a main area at least they were.

Presumably the protesters are allowed to travel to/from that "main area". That means the media can travel to/from that area also.

Media can be given ADDED privileges, but they automatically should get the same privileges as the public.