This made me kinda sad today...

[Gameface]

"Film crew" being the people who shot and distributed the video. The people who provided the quotes that went along with the original story. It was quite clearly a setup. They were working with Phillips. I have run large political events and we would have people to scan the crowd and mark the people who were obviously there to "make a story." It is pretty common, they are pretty obvious, and there were probably multiple groups like this at the march. We would have signs that said, "Don't talk to these people!" that someone would follow the instigators with. Eventually they would leave without incident. These high school kids and their leaders wouldn't have been educated on that, which is why, along with their hats, they were targeted.

Thing is, that the press that was present knows about this too, which is why they can't simply be excused of "being deceived." They got the story they wanted. If there was no threat of being sued, they wouldn't have backed down.

What press was present? What did those specif press people report?

"The press" is not a single thing.

You make a significant claim but provide nothing to substantiate it. Is it just so obvious that we should all assume it to be true?

Oh, and in a video I just watched of the incident I did see what appeared to be Native Americans with video cameras (not phone cameras) so I'll go with you on calling that a film crew.

 

[fishonjazz]

FAKE NEWS AT IT AGAIN

That says that Phillips was never in the Vietnam war. So he actually was in the Vietnam war?

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using JazzFanz mobile app

 

[infection]

But the things I would like to know now all boil down to why the adults supervising the school group thought it was a good idea to let the boys engage the Black Israelites.

It’s an interesting question, to be sure. But it’s a rather unusual focus in the larger context.

Perhaps let’s take a different angle on this. Instead of male high school kids waiting for a bus, let’s say it was a girl’s high school cheerleading team in cheer outfits waiting for the bus. And instead of Black Israelites yelling racist and homophobic slurs, let’s say it is a group of frat boys cat calling and making vulgar sexual comments. What would happen if one were to raise the question as to why the girls felt it appropriate to be wearing revealing clothing in front of sex-starved college males? What kind of chaperone would leave a bunch of “scantily clad” girls in front college males who would get worked up by it? Now, yes, why a chaperone would do that may indeed show poor judgement, but do you think that would be the appropriate direction to look at that situation? Is that a fair assessment — at all — of the situation, that this is really just a chaperone problem? Would that question be able to make it past the “OMG victim blaming” filter? Do the frat boys get the pass because “it’s just what they do” and all blame lies on the feet of the chaperones and the girls for “dressing scantily”?

 

[infection]

It’s an interesting question, to be sure. But it’s a rather unusual focus in the larger context.

Perhaps let’s take a different angle on this. Instead of male high school kids waiting for a bus, let’s say it was a girl’s high school cheerleading team in cheer outfits waiting for the bus. And instead of Black Israelites yelling racist and homophobic slurs, let’s say it is a group of frat boys cat calling and making vulgar sexual comments. What would happen if one were to raise the question as to why the girls felt it appropriate to be wearing revealing clothing in front of sex-starved college males? What kind of chaperone would leave a bunch of “scantily clad” girls in front college males who would get worked up by it? Now, yes, why a chaperone would do that may indeed show poor judgement, but do you think that would be the appropriate direction to look at that situation? Is that a fair assessment — at all — of the situation, that this is really just a chaperone problem? Would that question be able to make it past the “OMG victim blaming” filter? Do the frat boys get the pass because “it’s just what they do” and all blame lies on the feet of the chaperones and the girls for “dressing scantily”?

Or yet a better scenario:

A class of inner-city youth who are predominately AA are waiting for a bus while a bunch of white nationalists are hurling racist insults. What were the chaperones thinking, right?

 

[framer]

Well, you won't like my answer, but I don't care. First off, The Atlantic article helped me understand how editing can create an impression that can lead to confirmation bias.

In my instance, as an American citizen, during what amounts to the most divisive, hyper partisan climate in my lifetime(it does seem more divisive then the Vietnam era, but maybe the distancevin time just makes that era seem less disruptive to me), I saw what I wanted to see, or to be a bit fairer to myself, what fulfilled my expectations: MAGA supporters harassing a person of color.

Journalists are also citizens. Those who oppose MAGA as much as I do no doubt saw it the same way, and reported it that way. They should not have if they were acting as truly responsible journalists. They have more responsibility toward whatever the truth was then I do, as an opponent of MAGA, and everything that Trump stands for.

And here's where I think you won't like my point of view. We are at war in this country. And it's very clear there exists a press that is an adversarial press in relation to Trump and MAGA. And I assume those Trump and MAGA adversaries saw that original clip through the same lens of confirmation bias that I did. It led to the mistakes that we are talking about in this thread.

What I learned had to do with the ability of edited videos to go viral, and, in this particular instance, provide confirmation bias to those Americans opposed to MAGA/Trump. I hope I don't continue to jump the gun where viral videos are concerned going forward.

I do not expect the media to be perfect. I think the media hurt it's image in this incident. And anything that hurts the side that I am on in this war is regrettable. I don't like that this happened. It provides ammo for Trump to cry "fake news!" I don't like that because I have felt Trump is the most unqualified dolt to ever sit in that Oval Office. This is a war. As Biden put it some time ago, "this is a war for the soul of America".

Trump has governed through bullying. He bullies his domestic enemies. He bullies our allies. He praises dictators. I want him gone. I do not regard bullying as a quality of true leadership. We have reached our nadir where the office of the presidency is concerned.

The adversarial press will make mistakes in its eagerness to go after Trump. Regrettable.
But keep going after him. Do not let up.

The problem that you have is that you think this "war" is a product of Trump. It isn't. Trump is a symptom of it. The press "picked a side" way before now. They have been making these "mistakes" for decades, Trump notwithstanding. People voted for Trump because they tired of the press turning Bush, McCain, and Romney into Nazis when it served their purpose. People got tired of the tongue baths that Obama received from the press. History didn't start two years ago.

The media has long served a purpose in America, they are just unable to serve that purpose now which is why we are where we are at.

 

[Gameface]

The problem that you have is that you think this "war" is a product of Trump. It isn't. Trump is a symptom of it. The press "picked a side" way before now. They have been making these "mistakes" for decades, Trump notwithstanding. People voted for Trump because they tired of the press turning Bush, McCain, and Romney into Nazis when it served their purpose. People got tired of the tongue baths that Obama received from the press. History didn't start two years ago.

The media has long served a purpose in America, they are just unable to serve that purpose now which is why we are where we are at.

Having a bias and being fake are two different things.

You've made claims that the media intentionally mislead on this story and only corrected the story for fear of being sued. You provided nothing at all to back that up.

 

[silesian]

Do you think people are just zombies being led by what someone says and don't have their own thoughts or cannot control their own actions though?

How long can you keep blaming someone and not yourself?

Or we can blame both? Not every bad deed has a single root cause. The world is not black or white.

 

[framer]

What press was present? What did those specif press people report?

"The press" is not a single thing.

You make a significant claim but provide nothing to substantiate it. Is it just so obvious that we should all assume it to be true?

Oh, and in a video I just watched of the incident I did see what appeared to be Native Americans with video cameras (not phone cameras) so I'll go with you on calling that a film crew.

So there was no press present at the largest march of the year? Seriously? And, yes, the press is a community. They are largely homogenous in their political and social views and get their "news" largely from the same sources. Are you implying that "reporting" on a youtube clip exonerates them from their responsibilities to get the story right? It doesn't. It actually confirms that they wanted a premeditated outcome. All the stories had quotes, did those quotes come from the youtube video? Reporters interviewed Phillips only, who was lying, and reported it as gospel. The original stories also had other quotes, who were also lying, as well. Where did those people come from? They were likely referred by Phillips. They were there to make a story with Phillips. Needless to say, that isn't the way you do journalism. . .

 

[silesian]

Violence and hate speech by Antifa radicals is wrong
Violence and hate speech by White Nationalists is wrong.

Why y'all taking sides?

Just join condemn radicals, violence and hate speech wherever it happens.

 

[Gameface]

So there was no press present at the largest march of the year? Seriously? And, yes, the press is a community. They are largely homogenous in their political and social views and get their "news" largely from the same sources. Are you implying that "reporting" on a youtube clip exonerates them from their responsibilities to get the story right? It doesn't. It actually confirms that they wanted a premeditated outcome. All the stories had quotes, did those quotes come from the youtube video? Reporters interviewed Phillips only, who was lying, and reported it as gospel. The original stories also had other quotes, who were also lying, as well. Where did those people come from? They were likely referred by Phillips. They were there to make a story with Phillips. Needless to say, that isn't the way you do journalism. . .

If there was press there then who were they and what did they report? You're making assumptions. I'm not going to have a discussion based on your unsubstantiated biases.

Again "the press" is not a single thing, so if a news outlet was on scene and had access to information that they ignored so that they could report a misleading account of what happened name them. If you can't then you're just telling stories that you want to believe.

 

[Gameface]

Today I Learned:

The press is in all places at all times and has perfect knowledge of all things. If they ever get a story wrong it is because they are lying.

 

[idestroyedthetoilet]

No I am not delusional. I am questioning the decision making of the adults who were in charge of this school group. And yes, I do think Phillips version leaves a lot to be desired.

This piece was written by someone who has experience encountering blacks associated with the Black Israelite "movement". I just put that in quotations because I have no real idea what to call them. A religious sect? I don't know. But the things I would like to know now all boil down to why the adults supervising the school group thought it was a good idea to let the boys engage the Black Israelites.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/amph...othing-justifies-what-covington-students-did/

I just saw the Today Show interview of Sandmann. He indicated that, in hindsight, he wished his school group had just moved along. In his statement a day or two ago, Sandmann indicated the group of 4 black demonstrators hurled racial insults at them. That's clear from the long version video, which was about an hour and a half in length(?). One guy in particular seems very agitated and seems to be doing most of the yelling at the students. Sandmann stated one student asked a chaparone if the students could drown out the Black protestors with school chants/cheers. And apparently the chaparone said yes.

So, I wonder, why would an adult in that climate decide that it was a good idea for the students to actually engage the black protestors?

Eventually, the students exit the scene. Sandmann stated on the Today interview that he wished they had just moved along to begin with. So why did the chaparones not make the decision to exit the scene in the first place? Even before Phillips showed up. And once the stare down with Phillips commenced, and you've got students yelling, laughing, a few performing the tomahawk chop, where the hell are the adult chaparones at that point?

Maybe it's just too easy for me to say, but if I'm the adult in charge of those boys, and there they all are being taunted and insulted by black protestors, my response is not going to be "sure, guys, go ahead and yell school cheers at the black protestors". In so many words, "sure, guys, let's escalate this thing". I'm pretty sure I'm going to say, "no, guys, c'mon, ignore them, let's just move along".

When I initially "softened" my interpretation of what I was seeing in the short version video, I still indicated that I did not find the boy's behavior "appropriate". I still feel that way. And I do make allowances for the fact that these are kids, juviniles. But they were supervised by adults. I would like to hear more from those adults. I want to know why they decided that it was an appropriate decision to remain on the scene and let the boys engage with a group of obviously agitated Black Israelites. And why those adults did nothing whatsoever when the encounter with Phillips unfolded.

Cry harder.