or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › General › Current Events, Power and Money › killing Trayvon
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

killing Trayvon - Page 75

post #1111 of 6250
Cable news has really drug the networks down to their level. Weird to think that there was a time when the network news anchors were some of the most respected public figures in the country.
post #1112 of 6250
Quote:
Originally Posted by erictheobscure View Post

^ Ah, okay. FLMM's comment actually clears things up. Somehow, everything's getting reduced to conservative/liberal "positions" (and again, I'm fine with the fact that I'm not neutral and value-free or whatever). But I was hoping my thoughts were a bit more useful than this. Not just that the justice system is broken and racist and must be fixed, but that it exists as part of our social fabric, and this case shows what happens when its role in adjudicating truth + justice comes to be questioned. Yes, you're probably right that I, by and large, see this questioning as a good thing. But I don't think it's simply true that my observations can be boiled down to some partisan screed since I do think that there's an (epistemologically and culturally) unstable mix of truth claims and demands for justice.
You fuckers have made me late for my own class.

I also think that the justice system should be questioned, and it is unfortunate that partisans of both ideologies only specifically question it when they see fit to. Again, my only quibble was that I thought you were claiming that the inordinate amount of speculation in this case was due primarily to some sort of social dissatisfaction with the justice system. I'm an Occam's Razor sort - I think people just like to speculate about subjects with which the media bombards them.
post #1113 of 6250
Quote:
Originally Posted by munchausen View Post

Cable news has really drug the networks down to their level. Weird to think that there was a time when the network news anchors were some of the most respected public figures in the country.

as i mention (and I believe i am anointing myself SF's media maven here. mainly to piss off iamstillmatthew) that was such a small part of journalism's history it could best be described as an aberration. IRDK however, and I'm not really an expert on anything. so. yeah.
post #1114 of 6250
Quote:
Originally Posted by edinatlanta View Post

as i mention (and I believe i am anointing myself SF's media maven here. mainly to piss off iamstillmatthew) that was such a small part of journalism's history it could best be described as an aberration. IRDK however, and I'm not really an expert on anything. so. yeah.

I don't hate the media, young master Ed, I just think it is silly to every assume that reporting is unbiased. Nothing is unbiased, not even facts. I do think the papers are some of the worst, but I don't watch TV so my sample is limited.
post #1115 of 6250
Quote:
Originally Posted by itsstillmatt View Post

I don't hate the media, young master Ed,

The funny thing is... I do.
post #1116 of 6250
Quote:
Originally Posted by edinatlanta View Post

as i mention (and I believe i am anointing myself SF's media maven here. mainly to piss off iamstillmatthew) that was such a small part of journalism's history it could best be described as an aberration. IRDK however, and I'm not really an expert on anything. so. yeah.

Agreed, I think we've lost perspective on what media outlets have traditionally been. I think there is a bit of "golden yesteryears" that is coloring perspective as well.
post #1117 of 6250
I'm not saying that I think all journalism has always been honorable, just that I have the impression that at one time there was a genuine difference between national media outlets and the scandal rags, and that people like Edward R. Murrow and Walter Cronkite demanded genuine respect.
post #1118 of 6250
That's certainly true, but Edina's point was that that period was itself an aberration, and that the norm has been distrust of media.
post #1119 of 6250
561922_412162345479891_205344452828349_1489310_827946501_n.jpg

So... which side are you on now?
post #1120 of 6250
Quote:
Originally Posted by FLMountainMan View Post

I also think that the justice system should be questioned, and it is unfortunate that partisans of both ideologies only specifically question it when they see fit to. Again, my only quibble was that I thought you were claiming that the inordinate amount of speculation in this case was due primarily to some sort of social dissatisfaction with the justice system. I'm an Occam's Razor sort - I think people just like to speculate about subjects with which the media bombards them.

I know I said I'd bow out of this thread, but I wanted to reply to this. My response is (predictably) vexed. My original post meant that, in this particular case, the perception of mishandling (and racism) on the part of the police helped drive the wedge between the search for facts and the assignment of culpability (trying to avoid the "T" and "J" words). I didn't necessarily mean to imply that this was accurate or correct but that even the perception has real consequences, showing the delicate balance between the populace and the police/judicial system. But I guess we've all been assigned sides here, and, I dunno, maybe I do think the suspicion is merited. Your comment opens onto the question of whether I proclaimed that this kind of suspicion is warranted *in general* or just on a case-by-case basis with evidence. And here, maybe you made an interpretive leap based on my profession and maybe my persona on SF? I dunno. (Tangential question: why is my SF persona so wedded to my professional identity? It's not like when you made your "kill hispanic whitey" joke, I was like, "Oh, what a lawyer thing to say!")

Okay, so some academic musings that will be judged as useless: I figure if there's something tragic about all of this--the incident AND the discourse about it--it's a tragedy of foregone conclusions. Everyone drawing conclusions ahead of time and hoping that the facts will eventually vindicate the conclusions. (And I really mean everyone is doing this from all sides, starting with Zimmerman's belief that Martin was suspicious based on his looks, to the belief that Zimmerman's murderous racism is a foregone conclusion, to the belief that Martin really was a thug, whatever.) I am rather taken with the fact that "foregone conclusion" is a phrase coined by Shakespeare in Othello, and that Othello's foregone conclusion is based largely on his status as a Moor in a white culture. (Othello is rather eerily good at depicting cultural/somatic/religious difference and its effects upon the subject.) It should make those of you who think skepticism is the better way happy that Othello's foreground conclusion is wrong, and it's based on Iago's made-up reporting of a dream that Cassio had. On the other hand, Iago really is an asshole who taps into the "racism" that exists around him.
post #1121 of 6250
This incident has nothing to do with race and everything to do with commerce.
post #1122 of 6250
Quote:
Originally Posted by mordecai View Post

Some people, including Spike Lee, were tweeting an address that was supposedly Zimmerman but turned out to be some innocent woman

Unfortunately I was fool enough to retweet it myself.
post #1123 of 6250
Quote:
Originally Posted by erictheobscure View Post

I'm guessing that, at this point, even those deeply skeptical of the outcry about this case might admit that *insofar as the outcry led to further investigations*, it was useful and helpful--but that the truth claim (Zimmerman was a murderer; this was a racist act, etc.) was premature. But the mixture of truth claims and the demand for justice seems like a reflection of a problem at the level of law enforcement and the judicial process: once there's some reason to doubt that the police or the prosecutors or whoever failed to do their job, then our sanctioned method for detecting truth and administering justice accordingly breaks down. So I suppose it's only fitting that we're now left speculating about video footage: our own perceptions and speculations shouldn't matter very much, and they are relatively useless, but that's pretty much all we have at this point.

And what have the further investigations revealed? What striking new facts have been uncovered since CNN made lyching Zimmerman into the latest left-wing cause celebre? As far as I can see, nothing good has come from this.

Now balance your supposed good against the harm that's been done, that is, having the mass media bombard the entire population with a myraid of false, misleading, and speculative "facts" about the case, all of which that are calculated to make Zimmerman look guilty and bigoted. How do you think he's going to get a fair trial after all this? It's fucking impossible and the injustice of it is on you.
post #1124 of 6250
Christ, the hoodie thing feels like that montage in Wag the Dog every time I go on facebook.
post #1125 of 6250
Quote:
Originally Posted by erictheobscure View Post

Huh? Too many things to respond to here but, in general, my generalizations about truth and justice weren't somehow a thinly-veiled attack on one "side" or another. I was actually trying to get at why there's such a mess here *without* even invoking race. In any case:
- akatsuki was "held accountable" just like anyone else has been held accountable here for their claims. He was criticized (and even mocked). Not sure what other kind of accountability you want;
- there are lots and lots of people in here who have been judiciously skeptical about the topic without seeming particularly bigoted (and I think there are some who did sound rather assholish);
- I was actually trying to suggest that, in an ideal world, the demand for justice might be able to be articulated without the strong truth claim (i.e., not " We know Zimmerman is a racist murderer!" but "We would like more investigation because we have some reason to believe this was mishandled');
- I'd like to think that it's part of our political system that citizens can question or even protest the police & the state.
In any case, I'll bow out of this thread. But I am genuinely interested in the fact that what I perceived to be a fairly neutral set of claims drew so much ire from Piob and matt--two folks I've had relatively civil and reasonable exchanges with in the past.

To respond..

I was the only one who ridiculed and mocked akatsuki. Others ridiculed and mocked 16-ton.

The issue I am responding to isn't whether people have been judiciously skeptical, it is whether they were denigrated for skepticism in the first place.

It would be great if a demand for justice didn't need a truth claim, but the race narrative was the major truth claim. The incident was totally secondary.

We can question the police. There is little doubt of that, and we have a long history of being able to do so. However, there is a difference between questioning the police and making wild accusations that are premature and unfounded, riling people up to question justice in society and then exclaiming the goodness and importance of the question. It is like blowing up a bridge to bring attention to a pothole and then saying that the bridge was obviously unfit in the first place, thank God we now know. Or something like that. Not my best analogy.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Current Events, Power and Money
Styleforum › Forums › General › Current Events, Power and Money › killing Trayvon