6 ms·

The most recent and obvious case in my mind: Covington Catholic Incident: almost every major mainstream media outlet ran with the narrative that the boys were h

• beat 8y ago
  I disagree. Whether they were harassing is a matter of opinion. Whether there was a confrontation is a matter of fact, confirmed by the video and photos. If you want to claim the "narrative", you need a link to an actual article with actual quotes. That's how fact-checking works, and your response is failing it badly.
  • ajvs 8y ago
    This has been debunked thoroughly. That guy went up to the kids and started beating his drum right in their faces to intimidate them and somehow the media painted the kids as the harasser.
    • beat 8y ago
      Was his intent to intimidate? Why do you say that? How is that a "fact"? Where did you even hear that story? Geez, y'all don't understand fact checking at all.
      • ajvs 8y ago
        Does it matter what he says his intent was? He can paint whatever story he likes in interviews, but nobody would appreciate a random person going right in their face and beating a drum, especially a young kid. You can even see him flinching because of the proximity. Not sure what you're talking about "hearing that story", the video evidence is clear as day.
        • rootusrootus 8y ago
          [deleted unpopular opinion]
          • 1000units 8y ago
            You assume the drummer was trying to go somewhere such that someone could block his path. But he was exactly where he wanted, in this kid's face trying to provoke him. And the kid just smirked, earning great hatred and hostility from people who don't think there's any place for a smile in this cold, brutal world.
            • rootusrootus 8y ago
              I assume the kid wanted the confrontation just as much, hence the smirk and refusal to make a hole for the guy to walk through. Even if it is exactly what the old man wanted, the kid is not blameless.
              • 1000units 8y ago
                Again, you're assuming the kid had the option of yielding so that the drummer could "walk through." Watch the original video that includes the surrounding events. The kid did have an option to yield: getting on his knees and begging for forgiveness for the crime of appearing at an anti-abortion demonstration as a white Catholic male. Then the drummer (who is a 'professional protestor', by the way) would have had a more dramatic story to sell. Instead, he smirked.
                • deleted 8y ago
                  [deleted]
          • 1000units 8y ago
            META: I recommend against deleting unpopular comments. Editing in something like "Update: I disavow!" if you've changed your mind is harmless, but in general there's a benefit to treating public statements as a sort of permanent record. This practice exposes people to potentially underappreciated viewpoints and allows others to track the development and popularity of ideas. I have many poorly rated comments preserved here, but on balance I think people respect my personal commitment to the truth, however I see it. In the realm of public expression, it's honesty and integrity which matter most. Everybody is wrong sometimes; it's part of the process of discovering truth.
      • 1000units 8y ago
        Are you familiar with the story at all? You need to do more than "hear" about it from whomever you did. I watched a full recording of what happened, and the media coverage was absolutely ridiculously wrong. I hope the Covington kids win a defamation suit.
    • behindmyscreen 8y ago
      The confrontation was between the kids and the black Israelites. The Native gentleman was trying to use chanting to interfere with the conflict.
  • jimmy1 8y ago
    > Whether they were harassing is a matter of opinion But when you report it as a matter of fact in an editorializing headline, then it is a problem. > Whether there was a confrontation is a matter of fact This was not the narrative portrayed, in the slightest bit. Had this been the headline and narrative, I would have had no issue with it, either. The stories that day were "Boy in MAGA hat harasses Native Americans" period.
    • beat 8y ago
      See previous post. If you can't produce links and quotes, then that's just, like, your opinion, man.
      • fundingshovel 8y ago
        https://www.vox.com/2019/1/19/18189668/white-students-maga-gear-harass-native-elders https://www.vox.com/2019/1/19/18189668/white-students-maga-g... https://variety.com/2019/biz/news/maga-hat-wearing-teens-taunting-native-american-elder-spark-condemnation-from-hollywood-1203112838/ https://variety.com/2019/biz/news/maga-hat-wearing-teens-tau...
        • beat 8y ago
          Firsthand quote from the VOX article... “It was getting ugly, and I was thinking: ‘I’ve got to find myself an exit out of this situation and finish my song at the Lincoln Memorial,’” Phillips told the Washington Post in a separate interview. “I started going that way, and that guy in the hat stood in my way, and we were at an impasse. He just blocked my way and wouldn’t allow me to retreat.” The article is explicit. It notes that Phillips initiated contact because they were harassing another group. But it also makes it clear, with quotes, that he believes they began harassing him instead. Now, if you want to say Phillips is lying, you can do that, but unless you do that, at least one of your articles does not support your contention.
          • fundingshovel 8y ago
            The article was modified, and the sections in your quote added. I should have used the internet archive originally. See: https://web.archive.org/web/20190120030012/https://www.vox.com/2019/1/19/18189668/white-students-maga-gear-harass-native-elders https://web.archive.org/web/20190120030012/https://www.vox.c...
  • vokep 8y ago
    >Whether they were harassing is a matter of opinion It really is not, further video evidence makes this a fact, not an opinion.
  • briandear 8y ago
    “Vietnam Vet” — that was published by the mainstream media. But the Native American wasn’t a Vietnam vet. He never left the US and, in fact, was AWOL twice. The media used “Vietnam vet” to elicit sympathy, but it wasn’t even factually accurate. The actual facts were ignored in order to promote a particular bias. “AWOL soldier” doesn’t have the same emotional value to the narrative as does “Vietnam combat vet.” The history of the Native American, including past protests and confrontations was highly relevant to the story but instead, the media focused on the the teenagers rather than the professional agitator as well as the hate-group the Black Israelites.[1] The Covington story was “privileged, white teenage, racist Trump supporters got in a confrontation.” However the facts had to be massaged in order to sell that fiction was what happened. We all know that was the intent of the media and to suggest the reporting was either factual or objective is nonsensical. It’s delusional to suggest that the media treats Trump supporters objectively. Look, for example how the New York Times classifies Joe Biden’s repeated sexual harassment as “tactile politics,” while anyone affiliated with Trump gets no such delicacy in headlines. It’s absurd to suggest that the Covington story was anything except the media attempting to make those kids look like evil puppy-killers. The vile, racist comments of the Black Israelites on the scene were ignored for the most part and instead media talking heads spent hours analyzing the alleged “smirk” of the white kid with the MAGA hat. There is a narrative and any reasonably intelligent person can clearly see it. [1] https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/intelligence-report/2008/racist-black-hebrew-israelites-becoming-more-militant https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/intelligence-report/...
  • astine 8y ago
    "If you want to claim the "narrative", you need a link to an actual article with actual quotes" This is essentially what you're looking for: https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/01/julie-irwin-zimmerman-i-failed-covington-catholic-test/580897/ https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/01/julie-irwi... The short story is that when news about the incident first emerged, it was lacking the context about the Black Hebrew Nationalists antagonizing the boys. Early coverage made it sound like the boys sought out Mr Phillips to antagonize him. When it turned out that he had inserted himself into the situation, rightly or wrongly, it changes a lot. This doesn't necessarily exonerate the teenagers--you might still find stuff to criticize about their behavior--but it does provide a more sympathetic context, one that was missing with the initial press coverage. So yes, whatever your final takeaway, the initial coverage was incomplete and people did form and share very strong opinions based on that incomplete coverage. Once more information came out, many people changed their minds while others stuck by their initial takes. Had the coverage been more complete before people starting making opinions, we might have avoided a lot of unnecessary kerfuffle over this.
  • cheez 8y ago
    If you watch the video, that kid with the long face was just standing there looking goofy because he was uncomfortable as the drummer walked right up to his face. There is really no way to misread that interaction. He's a teenager for god's sake and he was being harassed by ideologues.
  • ALittleLight 8y ago
    >Whether they were harassing is a matter of opinion The entire event is on video. The boys are waiting for their bus. They are repeatedly insulted by a group of adult men who use racial and homophobic insults against the boys, who do not respond in kind but do talk with the adults harassing them. Into the fracas enters Phillips, who approaches the boys, and bangs a drum in the face of one boy. Most mainstream news outlets then smear the children as racists who surrounded and harassed Phillips without regard for the events on film. If you want to describe this as a matter of different opinions, then I think you're basically in the camp of just disregarding reality and making up whatever is most pleasant to your perspective.
  • will4274 8y ago
    > Whether they were harassing is a matter of opinion. Perhaps. But the question of who approached who is a matter of fact. Initial reporting claimed the teenagers approached a group of Native Americans. The videos clarified that the Native Americans approached the teenagers.
• ddgflorida 8y ago
  Excellent example- it will be interesting to see if they win their defamation lawsuits against CNN and the Washington Post.
• macspoofing 8y ago
  And why couldn't media conglomerates get the facts right?