Discussion for article #226825
Whatâs your point, Times? Abraham Lincoln was no angel, either. As a youngster, he enjoyed tying cats tails together and hanging them over a clothes line to fight. That doesnât make John Wilkes Boothe a hero.
24 Likes
A big problem today is that people canât be bothered to read a lengthy, in-depth article before commenting. The âno angelâ phrase that has so many upset was an in-context part of a larger piece. Heaven help us when the Twatter crowd becomes the journalists of tomorrow.
17 Likes
Well, of course. Because every other teenage boy is studying for the priesthood.
Seriously, have they never met anyone that age?
16 Likes
I didnât read your whole comment but i am utterly outraged at your assumption that people canât be bothered to read anything lengthy!
hashtag outragedovereverything!!!
6 Likes
More evidence that we as a society are incapable of discussing this particular incident in a rational way. The story was fine, but people would prefer to render righteous indignation by taking one phrase out of context, rather than to sincerely what happened in this case.
7 Likes
âBut maybe if I would have said heâs ânot perfectâ then the connotation would have been different and people wouldnât have been so up in arms. I donât know. But again, I understand. I get it.â
How about not using either term because theyâre completely unnecessary. Itâs like saying, âHe was a person who breathedâ. None of us are angels and none of us are perfect. Thereâs no reason to point that out.
18 Likes
SoâŚis this writer just an idiot or what? Since when does the phrase âheâs no angelâ mean that someone isnât perfect? Because Iâve always understood it to mean that someone was a bad person. And if youâre trying to say that he wasnât perfect, then just say that. At best, the writer used a phrase he didnât understand.
And frankly, I fail to see how smoking weed or drinking alcohol is even a moral issue. Sure, itâs illegal, but breaking laws isnât a moral issue.
6 Likes
I see this a lot, not just in articles about people. Everything has to be couched in this ridiculous language where flaws [even minor ones] absolutely must be mentioned front and center. âWhile X is certainly flawed, it is blah blah blahâ or âDoes X have problems? Of course, but blah blah blah,â and it just comes across as trying to ride the fence and not offended someone who might get upset if you praise something too much without giving equal time to the flaws [even if they donât warrant equal time].
2 Likes
I donât think the phrase was out of context. I think he used a phrase he didnât understand, because it doesnât mean that someone isnât perfect.
2 Likes
As much as anything else, the criticism of the âno angelâ phrase reveals a belief that one should not speak ill of the dead, and indicates the critic doesnât know a news story from an obituary. Brown had some hell in him and Eligon discharged his obligation to tell the truth when he said so.
2 Likes
Hereâs a piece that highlights other people the NY Times thinks arenât angels. It includes Al Capone, Rommel, one of the Columbine killers, Larry Flynt, Magic Johnson, and Michael Jackson. Somehow, the white non-angels are more notorious than the black non-angels.
I donât agree that âno angelâ has to mean a consistently bad-doing person. For Whitey Bulger it was an obvious understatement. Just as obviously in this context it means he was capable of getting himself in trouble, despite his good qualities. Any parent would be concerned about a kid who stole a box of cigars and shoved the salesman who tried to stop him. Thatâs one solid notch past youthful hijinks. But if the piece had soft-pedaled that side of him, the other end of the spectrum would have howled about political correctness. All of it fades into irrelevance because of the way he died. It just doesnât matter what kind of person he was, where he fell on the good-bad continuum. Witnesses say he was unarmed and trying to surrender. Thatâs it. Nothing else matters.
4 Likes
compare and contrast NYTs obits for brown, an innocent victim, and the boston bomber.
It gives you a sense of what a post racial world weâre living in.
1 Like
I read it and the other piece about Officer Wilson. I thought it was even-handed and probably pretty true to life. People are just a tad overwrought and super sensitive. Michael Brown was an 18-year-old human being. Of course he was no angel. Neither are the people who are twittering.
We sure do have to take offense at every word these days, donât we?
Thanks, internet.
8 Likes
I only scanned your comment and saw âassâ which outraged me.
4 Likes
But that IS what it means. To say someone âis no angelâ is to say that they were a bad person. Iâve never heard it used otherwise.
Nobodyâs perfect, and the article would be wrong to say that Brown was. ButâŚthat phrase has a specific meaning, and itâs used when someoneâs a bad person.
5 Likes
And the NYT is no angel, since they get human rights, can they al be killed?
I donât care if he was âno angelâ what I care is was he deserving of an execution?
Iâm more offended that they chose to use such a vapid and overused term, to be honest. Itâs groan-worthy even in the best of times.
3 Likes