Discussion for article #226846
Elignon lamented to TPM that those criticizing the phrase did not take the rest of the profile into account.
Is this guy new to journalism? He should be thrilled that people even got to the fifth paragraph.
3 Likes
Only one person got to the fifth paragraph. They Twattered their outrage and the hashtag campaign began.
5 Likes
Twattered. Perfect.
2 Likes
Like the STL Post the NYT ignored its race problems in NY and are willing to sell race for profit. What happened to âall the news fit to printâ. Now it is all the gossip we can make up to print in a timely manner.
2 Likes
The full NYT article.
1 Like
Yeah, yeah, should have read the whole story, just one phrase, out of context, blah de blah de blah.
Putting that phrase in and, more importantly, failing to edit it out, demonstrates an astonishing degree of obliviousness to the very visible and vocal meta-critique of the way the press covers stories like this. I mean, itâs not like there was a big, well-covered Twitter campaign addressing the way black victims of shootings by white are portrayed in mainstream media reports. And it further demonstrates the extent to which the Ferguson P.D.'s frantic effort to generate that kind of meme has succeeded, even among the smart, savvy, tough, fair-minded, preeminent journalists of the NYT.
9 Likes
I read the whole story. There is no way to interpret the phrase that doesnât disparage Michael Brown. No one is an angel, no one deserves to be shot down for walking in the street instead of the sidewalk, and oneâs prior actions to that event are irrelevant. It would have been sufficient to remark on his recent religious revelation with no comment about whether he was an angel or not. It was a huge blunder. If thatâs what passes for journalism at the NYT, I have no interest in subscribing.
7 Likes
I missed the part of the article where it said that because he was no angel, he deserved to be shot for walking in the street instead of the sidewalk.
5 Likes
Incorrect, but your disdain for Twitter doesnât exactly make you the best candidate to lay down a critique against journalism.
There is a theme in how mainstream media prefers to frame young black men in Michael Brownâs situation. The Eligon story is just the latest example. If youâre blind to it, perhaps you ought to stop ridiculing new media sources such as Twitter or blogs and embrace the fact theyâve actually spent a little time doing their homework.
As much as Iâm really not a fan of his waffling asshattery, Ezra Kleinâs new media venture actually DID do your homework for you and pointed you in the direction to see the difference between how a young unarmed black man gunned down in the street has been portrayed, and how 3 different white mass murderers and serial killers were written upâŚby the same paper. Different writers, different erasâŚsame narrative.
So please stop with the âtwatteryâ nonsense. Systems such as Twitter have been all over this story since it happened, whereas mainstream media heaved a collective yawn until one or two of their younger more intrepid reporters (none from NYT of course) wound up getting arrested in the well documented Ferguson PD overreach. Itâs also been very well documented by independent media sources and locals-turned-independent media sources that the larger mainstream media has really had no interest in the positive aspects of this storyâŚnotice how quickly they packed up their camera crews when the tear gas stopped? They werenât interested in the volunteerism, in the cleanups, in the voter registration, in the community collaboration. NoâŚthey wanted the click bait, just like Eligon did. So spare me your social media indignation, because theyâve been the only ones telling the world the WHOLE story.
Iâve learned more about this case from social media on the ground in Ferguson than anything the Grey Lady has put out there on this case yetâŚand that includes THIS story.
5 Likes
How is it relevant? To say that he was no angel implies that, if he WAS an angel, he wouldnât have been shot dead for walking on the street instead of the sidewalk. How did the cop know he wasnât an angel? The cop didnât know ANYTHING about him.
4 Likes
Mr. Brown has become a national figure. As far as I can tell, the article was simply intended to provide a picture of who he was - both the good and the bad - because, letâs be honest, people are interested in learning about who Mr. Brown was. That is why it is relevant. No where in the article did I see any suggestion that he deserved to get shot because he was no angel or that the article was in any way presenting an excuse for what the officer did.
Asshole. It wasnât the words âno angelâ it was the rundown of typical teenager things made to seem like he was fucking Al Capone that was the issue. Rap lyrics with lure and violent content? THATâS why he deserved to be shot in the face!
Assholes.
The actual, relevant phrases in the article were:
" He had taken to rapping in recent months, producing lyrics that were by turns contemplative and vulgar."
and
âThe content varied. He collaborated on songs that included lyrics such as âMy favorite part is when the bodies hit the ground.â But he also derided fathers who âdonât pay child supportâ and rapped glowingly about his stepmother.â
1 Like
Itâs your decision to lump all âsocial mediaâ into the criticism of Twitter, not mine or AntiSachetDeTheâs. I believe I have gotten plenty of information regarding the events in Ferguson, much of it from online sources, without once resorting to Twitter, and, frankly, Iâm a bit perplexed by your defensive reaction to another personâs opinion of the medium. Do you happen to work for Twitter?
An indecent blunder. No respect for the dead. Iâd hate to have my obituary published in this paper.
Thatâs cruxt of the matter. Why did this kid deserve to be executed? He was the victim not the guy with the gun.
When you mother was laid to rest, did her obit talk about all the good and the bad things she did in her life. Itâs just not done.
1 Like
I posted my disdain for people who just re-Tweet the first tweet without knowing firsthand anything about the subject matter. On this, we would seem to agree. It was only 4 days ago when you were upset about the impact of unverified Twitters:
"JJRotheryď¸ď˘
Interestingly, the NYT piece was likely borne out of [this],9 a widely disseminated unsourced and unverified tweet of a St. Louis Post-Dispatch reporter who isnât even on the Ferguson story - sheâs on maternity leave.18 (Iâll just add my own personal disgust at the RWNJ baloney she posts to her feed so this particular instance shouldnât be all that surprisingâŚIâll bet she was surprised as hell to get called out on it though)
The blog I attached actually contacted her paper to confirm this was a viable story, and they couldnât walk away fast enough. She backpedaled on her own later without apology, saying her information did not âmeet standards for publicationâ. But not before it had been picked up by dozens of right wing rags and Fox and retweeted over 3,000 times.
1 Like
This was not an obituary. This was a news article.
3 Likes