Even if it was a racist attack, which the evidence seems to be lacking in my opinion, would it have been better to simply label it as a murder in order to prevent the chaos that has ensued? Or, does the media’s responsibility to report accurately outweigh the possible consequences? — Pinprick
And both in news and commentary I prefer honesty and truth (I actually think they are necessary). — tim wood
As to your "evidence seems to be lacking," are you kidding? — tim wood
The media has its agenda: it always tries to engage the most significant possible audience for as long as possible. To achieve this goal, the media utilities various techniques and strategies: first, they select the so-called ‘brute’ fact to report. Then, the media frame this fact to be enveloped in the recognizable plot and to invoke the familiar narrative. Even if they do not label the chosen fact directly, they can easily integrate it into a favorable context. Further, the news should appear as the novel and extraordinal ‘breaking news’. A collective of professionals supports the current breaking news on-air and is ready to drop it at any time to start the next one. Often, a media platform promotes a clear partisan perspective. Yet, it is even much more effective in imposing a particular cluster of opinions and preferences when it looks like reporting the neutral, unbiased news.I think that the media is partly to blame for the current state of affairs by labeling the murder an act of racism, with no evidence (at least that I’m aware of) other than the fact that the race of the murderer and victim were different. The question I have is whether or not the incident should have been labeled as racist. Even if it was a racist attack, which the evidence seems to be lacking in my opinion, would it have been better to simply label it as a murder in order to prevent the chaos that has ensued? Or, does the media’s responsibility to report accurately outweigh the possible consequences? — Pinprick
He probably should not have been on the force. — prothero
The media has its agenda: it always tries to engage the most significant possible audience for as long as possible. To achieve this goal, the media utilities various techniques and strategies: first, they select the so-called ‘brute’ fact to report. Then, the media frame this fact to be enveloped in the recognizable plot and to invoke the familiar narrative. Even if they do not label the chosen fact directly, they can easily integrate it into a favorable context. Further, the news should appear as the novel and extraordinal ‘breaking news’. A collective of professionals supports the current breaking news on-air and is ready to drop it at any time to start the next one. Often, a media platform promotes a clear partisan perspective. Yet, it is even much more effective in imposing a particular cluster of opinions and preferences when it looks like reporting the neutral, unbiased news. — Number2018
The media is just one of the factors of the entire dynamic. There is the double crisis of economy's shutdown and pandemic's effects as well as the continuous erosion of trust in traditional institutions. Since Trump was elected, there has been an escalation of the struggle around his presidency's legitimacy. We see the dramatic increase of the partisanship of the mainstream media. Probably, since the stakes are so high now, the leading media platforms are further diverging from the facts reporting. For example, yesterday CNN presented the unnecessary excess of power when peaceful protesters have been pushed away from the White House so that Trump could pose beside St. John Episcopal Church. According to the Fox News version, Trump has restored law and order by visiting the church that was set on fire during the previous night protests.I’m asking about the consequences of operating in this way, specifically considering all that has transpired with this incident. Thoughts? — Pinprick
Good call. Exposes, to my dismay, a point of view that isn't all that praiseworthy. I mean would there be no protests, no hurt, no call for justice, would people have looked the other way, if it had been a white cop killing, using excessive force, an unarmed white man? While I don't condone racism-motivated attacks, shouldn't the police be told in clear terms to tone down their "zeal" when making arrests in general and not just under "special" circumstances?
It’s strange. You would think that outright murder by the very people charged with protecting us would warrant a public outcry in itself, but it seems the outcry is much greater if the murder is considered to be racially motivated — Pinprick
To me the media’s role in this is more fuel for the fire. — Pinprick
So do you think the media should at least be held partly responsible for what’s now occurring? Should the media’s methods change? — Pinprick
Yet, I think that we cannot change the media. — Number2018
When you write: “the media is partly to blame for the current state of affairs,” you probably underestimate the role of the media in the construction of our social reality. — Number2018
It continuously exercises the excess of dominating creative power, and performs in a machinic, automotive mode, without personal human intentions. — Number2018
Therefore, the media is always entirely to blame for the state of affairs. Practically, we could try to understand how the media functions and to regulate our own degree of involvement and engagement. — Number2018
To answer this, I would like to get back to your OP.Aren’t humans completely in control of what gets covered/reported, and how? — Pinprick
Indeed, the media was swift. Likely, it is possible to represent what happened using the following scheme, dividing it into steps:Regarding the recent murder of George Floyd, the media appeared to be very quick to label the murder as the result of racism. — Pinprick
having media outlets clearly labeled as opinion programming would help. There is a certain air of authority and accuracy that goes along with the term “news” that has now become misleading. — Pinprick
Objectivity cannot seem to be found, and this results in the public being burdened with the need to seek out varying opinions and draw their own conclusions. — Pinprick
3) “Labeling the murder as an act of racism, with no evidence” – the critical point! Note that without this ‘labeling,’ there would not be “the breaking news,” so that 1) and 2) would become pointless. — Number2018
We may think, that steps 1) and 2) at list provide an evidence of existence of a group of responsible humans. Unfortunately, this stereotyped narrative – about racist evil white cop (Step 5) had already existed and in-formed steps 1) and 2). — Number2018
I think I disagree here. Why would video evidence of a cop blatantly killing a person unprovoked not qualify as breaking news? The addition of racism into the equation adds drama and sensationalism, but isn’t needed to further the media’s agenda. — Pinprick
Most likely, you would not ask the New York Stock Exchange broker to make decisions accordingpeople are not powerless or forced to repeat the stereotype. The people involved in the first two steps could have chosen otherwise. Therefore they are still responsible for doing so. — Pinprick
I think that the media is partly to blame for the current state of affairs by labeling the murder an act of racism, with no evidence (at least that I’m aware of) other than the fact that the race of the murderer and victim were different. — Pinprick
Indeed, the media was swift. Likely, it is possible to represent what happened using the following scheme, dividing it into steps:
1) Selection 2) Prioritizing 3) The way of covering/reporting (labelling) 4) Maintaining the created momentum
5) Back-Referencing, so that all previous steps, all that was constructed looks as a set of real facts.
Probably, the selection was made on the base of the corporate policy, as well as aspiration to advance and to shape particular political agenda. The policy is debated and renovated by the small group of big bosses, and it is entirely out of public awareness. — Number2018
Do you think that Minnesota Public Radio reporting was decisive factor in forming theI get most of my news from Minnesota Public Radio, here in Minneapolis. MPR was very much social-justice-forward in their treatment of Floyd's death. Several call-in shows were reserved for black callers; white listeners were invited to not call -- just listen. Their reporters accepted the narrative that police regularly murdered black people -- citing some cases in the Twin Cities and cases in other cities over a few years time. — Bitter Crank
But the cable and broadcast networks--even a few overseas news teams--and major newspapers were all covering the same story in a generally similar way--video of people demonstrating, close-ups of signs, footage of fires, tear gas--all that. — Bitter Crank
Most likely, you would not ask the New York Stock Exchange broker to make decisions according
to some moral or religious system of values. — Number2018
They have to be effective and make money. — Number2018
The critical event on May 25 was captured on video by bystanders and was posted on social media. The community in which the event occurred reacted swiftly with an impromptu march and demonstration, labeling the death of George Floyd as a racist murder by the police. The media I follow picked up on the demonstrations and the rhetoric used. — Bitter Crank
Regarding the recent murder of George Floyd, the media appeared to be very quick to label the murder as the result of racism. — Pinprick
the media is partly to blame for the current state of affairs by labeling the murder an act of racism, with no evidence — Pinprick
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.