I just had to flee my TV.
On CNN just now, “New Day” interrupted its coverage of the ambush and murder of five police officers last night to go to a Minnesota demonstration in response to the police shooting of Philando Castile . The girl friend and family of Castile were front and center; in the background, along with a throng of African-Americans (exclusively) we heard a woman weeping loudly and uncontrollably. (“Hey, Joe, see if you can make that sobbing as loud as possible. This is great!”)
The segment went on and on, longer, in fact, than any segment previously shown regarding the deaths of the Dallas police officers. We were told by the angry demonstrators that Castile was murdered (undetermined at this time, in fact), that “everything was on the video” (the video began after the shooting) and that local officials were incapable of fairly investigating. We were made to understand that the shooting was racially motivated (there is, at this time, no evidence to support this.) Typical of the whole scene was the statement made and supported by several individuals in the protest, that the coronor had ruled the death of Castile a “homicide,” so this means that the police officer must be charged with murder. Crowd: “Yes!”, “Uh-huh,” “That’s right!” Interviewer Chris Cuomo: “____” This is how you make all of America more ignorant, CNN. “Homicide” means only that Castile died from being shot: he was killed; he did npt die of accidental or natural causes. It does not mean that he was illegally shot, or murdered. Cuomo had an obligation to correct them, and if he thought that it would be too “insensitive” to correct misinformation being broadcast to millions, then he shouldn’t do the interview, or is in the wrong profession.
I suppose that there is always the chance that Cuomo doesn’t know that homicide and murder are not synonymous. There is a lot he doesn’t know.
To reiterate yesterday’s post: this is not news, but sensationalism and exploitation. It misinforms viewers and warps public perception. It is unethical, incompetent, cynical journalism, and it puts police officers at risk. To engage in this immediately after reporting on the assassination of five police officers shows the complete lack of decency and professionalism on the part of all involved on CNN, especially anchor Chris Cuomo.
Last night, Turner Movie Classics introduced its showing of “Network” by noting that what was regarded as obvious satire in 1976—a news department warping its reporting for sensationalism and ratings–had become more or less the norm in 2016. What was satire in 1976 is tragedy today.
I walked away from the TV when CNN began today’s round of biasing and divisive victim porn. Broadcast journalism will not reform until everyone walks away, in the interest of minimizing race hate and a functioning law enforcement system.
33 thoughts on “Update: CNN Is Doing It Again”
Well, CNN has egg on it’s face now after what happened in Dallas last night. Next step, Obama and Hillary again calling for increased gun control.
Of course. Like the night follows day.
They might do better to call for increased hate control. Objecting should not sound like inciting the mob. Dallas is the other shoe falling for rabble rousing and I hold them partly responsible.
Anybody watch Obama’s reaction to the shootings? He says he is “…deeply saddened by this tragedy…” and called it “…unacceptable…”.
They are his fault as much as anyone else’s. He’s spent seven years as this nation’s divider in chief. He has blue blood on his hands.
I agree. I’ll go so far as to say he is the single individual MOST responsible for the collapse of race relations and respect for law enforcement in this country.
He keeps this up and maybe his own LEO bodyguards will pull an Indira Gandhi.
You do know you can get visited by the FBI for making a comment like that, right?
OK, maybe that was a reach. My main point was that law enforcement is likely to start to have ZERO trust in their civilian leadership if this kind of thing keeps up.
this nation’s divider in chief
Read it, and weep.
Watch this become the justification for more anti-Second Amendment propaganda.
It didn’t already? Like before the bullet casings hit the ground and bodies turned cold?
The best bit was the poor shmuck who was open carrying and everyone had a hissy-fit over that and after his image was blasted internationally as a suspect or person of interest he calmly turned himself in. Video of him during the shooting shows him standing or milling around in confusion with all the other protesters as police go by him *without a concern for him open carrying*.
(I think casual open carry is a dumb practice by the way, legal, but dumb)
Open carry of rifles in an urban setting makes no sense to me, and comes across as threatening, rogue-ish, and terroristic. But open carry of pistols, anywhere, is fine by me.
I actually thought he was carrying a side-arm until I saw the news last night. Believe it or not, his lawyer is claiming racism for his being detained.
It’s one of those “I don’t think anyone ought to actually do it, but I also don’t think it’s something that ought be illegal also”
You betcha! Surprised it hasn’t already started.
It’s almost like someone somewhere wants to keep egging on hatred and anger and violence.
What groups stand to benefit from exacerbating chaos and crises?
hmmm, I’ll give you three guesses, and the first two don’t count.
It won’t benefit cops and it won’t benefit black people (well, it won’t benefit the citizenry at all, let alone just black people).
Lemme see……Presidential candidates?
The link does not link to the story you intend it to link to.
Not sure how I screwed that up, but its fixed. Thanks.
Wonder if any of the slain officers hesitated pulling the trigger on the black suspect, because…well you know.
Jack, you described the cable propcastmosphere succinctly and accurately in an earlier post: “tragedy porn.” Perhaps some tweaking of the First Amendment is in order – after all the guns that aren’t under the control of the infallible plutobureaucracy are banned and confiscated.
I’ve long since walked away. I almost never watch TV news, except local news, and even that, very rarely.
There is no point yelling at the television, which is the inevitable result of watching the news. At some point, we just have to stop the self-flagellation and find some other way to be informed.
Cuomo is a transparent cretin, and Hanlon’s Razor cannot save him in my humble opinion.
I wish I could say I walked away from news. But really I’ve just stopped watching the Nightly National Left-wing Activism shows. Regardless of whether or not they accidentally mentioned something newsworthy.
I stopped watching even Fox News for awhile there, referring to it as “The Trump SuperPAC Channel.” I am still watching less and less of all the programs that are supposed to be factual news, fair analysis, and balanced commentary. They’re all into hard-sell propaganda broadcasting now – what I call the propcastmosphere – all in service to one plutobureaucracy (bureaucracy in service to plutocrats; the little people be damned and suck it) or another. Nowadays, for me it’s the radio and Larry Elder, Mark Levin, Michael Medved and Rush Limbaugh. With occasional sit-ins at Prager University, and drive-by glances at videos by Bill…Whipple? Whittle?
By the way, in light of EA’s discussions relating to drone strikes against criminals, it is useful to note, that, though not a full on drone strike, the method to take down the Dallas killer is definitely kissing cousins to a drone strike.
Agreed. However, there is a bit of difference between surprise-bombing a terrorist leader who is an American citizen without due process and ending a gun fight with a fortified and well-armed assassin. Don’t think I’d be real thrilled about Hellfire strikes on U-Hauls on I-35 suspected of hauling drugs.
If your concern is about possible damage to I35, I assure you several drone strikes could easily do millions of dollars of improvement.
But I recall discussing drone strikes against criminals within the limitations of due process. I specifically recall the context being Chris Dorner and whether or not holed up in a shoot out with cops that the droning of him would be fine.
Anybody wants to take a few pot-shots at 35 as it goes through Austin, I would have no objection. “Two birds” actually.
Within the context of due process, or possibly more appropriately, self-defense, I have no problem with drone strikes. Dorner was offered an opportunity to surrender, he chose not to. He died. Q.E.D.