In Tulsa, gas station clerk Isaias Jones (far left) called the police and reported that a masked man had walked into the gas station where he was employed, and, brandishing a gun, threatened to shoot him if he didn’t empty the register and hand over the cash. Jones did as he was ordered, of course. Surveillance cameras confirmed the account, but eventually the truth emerged, and it was both unethical and ridiculous.
The robber, Steven Jones (no relation to the clerk) was caught in three days and immediately spilled the metaphorical beans. He told investigators that a woman named Alyia Locke, a mutual friend of the two Joneses, persuaded Steven to rob the gas station because her friend the clerk, was feeling tired and wanted to leave work early. Locke was arrested on an outstanding warrant regarding an unrelated matter and confirmed the story with the texts between herself and the two men as proof. Police finally arrested the clerk, who confessed that he had indeed asked Alyia Locke to find someone to rob the gas station.
Because he was tired.
And needed an excuse to leave early.
What’s really infuriating about this nonsense is that none of the news accounts reveal whether poor, tired Isaias at least got to go home early on the day of the robbery. At least then the fiasco wouldn’t be a total loss…
On another only tangentially matter…here’s a section of one of the news accounts about the episode: “Surveillance cameras confirmed the clerk’s version of the events, but the footage also helped police identify the robber, and when they managed to apprehend them, they learned that there was more to this case than they originally believed…”
Who’s “them”? Apparently it’s the clerk, no? Why is he “them”? The police are “they” three times in the same sentence. Here’s another news item, also from Oklahoma: “Oklahoma City police responded to a shooting involving a two-year-old on Sunday evening. The Oklahoma City Police Department said the child found a gun, presumably from their parents, and shot themselves in the leg.” This happened at a motel near Southeast 29th Street and South Interstate 35 Service Road in Oklahoma City.”
What’s going on in Oklahoma? In journalism? Have the reflexively woke now decided that obvious pronouns identifying single individuals are taboo, and everyone had to be a “them,” so we have to live with rhetorical monstrosities like “shot themselves in the leg”?
Ethics Alarms 
What is truly confusing is the on-air report embedded in the story uses singular pronouns to describe the child. So, my mind simply boggles at the incoherent reporting.
jvb
Maybe these journalists graduated from LaGuardia Community College.
Having lived in Oklahoma for 5+ years, I can understand the Tulsa article but the OKC article, not so much. The only plausible explanations I can offer are that the copy editor(s) went to the same “woke” J-school or the papers are slavishly devoted to the AP Style Manual, or both.
I can see using “they/them” for a child victim as a way to try to protect the identity of the child. It would be silly to do that, since anyone who might guess who the child is would be able to do so without the gender reveal. (I don’t think that’s the paper’s reason, but it’s the only reason that comes close to making any sense to me. If it’s bad to misgender someone, don’t you risk doing it more by using “they”?)