Another PC reported shooting

[Valuist]

I saw in one of the comments that on Milwaukee TV, they are reporting the suspect as "ethnic". WTF is that? Everyone has ethnicity. Its just a PC way of saying the shooter wasn't white.

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/...180854621.html

[Dahoss9698]

Wouldn't you have been better off linking the "PC reporting" than what you did?

I have no idea if the station did that (and apparently neither do you), but the comments in a yahoo article are usually known for accuracy.

[johnhannibalsmith]

If it really matters one way or the other:

...1:41 p.m.
Authorities have retracted an earlier statement, saying that the suspected shooter is not African-American, but is "ethnic with dark skin."

The suspected shooter is also more than 200 lbs, but may not be as heavy-set as authorities said earlier...

http://www.todaystmj4.com/news/local/175145691.html

[FantasticDan]

Just so I'm clear.. the angle you find most notable in this tragedy (which I'm assuming, since you made it the thread title) is that you read an anonymous comment from someone who claimed that a TV station reported the assailant somewhere along the story as "ethnic".

Wow.

Wait a sec.. just realized I was on PA OT, so I withdraw my Wow in favor of a..

[Valuist]

Originally Posted by Dahoss9698

Wouldn't you have been better off linking the "PC reporting" than what you did?

I have no idea if the station did that (and apparently neither do you), but the comments in a yahoo article are usually known for accuracy.

Yahoo comments are usually more accurate than their stories.

[JustRalph]

On twitter they are blaming the Governor for not "doing more" to protect the people of Wisconsin

It was a domestic. Guy went after his estranged wife

Before it's over Paul Ryan will be frog marched......

[Dahoss9698]

Originally Posted by Valuist

Yahoo comments are usually more accurate than their stories.

You avoided my question.

Why not just link to what you were talking about? I mean, if true there has to be a link right?

And even if true, isn't the story the shooting? Who cares what one station might have reported?

I read an interesting post today about how "this joint is good about scrutinizing sources & HEAVY biases." So your source right now is a comment under a yahoo article.

Could very well be true, but even the most biased person might agree that it's a questionable source.

[johnhannibalsmith]

Originally Posted by Dahoss9698

...

Could very well be true, but even the most biased person might agree that it's a questionable source.

The local rag that I linked to reported it as such, but they are reporting it is having come from authorities. So yeah, it appears as though it was reported that way locally, but no, this wasn't the media selectively reporting the race as they saw fit. By the accounts I've read, their use of "ethnic" came straight from the po-po. In a related story, four or five people are dead again.

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally Posted by FantasticDan

Wait a sec.. just realized I was on PA OT, so I withdraw my Wow in favor of a..

I don't understand the criticism of PA OT as a whole. Are you saying a substantial portion of the country doesn't hold similar views as to the ones expressed in PA OT?

After all, you expect Romney to get at least well over 40% of the vote, do you not? Does that not represent a substantial portion of the population?

[Dahoss9698]

Originally Posted by johnhannibalsmith

The local rag that I linked to reported it as such, but they are reporting it is having come from authorities. So yeah, it appears as though it was reported that way locally, but no, this wasn't the media selectively reporting the race as they saw fit. By the accounts I've read, their use of "ethnic" came straight from the po-po. In a related story, four or five people are dead again.

The dead people are apparently irrelevant.

How it was reported is what matters. Yay!

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally Posted by Dahoss9698

The dead people are apparently irrelevant.

How it was reported is what matters. Yay!

It was either you or someone else who came at me with this kind of thinking when I created a similar thread a couple of months ago. I didn't understand it then, and I don't understand it now.

Why the criticism because someone chooses to explore a certain angle related to a story?

I think it's pretty well understood that none of us are happy this shooting took place and people are dead. And it's also pretty well understood that these people are tragically dead, and there isn't much to debate about that. So, unless one of us is personally connected to this tragedy (and I pray none of us here are), why should one be criticized for wanting to discuss how this tragedy is being reported?

[Dahoss9698]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

It was either you or someone else who came at me with this kind of thinking when I created a similar thread a couple of months ago. I didn't understand it then, and I don't understand it now.

Why the criticism because someone chooses to explore a certain angle related to a story?

I think it's pretty well understood that none of us are happy this shooting took place and people are dead. And it's also pretty well understood that these people are tragically dead, and there isn't much to debate about that. So, unless one of us is personally connected to this tragedy (and I pray none of us here are), why should one be criticized for wanting to discuss how this tragedy is being reported?

Race baiting might be good for business, but I don't see how it promotes intelligent discussion.

This ignores of course that the original "source" for this thread is a comment under an article on yahoo.

I'm genuinely curious what kind of a discussion you are looking for here. I mean, we can all agree that the media for the most part is a joke.

It'd be like starting a new thread everytime Romney flip flops on an issue. Redundant, no?

[bigmack]

This is how it was actually reported:


http://www.620wtmj.com/news/local/175145691.html

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally Posted by Dahoss9698

Race baiting might be good for business, but I don't see how it promotes intelligent discussion.

This ignores of course that the original "source" for this thread is a comment under an article on yahoo.

I'm genuinely curious what kind of a discussion you are looking for here. I mean, we can all agree that the media for the most part is a joke.

It'd be like starting a new thread everytime Romney flip flops on an issue. Redundant, no?

I don't see race baiting as good for business. Then again, I don't really see this thread as race baiting. If I did, I might have had the inclination to remove it at first.

And no, I don't agree that we all agree the media for the most part is a joke. A lot of people believe the media to be quite fair when it comes to the reporting of crimes and politicians.

[johnhannibalsmith]

Originally Posted by Dahoss9698

The dead people are apparently irrelevant.

How it was reported is what matters. Yay!

I can understand, to a degree, criticisms of how things are reported. Lately it seems the way a story is reported is in fact as much a story as the story itself. In the case of tragedy like this one, where race or ethnicity or whatever isn't exactly front and center (as opposed to Zimmerman v Martin, for example), it does seem like maybe we needn't be quite so quick to jump all over "media bias" since in this case and others like it, the media isn't necessarily creating it, and frankly, it isn't all that relevant.

I'm part of the pissed off honky male cracka gringo sect that has grown tired of being labeled, or having others in my category labeled, as racists if we so much as dare to speak or express any opinion or feeling about any subject that involves any person of any color or has hyphens in their official title to differentiate themselves from being generic americans. It (the label "racist") has become, to borrow another completely meaningless phrase, "epidemic" in this country to head straight in that direction - a topic that has been beaten to death here and elsewhere.

Unfortunately, I get the sense at times, that those in my sect of honky white cracka men gringo victims are beginning to go just a wee bit overboard with our own sensitivities on the subject and are getting almost, well nearly almost, as bad as those that we rightfully, proudly, and divinely scream against. We're looking for racist anti-racists behind every corner now, a little overly eager to turn everything into an example of "political correctness run amok", much like the counterbalance wants to make us all out to be "political incorrectness run amok".

It's okay to be the same amount of measured in how we display our own dissatisfaction with bullshit race baiters as we expect them to be in not immediately linking every casual happenstance and utterance to race.