VegetableMan wrote:
karathraceandherspecialdestiny wrote:
VegetableMan wrote:
karathraceandherspecialdestiny wrote:
Meanwhile, a student from that school is going to trial for his second violent rape, at the tender age of 18.
http://www.fox19.com/2018/12/12/former- ... pe-sodomy/And there are pictures of the students in blackface. It seems to be a pattern of behaviour from boys at this high school:
http://prinniefied.com/wp/2019/01/19/th ... gh-school/http://prinniefied.com/wp/2019/01/20/co ... privilege/Sounds like they're producing real upstanding citizens out of this school.
Terrible stuff, to be sure. But I hope you are not using these cases as justification for the media telling only a part of the story.
I guess that means you missed this article when it was posted earlier in the thread:
This Viral Thread Explains Why The ‘Unedited’ Video Of That Protest Confrontation Is Even WorseThey were being racist the whole time, first against the black Isrealites (acting like apes and making monkey noises at them) and then against the Indigenous marchers. And they were there in the first place to support stripping women of their right to health care, and happily all wearing MAGA hats. So yeah, I feel like I have the whole story now and I have a good idea what kind of boys they are.
I watched all the footage available. Did you? Yes, there was bad behavior all around. Have you heard the homophobic remarks by the black Israelite preacher? Did you hear him using the word 'fa***t?" Did you notice that the preacher was attacking the indigenous protesters for their beliefs, and did you see the shouting that ensued between those groups?
How about you condemn the Israelites for their behavior. And I'd still like to know how you feel about the media leaving out a huge chunk of the story. Are you good with that -- if it suits an agenda with which you agree?
I think they were behaving deplorably and like the nutbars they are, yeah. Does not in any way excuse the way those boys were behaving, and it certainly doesn't excuse how they treated the Indigenous marchers. I don't think the media left out a big chunk, I think the media reported the information as they received it. That's what almost always happens--one perspective on a story is shared with a news agency, they post it, and then they add to the story as new information and other perspectives come to them. They almost never have all the information on a story from the get-go, I thought that was understood by most adults as how reporting the news works.
Scientific research follows a similar pattern--theories change as new information becomes available. The first pass at something is never the definitive pass. We as the readers are supposed to be aware of this and keep it in mind when taking in the news, just as scientists who do research need to keep in mind that their theories can be changed by new information and be flexible to accommodate that progress. We, the news audience, need to be similarly flexible with our perception of news stories, because there's always more info coming.