SUV runs through crowd at Christmas parade in Waukesha WI... (2 Viewers)

baarbogast

Hall-of-Famer
Joined
Jan 30, 2002
Messages
5,329
Reaction score
3,167
Age
56
Online
To somewhat defend the media, if his name isn’t mentioned then he loses his fame, so to speak.
 

Saint by the Bay

Administrator
Staff member
Administrator
Joined
Sep 2, 1999
Messages
32,381
Reaction score
19,555
Age
48
Location
Houston
Online
Why are we blaming the poor car? When someone uses a gun to shoot up a work place or a concert, we usually blame the person. What makes ramming a car into a pile of people different?

Also, why should we stop at blaming the media when the media is feeding off of politics. The media and politicians (and their handlers) go hand and glove in this awful blame game.

We can blame the media all we want, and with our spending dollars we can shrink their influence, the same can be recommended regarding politicians I suppose.

Either way, like you said, this country is headed in a wild direction.

Most of what you said had absolutely nothing to do with what I said, but I'll address the small part that did (first paragraph).

When have we ever not discussed it that way when someone is hit by a car? We always say they were hit by a car. The detailed reporting I've seen goes into the driver, but headlines and tweets (another gutter form of communication that has destroyed the fabric of the country) generally are top-line views. So saying "three people were hit by a car" is completely consistent with how we have discussed these situations since Henry Ford got going.
 

Saint by the Bay

Administrator
Staff member
Administrator
Joined
Sep 2, 1999
Messages
32,381
Reaction score
19,555
Age
48
Location
Houston
Online
To somewhat defend the media, if his name isn’t mentioned then he loses his fame, so to speak.

Except his name is. His picture is all over the place. The video of him on the guy's ring Doorbell is all over the place. Even TMZ has been running his rap sheet. I don't even watch the news and I know all about this dude just from a few clips, all from what's considered MSM, sources I've seen. They have made him, his criminal record, and his image "famous".

I mean, here is an article from the day after it happened.


The driver has been identified as Darrell E. Brooks, 39, of Milwaukee, Thompson said Monday afternoon at a news conference.

Police have recommended five charges of intentional homicide. Prosecutors in the Waukesha County District Attorney's Office said they will review the matter with police and expect to file initial charges Tuesday. Brooks will make his initial court appearance Tuesday afternoon.

Brooks was out on bail, according to court records and the Milwaukee County District Attorney's office.

Brooks posted a $1,000 bond on November 11 in relation to charges including domestic abuse. That incident also involved Brooks being accused of using a car to cause an injury, according to a criminal complaint.

Brooks also has an outstanding arrest warrant in Nevada in an unrelated case in August 2016 for which he was arrested and allegedly jumped bail, according to Sara Johns, Washoe County Sheriff's Department spokesperson. CNN has reached out to a previous attorney for Brooks with no response.

I'm baffled by what problem people have with this reporting.
 

El Caliente

More than 15K posts served!
VIP Subscribing Member
VIP Contributor
Joined
Aug 6, 2011
Messages
33,131
Reaction score
48,157
Age
36
Location
70002 via 92243 via 48109 via 92122 via 70119
Offline
Most of what you said had absolutely nothing to do with what I said, but I'll address the small part that did (first paragraph).

When have we ever not discussed it that way when someone is hit by a car? We always say they were hit by a car. The detailed reporting I've seen goes into the driver, but headlines and tweets (another gutter form of communication that has destroyed the fabric of the country) generally are top-line views. So saying "three people were hit by a car" is completely consistent with how we have discussed these situations since Henry Ford got going.
I think one day you and I will have a major disagreement, but today isn’t that day brother.

This wasn’t some every day car accident. There is nothing normal about what happened, so why address it like it was a normal accident?

Did the car hit the people under its own volition? When someone shoots into a crowd of people do we say “man fires into crowd”, or do we say “gun fires into crowd?” If you feel we are going into semantics here, then so be it, we can leave it there.

I agree with you on Social Media, while it sucks the power from main sources of media, it also spews that much more misinformation into the world.
 
Last edited:

brandon8283

Probably a drive-by
Joined
Jul 11, 2009
Messages
8,432
Reaction score
10,463
Age
38
Offline
Did the car hit the people under its own volition? When someone shoots into a crowd of people do we say “man fires into crowd”, or do we say “gun fires into crowd?” If you feel we are going into semantics here, then so be it, we can leave it there.
This is such a stupid argument just so you can find something to rail against the media about.

A man hit people with a car. The people were hit by a car. A man in a car.

No one is trying to hide the fact that there was a man driving the car. It’s inane.
 

Xeno

Practice Squad
Joined
Oct 5, 2013
Messages
1,054
Reaction score
2,999
Age
32
Location
Lafayette
Offline
This is such a stupid argument just so you can find something to rail against the media about.

A man hit people with a car. The people were hit by a car. A man in a car.

No one is trying to hide the fact that there was a man driving the car. It’s inane.

I agree with you. We generally say something like, "A car ran through a crowd."

Where I disagree is your last statement. WAPO's headline outright said, "Caused by an SUV." That's garbage writing and garbage journalism. English is already an imprecise language and that headline is just trying to obfuscate what happened.
 

brandon8283

Probably a drive-by
Joined
Jul 11, 2009
Messages
8,432
Reaction score
10,463
Age
38
Offline
that headline is just trying to obfuscate what happened.
How?

Do you think people who read that headline were confused and thought maybe this was a terrible case of a new autonomous vehicle that became self-aware?

Who do you think is being confused by that headline?
 

Xeno

Practice Squad
Joined
Oct 5, 2013
Messages
1,054
Reaction score
2,999
Age
32
Location
Lafayette
Offline
How?

Do you think people who read that headline were confused and thought maybe this was a terrible case of a new autonomous vehicle that became self-aware?

Who do you think is being confused by that headline?

Nobody is. That's why WAPO was forced to take the article down after massive backlash overnight. Even they know it was a purposely obtuse way to write their headline. "Caused by man in SUV," would have been a much better way to write it.
 

brandon8283

Probably a drive-by
Joined
Jul 11, 2009
Messages
8,432
Reaction score
10,463
Age
38
Offline
Nobody is. That's why WAPO was forced to take the article down after massive backlash overnight. Even they know it was a purposely obtuse way to write their headline. "Caused by man in SUV," would have been a much better way to write it.
So no one was confused. Therefore, the communication was clear and in no way misleading.

So why were people outraged?
 

El Caliente

More than 15K posts served!
VIP Subscribing Member
VIP Contributor
Joined
Aug 6, 2011
Messages
33,131
Reaction score
48,157
Age
36
Location
70002 via 92243 via 48109 via 92122 via 70119
Offline
I agree with you. We generally say something like, "A car ran through a crowd."

Where I disagree is your last statement. WAPO's headline outright said, "Caused by an SUV." That's garbage writing and garbage journalism. English is already an imprecise language and that headline is just trying to obfuscate what happened.
I feel the “a car ran through a crowd” title sells short what actually happened (gives it the impression that this is something that happens every day), which leads into your next paragraph (and speaks to what so many people take issue with). There is a selling short of the action. The car didn’t cause those deaths, the man driving it did.
 
Last edited:

brandon8283

Probably a drive-by
Joined
Jul 11, 2009
Messages
8,432
Reaction score
10,463
Age
38
Offline
I feel “a car ran through a crowd” title sells short what actually happened, which leads into your next paragraph (and speaks to what so many people take issue with). There is a selling short of the action. The car didn’t cause those deaths, the man driving it did.
What motivation would the media have in underselling this tragedy?
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Users who are viewing this thread

 

New Orleans Saints Twitter Feed

 

Headlines

Top Bottom