When I first heard about Trayvon Martin, I was aghast that George Zimmerman wasn't in jail awaiting trial. There's this picture of a genial black teen who was armed with Skittles and Tea beside a mugshot of Zimmerman. There was the recording of Zimmerman following Trayvon even afer the 911 operator told him that the police could take it from here. Then there was the fact that Trayvon was dead shortly thereafter. Wow! That's pretty damning. How is it the police let him go?
Then more of the story came to light. A witness reported that Trayvon was beating Zimmerman, resulting in a gash to the head and a bloody - maybe broken - nose. The police did arrest Zimmerman but let him go after they had interviewed the witnesses and reviewed the tapes. Trayvon had been suspended from school, had been caught in possession of marijuana, and had - according to Zimmerman's father - threatened to kill the neighborhood watch captain. Moreover, the screams on the second 911 call were those of Zimmerman, not Trayvon.
Though weeks old when it broke on the national scene, the press told only the first half of the story. And that half could not help but stoke racial resentments. Was such accidental or intentional? This is not the first time the media has jumped on a racially charged story and initially reported it in such a manner. Recall Duke lacrosse. Or the arrest of the professor in Massachusetts that led to the Beer Summit.
What really bugs me is that I bought into the story. I believed the reports and, once again, felt misled. I was given just enough facts so I'd come to a conclusion that the reporter wanted even if that wasn't necessarily the truth.
2 comments:
I'm afraid you may have made the same mistake twice Dave. You jumped to a conclusion before knowing all the facts.
I believe it would be best if EVERYONE refrained from "buying" into stories until ALL the FACTS have been presented and our justice system as had the opportunity to do it's job. For instance,I'm not sure what being suspended from school for possession of trace amounts of marijuana really proves? And I'm also not so certain if I would be taking the word of the shooter's father as fact unless maybe he is willing to speak under oath. Moreover, the screams heard on the 911 tapes are very unlikely to be that of Zimmerman according to multiple experts willing to testify in court. It really bugs me when information is present as fact in order to sway my views.
You have somehow taken the mistakes of the media and assigned them to me. It was the MEDIA that jumped to conclusions. It was the MEDIA that didn't get all the facts. You and I agree that this should be decided in court, not the nightly news. Yes?
Post a Comment