I agree. if you’re going to post a dumbshit thread, it’s safer not to post it in the pit.
Can’t you find anyone better than a talking head news reader?
His first link is to a still of Zimmerman juror’s interview with Robin Roberts on GMA. The juror, indeed, appears to be pretty conventionally a woman of color. (I’ve no idea how she identifies herself; I suppose it is possible that she does not so identify. But, if I had to make a guess as to how she identifies herself, I would not imagine, and would in fact be surprised to learn, that it is as a white person.)
The subsequent links are to sources that identify the composition of the Zimmerman jury as “all-white,” which seems amply refuted by noting that this woman was one of those jurors.
So, it does seem that there is some misinformation out there. For those commenters unable to attend to attend the trial, I don’t fault them for relying on a widely reported error (as, of course, Terr’s post also proves). For the media outlets that did have on-site reporters covering the trial, and there were many of those, this does represent significantly poor journalism (if you were in the courtroom, this would not have been an easy mistake to make) and, correspondingly, somewhat undermined credibility.
I don’t care for the term “race hustling,” and it is unfortunate that Terr could not restrain himself from using it, as it diminishes what would otherwise be a slam-dunk for him.
Yeah, Terr, go away. You’re harshing our groupthink circle jerk buzz.
(Edit: In response to Kimmy) It would have been better if it had been a straight-up slam on journalists failing to fact-check and this misleading readers/viewers, and fueling tensions as a result. Instead he resorted to baiting by means of phrases like “race hustlers” and the like, as well as other phrasing that pretty much meant it was destined for the Pit.
Personally, I had no idea what the fuck he was talking about, having not seen any of it. I would like to suggest use of an introductory paragraph next time as a better lead-in.
More edit: The interesting bit is that Zimmerman has been tagged by many people as being white. As I noted in a previous post, by many surveys’ criteria, that could well be true.
Probably not. Last time he tried that, it bit him on the ass.
Maybe. And maybe the words he used were incendiary to some extent. Maybe to a large extent.
But based on the links provided, this doesn’t seem to be just poor fact-checking. The are people using this “fact” as further evidence of racial bias, as a means of advancing a particular cause. I’m not saying such a bias doesn’t exist in general, or that this is an unworthy cause. But this seems at best ignorant and at worst dishonest, and it’s not (at least not in every instance) just poor journalism. It’s editorializing using a false premise. Just because it’s a righteous cause doesn’t make this proper, and it can’t be excused by hand-waving it away as “poor fact-checking.” I’d say there’s a bias in play here for sure, just not the one that seems to be the most popularly accepted one.
Just my opinion, but that’s my assessment of the verdict as well. I believe that blacks do not get the same treatment in our judicial system, and that we should be outraged by such a circumstance. And I believe that the Zimmerman case had zero to do with such a bias. It has just become a given, an undisputed, self-evident fact. Despite the fact that there is no real evidence for such a conclusion.
There is misinformation on the internets and there are reporters who don’t fact check?
I am so disillusioned.
I was trying to get at that with my “fueling tensions” statement and apologize for not being more descriptive.
We should all remember that no cause, however noble, cannot be exploited by an asshole to his personal advantage. That we are reminded of this by an intellectually constipated pissant in no way detracts from its truth.
Got it. I probably wasn’t reading you properly, my bad. My point still stands (not directed at you!) that this is more than just bad reporting. The “fueling tensions” seems deliberate from some, and in these instances, it’s based on a falsehood. IMO, such people don’t get a pass because their cause is righteous. It can set the cause back and helps fuel the closet racists when the national discussion is based on such “facts.”
ETA: “Closet racists” was not directed at Terr, by the way.
After his painful strikeout in the “sign-wielding leftist” thread, it warms the heart to see the little fella keep swinging. It’s just too bad that his rants keep getting relocated to the Pit, where they may not receive the thoughtful consideration and accolades they deserve.
He just seems so angry at us, I’m worried about him.
One too many "not"s here.
Ah, I get your point. I don’t think it’s too hard to find examples of this in just about every situation considering the wide selection of assholes and nuts that populate the Internet, but I agree that its probable usage here by some to fuel their agenda (whether they have a valid broader point or not) is vile.
I’ll also apologize for being agreeable in the Pit. 
Yeah, me too. What came over us? 
I’m not speaking for him, but there are certainly similarities in my views and Terr’s, based on the Zimmerman threads.
I post here, and read far more than I post, because there are entertaining and interesting discussions on a wide range of topics, and also because I like to hear opposing views to my own, as I feel it’s always a good idea to challenge my views.
There’s plenty of parts of this board that don’t talk about politics.
(Also, I’m right and you’re wrong, and it’s my duty to tell you that).
You know, Steophan, I don’t think I’ve ever noticed you in any thread that wasn’t about the Zimmmerman trial.
Just today I’ve posted in a few Pink Floyd related threads, and started one. I post about films and music fairly often, and in GQ when I have an answer. There’s certainly a disproportionate amount in the Zimmerman threads, though.
Looking at your posting history, the overwhelming number are about Zimmmerman, including your very first post. It’s like dead black kids give you a boner.