I guess we’d have to ask the hoodie-wearing marchers and speech givers. My guess is that racial-profiling is the biggest part of it.
People would have shrugged and said “There Fox goes again.” And Fox would have claimed it was an “error”, not have admitted wrongdoing or punished anyone - lying is their function, after all.
It may not be significant at all, but since Z’man was probably not going to be charged at all, then the edits, then the charge, how does this align with the edits?
In other words, the flames may have been raging but public outcry hadn’t reached crescendo, at least in order to force an arrest.
And I believe it did force an arrest (public outcry that is, not the edits) But the edits may have certainly helped in that regard.
We’re talking about the journalists who chose the picture, not “marchers and speech givers.” That picture showed Martin wearing the hoodie he was killed in, and there’s been much discussion over whether that garment contributed to what happened. There’s no reason to invent nonsense about symbolism.
You get to decide what we’re talking about?
The only thing nonsensical is that you want to claim that wearing a hoodie is coincidental.
I am telling you what we were talking about. You made some comments about why news organizations were using a picture of Martin where he was wearing a hoodie, and I pointed out some obvious reasons you had overlooked. You then started talking about marchers and speech-givers, which has nothing to do with why a particular picture was used.
Somebody else brought up pictures and you brought up the hoodie.
I’d be more than happy for it to have stayed on NBCs public investigation into their little “mistake”.
I am not talking about who brought up the subjects. I was saying that your comment was not responsive to what I had posted about the use of the photo.
Do you have anything else to say on the subject?
You mean besides the fact that the public investigation still isn’t very public? I’m still hoping somebody who wants to defend NBC (and I think there are probably a few) will be able to provide more.
On the subject of selective edits though I actually do. I wasn’t familiar with the fact that the reported transcripts of the 911 call left off the “O.K” when first presented to the public.
I think it’s clear at this point that they’re not going to announce anything else.
Didn’t Zimmerman say he’d stop following Martin, and then immediately change his mind and tell police he’d meet them somewhere else?
I see how it works now…
I don’t know.
I’m not surprised they are not making the name of the fired employee public.
Actually it sounds to me like that blogger is just whining he hadn’t heard one particular piece of the transcript even though the full transcript has been online for quite a while. I don’t know what the relevance of that is supposed to be.
…and I’m not surprised the rest of the MSM are giving them the cover to not provide any more info at all.
For them to call it a “mistake” and for them not to fix a “mistake” like that immediately is …well its something.
Er… they did fix it and have done far more to make up for it then Fox News ever has whenever one of their “mistakes” was exposed.
Also, how has “the MSM” been covering this up?
Fox News has done a number of reports on this.