Trayvon Martin and The Media

Some of you may have heard this week of the tragic shooting of a teenager, Trayvon Martin, by a neighborhood watchman named George Zimmerman. Zimmerman claims that he witnessed suspicious behavior and that he had a physical altercation that warranted the use of deadly force. Zimmerman was not arrested because Florida has a "Stand Your Ground" law, stating that a person is authorized to use deadly force in self defense when there is a reasonable belief of a threat. As of today, Zimmerman remains a free man. Some politicians and commentators in the media have suggested that the police may have not conducted itself appropriately and that there is a particular racial aspect to the case.

Whether or not Zimmerman will be charged or is guilty of murder or manslaughter is not for me to decide. My focus in this blog post is on the out of control media. Even if everything that comes out in any news story covering this case turns out to be true in the end, I can't stand to see is how the media jumps to conclusions and declares a person guilty in the court of public opinion. Time and time again, we see cases where many in the media act less like journalists and more like an editorial board hiding behind the cover of a "news" banner. And then comes the inevitable stream of "new" information that is released-- oohhh! the plot thickens! To everyone that reads this blog at this school, this should be more than familiar: The Sandusky Scandal. The rush to judgement cost Joe Paterno his job(he should have been placed on administrative leave, pending the investigation), and the school's reputation has been heavily damaged. I am not trying to say that Sandusky is innocent of all charges-- the evidence in the grand jury report is damning. But for us to function as a society, I think we have to let our constitutionally guaranteed right to due process run it's course. It may be an ugly truth, but Jerry Sandusky is as much entitled to his rights as you or I am. Hopefully I am never placed in one of these situations where I do have to let the judicial system decide my fate, but if I was I would certainly want what I am constitutionally entitled to.

If the people concerned about Trayvon Martin really want justice, they should want the verdict carried out the right way-- In the court room, not the news room.

Sources:

ABC News timeline of events
CS Monitor why George Zimmerman hasn't been arrested.

The Rhetoric of "Real Time"

Whenever I get the chance, I like to watch "Real Time With Bill Maher" on HBO. The concept of the show isn't all that original-- Bill Maher and his panel of 3 or 4 guests discussing the biggest news stories of the week-- but the show always features a robust conversation with differing viewpoints. For those who have never seen the show, the main portion features Bill Maher, the host, and a panel of guests, usually a liberal, an independent, and a conservative commentator. While the panel may be "fair and balanced", Maher himself is unabashedly liberal.

What makes Maher's show different from a program like "Hannity", which would probably be the conservative equivalent to "Real Time", is that the people on the show have their opinons respected. A few weeks ago, one of Maher's guests was Grover Norquist, who is the president for "Americans for Tax Reform", which is a very conservative political lobbying group. While Maher completely disagreed with virtually everything Norquist said, he always gave him the opportunity to speak his mind and never interrupted or cut him off from speaking. Compare this with Sean Hannity, who claims that Barack Obama used to be affiliated with known terrorists and probably has never had a non-conservative view on his show.

Granted, I sometimes feel that Maher can take it too far. Last season he did a show where he said that those who go to college and are getting a degree in something other than computer science or engineering are doing "bullshit." I got his point about how some college degrees don't necessarily prepare students for work in the 21st century, but his argument rang totally false when I found out that he got a degree in English from Cornell.  Despite this one complaint, the show is informative, intelligent, and immensely entertaining.

Sources:

-Bill Maher and Grover Norquist
-Bill Maher on College

Vote "Kony" For President!!!

I first heard of Joseph Kony, and the Lord's Resistance Army(LRA), in October 2011, when I read in the Washington Post that President Obama had authorized the deployment of 100 SOF operators to Uganda to kill or capture Kony and crush his army. Just this past week, the video "Kony 2012", produced by a non-profit group called "Invisible Children Inc.", went viral and was the talk on the news and in social media. The purpose of the film is to inform people around the world about Joseph Kony and the atrocities he has committed (Such as the use of child soldiers). While the intentions of the film are certainly noble, it oversimplifies the serious problems taking place in the region and routinely glosses over relevant facts.

Most notably, Joseph Kony has not been in Uganda for 6 years. Both him and his army retreated from Uganda after a number of military offenses by the Ugandan Army in 2006 and are most likely located in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, south Sudan, and parts of the Central African Republic. This is only mentioned in passing in the film. Also, saying that he has over 30,000 child soldiers at his disposal is also disingenuous: the current LRA numbers most likely in the hundreds, not the thousands. Additionally, the Ugandan Army has also been accused of some of the same types of atrocities that Kony and his army are most notorious. The Ugandan government can also hardly be called "democratic"when its legislature is currently considering a bill that makes homosexuality punishable by life in prison (originally it was to be a capital offense punishable by death).

All of this brings us to the question of "Why did this video go viral?" I think it's because people want to feel that they are connected to a cause bigger than themselves. Devoting oneself to a cause to help those less fortunate around the world is extremely noble. But I think that in this day and age, people feel that making a difference is only one click away. That by reposting or retweeting this link, they have helped to capture a war criminal. This satisfaction is false. Changing the world--really making a difference--is extremely hard. If it wasn't, everyone would be able to do it and it would lose its importance. 

It's too bad that it only takes slick production values and Facebook to make a video popular. If people turned on the news once in a while, they would know that atrocities are already taking place in Syria as we speak.

Sources:

-Foreign Policy Magazine Blog
-Huffington Post Article focusing on criticism of "Kony 2012"
-BBC article about Anti-Homosexual bill in Uganda