Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums
Sign in to follow this  
lictor616

Typical Media anti White Bias-

Recommended Posts

(http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,573826,00.html?test=latestnews) (copy paste link in browser)

also try:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2384087/posts

"Arkansas Anchorwoman's Face Shattered 'Like an Egg' During Attack"

the wonders of the "colored brother"

snip--

"LITTLE ROCK, Ark. — One blow ruined her smile and others crushed the middle of her face, but the attack on television personality Anne Pressly didn't end until after her jaw was forced to the back of her head and cut off blood flow to her brain, a medical examiner said Tuesday."

A black savage raped, horribly disfigured and robbed a white woman... does news about the story include the word "hate" or "racism" or "bigotry"... ahahahaha! of course not!

This is just another incident that will not be described in the SPLC’s Intelligence Report as a hate crime of course...

and actually I'm ready to bet that if it ever gets discovered that this white woman rejected the black man's advances, that SHE'D be the one called a "hater" or "bigot" by the reptilian like prostitutes who manage our press.

my god, I weep for the future.

Edited by lictor616

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,573826,00.html?test=latestnews) (copy paste link in browser)

also try:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2384087/posts

"Arkansas Anchorwoman's Face Shattered 'Like an Egg' During Attack"

the wonders of the "colored brother"

snip--

"LITTLE ROCK, Ark. — One blow ruined her smile and others crushed the middle of her face, but the attack on television personality Anne Pressly didn't end until after her jaw was forced to the back of her head and cut off blood flow to her brain, a medical examiner said Tuesday."

A black savage raped, horribly disfigured and robbed a white woman... does news about the story include the word "hate" or "racism" or "bigotry"... ahahahaha! of course not!

This is just another incident that will not be described in the SPLC’s Intelligence Report as a hate crime of course...

and actually I'm ready to bet that if it ever gets discovered that this white woman rejected the black man's advances, that SHE'D be the one called a "hater" or "bigot" by the reptilian like prostitutes who manage our press.

my god, I weep for the future.

Again, you haven't provided any evidence. We're looking now at about 5 or 6 examples I would count where you're asked for evidence and you don't provide it. Instead, you constantly cry about 'political correctness' and 'media bias'. You're pretty clearly just grasping at things and running away when they're shown to be wrong, or to not support your point.

We're looking for anti White bias in the media, where black-on-white crime isn't treated as white-on-black crime. The white-on-black crimes that you highlighted received national coverage because law enforcement indicated that they were race-based murders by people acting on ideology.

You provided 4 examples so far, none of them showing your point. I have shown why, but you mostly have switched the argument or moved on to get new examples.

This example is odd because the person in question seems to have received national coverage from Fox News, so I don't understand why you used it as an example.

You also tried to provide some statistics on crime, which I responded to - to no acknowledgment from you.

How many times do I have to prove you wrong before you stop crying about media bias, and political correctness, and admit that you don't base your opinions on facts ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again, you haven't provided any evidence. We're looking now at about 5 or 6 examples I would count where you're asked for evidence and you don't provide it. Instead, you constantly cry about 'political correctness' and 'media bias'. You're pretty clearly just grasping at things and running away when they're shown to be wrong, or to not support your point.

We're looking for anti White bias in the media, where black-on-white crime isn't treated as white-on-black crime. The white-on-black crimes that you highlighted received national coverage because law enforcement indicated that they were race-based murders by people acting on ideology.

You provided 4 examples so far, none of them showing your point. I have shown why, but you mostly have switched the argument or moved on to get new examples.

This example is odd because the person in question seems to have received national coverage from Fox News, so I don't understand why you used it as an example.

You also tried to provide some statistics on crime, which I responded to - to no acknowledgment from you.

How many times do I have to prove you wrong before you stop crying about media bias, and political correctness, and admit that you don't base your opinions on facts ?

wow,

it a fox employee is murdered you'd expect coverage... but still the coverage has been nothign liek the duke case or any other eminently less atrocious "hatecrime"

her parents here:

deplore the media for not "probing further into the issue": saying that this was more then just "a robbery gone bad" that racial elements were completely ignored...

of course none of this you will concede, you don't want to admit that you're completely biased..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

wow,

it a fox employee is murdered you'd expect coverage... but still the coverage has been nothign liek the duke case or any other eminently less atrocious "hatecrime"

her parents here:

deplore the media for not "probing further into the issue": saying that this was more then just "a robbery gone bad" that racial elements were completely ignored...

of course none of this you will concede, you don't want to admit that you're completely biased..

Your claim that I'm biased flies in the face of the fact that I continually come back to you with facts, only to hear no final rebuttal and that part of the thread dies. Do you understand the arguments you're making ? Is that why you can't reply to my rebuttals ? I'm concerned that you're just cutting/pasting things from other sites and that you're just soaking up information that somebody is feeding you.

How could a biased person entertain your arguments, parse them for truth and respond as I have with factual rebuttals I ask you ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow. That Youtube is completely useless. It's an allegation of a cover-up, followed by a clip from "America's Most Wanted" indicating that her ATM card was used, followed by a cartoon of Obama saying that the details will come out "after the election" ?

Lictor, there just is nothing of substance to that video. This post is simply a spam - there's nothing here supporting your point that I can see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You only look for one element whenever something like this occurs, Lictor. Why do you call this a black-on-white crime, rather than a male-on-female crime? This woman was raped and murdered by a man; skin tone doesn't really come into play.

Your Fox news link doesn't work, and Free Republic has all the credibility of toilet paper. I didn't bother with the Youtube link, as Michael has already commented on its worth. But I checked Wikipedia, and it sounds like this crime was a random robbery, not motivated by race. So maybe you could also look for the element of poor-on-rich crime.

Murder of Anne Pressly

Edited by Melanie_

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow. That Youtube is completely useless. It's an allegation of a cover-up, followed by a clip from "America's Most Wanted" indicating that her ATM card was used, followed by a cartoon of Obama saying that the details will come out "after the election" ?

Lictor, there just is nothing of substance to that video. This post is simply a spam - there's nothing here supporting your point that I can see.

yeah this was the interview from USA today, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cznEC2zndmQ, wrong vid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You only look for one element whenever something like this occurs, Lictor. Why do you call this a black-on-white crime, rather than a male-on-female crime? This woman was raped and murdered by a man; skin tone doesn't really come into play.

Your Fox news link doesn't work, and Free Republic has all the credibility of toilet paper. I didn't bother with the Youtube link, as Michael has already commented on its worth. But I checked Wikipedia, and it sounds like this crime was a random robbery, not motivated by race. So maybe you could also look for the element of poor-on-rich crime.

Murder of Anne Pressly

I have a hard time believing (due to the absolutely animalistic brutality and inhuman savagery) that this was nothing but a simple murder... or a robbery gone wrong...

investigators described her face as resembling a crushed eggshell, her cheekbones were fractured to the point of almost being pulverized, her head was matted with blood... all the coroner's reports say that she was beaten long after she lost consciousness still...

Of course you fail to acknowledge that the media COMPLETELY IGNORED the potential racial side of it, they still are piecing the elements together, but we all know if the races had been reversed, the media would have no problem at all talking about the racial angle... so you'd hear the reporter say "perhaps some racism fueled the attack" or words to that effect.

The fact that the racial angle is not even discussed here is another typical example of the slant that black on white crimes consistently receive.

also my fox news link must be copied and pasted into your browser: (for some reason I can,t link it- maybe fox doesn't want mass awareness of this article)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yeah this was the interview from USA today, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cznEC2zndmQ, wrong vid

It's an interview from the NBC morning news show - again it's national coverage from one of the most watched shows on TV. Explain again how this case isn't getting coverage ?

Lictor, you're really terrible at presenting a case, I have to say.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I tried to copy and paste the link into my browser, but it didn't work.

Perhaps the media ignored the potential racial angle, but do you see you are also ignoring other potential angles? Could this be about misogyny rather than race? Could it be about poverty rather than race? I'm certainly not saying this crime was acceptable, I'm just saying you are seeing it through the lens you choose to apply, and ignoring other possible factors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a hard time believing (due to the absolutely animalistic brutality and inhuman savagery) that this was nothing but a simple murder... or a robbery gone wrong...

investigators described her face as resembling a crushed eggshell, her cheekbones were fractured to the point of almost being pulverized, her head was matted with blood... all the coroner's reports say that she was beaten long after she lost consciousness still...

Of course you fail to acknowledge that the media COMPLETELY IGNORED the potential racial side of it, they still are piecing the elements together, but we all know if the races had been reversed, the media would have no problem at all talking about the racial angle... so you'd hear the reporter say "perhaps some racism fueled the attack" or words to that effect.

The fact that the racial angle is not even discussed here is another typical example of the slant that black on white crimes consistently receive.

also my fox news link must be copied and pasted into your browser: (for some reason I can,t link it- maybe fox doesn't want mass awareness of this article)

Right. Fox is in on it too.

The problem, Lictor, is that every time we come back at you with questions you come back with another angle and another link. I've been more than generous in asking you to produce examples - four so far - and you're coming up with blanks every time.

Lictor, I have to ask why you think that such things prove media bias. Even you can see that there's no evidence of it whatsoever. Where do you get your ideas from, and why don't you listen to evidence ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I tried to copy and paste the link into my browser, but it didn't work.

Perhaps the media ignored the potential racial angle, but do you see you are also ignoring other potential angles? Could this be about misogyny rather than race? Could it be about poverty rather than race? I'm certainly not saying this crime was acceptable, I'm just saying you are seeing it through the lens you choose to apply, and ignoring other possible factors.

Melanie, don't acknowledge that the media ignored a racial angle - it's not so. The allegation we're trying in vain to track down is anti-white bias. This has been going on over several threads for several days, and Lictor doesn't have any good evidence.

Personally, I have to start asking why he believes these things when they're not supported by facts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right. Fox is in on it too.

The problem, Lictor, is that every time we come back at you with questions you come back with another angle and another link. I've been more than generous in asking you to produce examples - four so far - and you're coming up with blanks every time.

Lictor, I have to ask why you think that such things prove media bias. Even you can see that there's no evidence of it whatsoever. Where do you get your ideas from, and why don't you listen to evidence ?

no evidence!?!?? The Newsome murder, Patricia Stansfield, Carignan Agression, the Byrd dragging death, duke lacross team, jena 6 trial... if you can't see that the races in all of these crimes receive very different attention, then as I said you're simply playing dumb, and rejecting facts out hand and obscenely asking "what the big deal's all about".

many examples were lifted, but your anti-white bias (which is present in every line your write) shows that you're not interested in being objective on the matter.

We've shown case after case of non racist events (Courtenay, Duke Lacrosse rape incident) where the media goes berserk and starts throwing "bigottry" and "racist" accusations, human rights leagues are apoplectic and threaten to demonstrate... the NAACP demands the heads of the accused!

yet when you reverse the races, no human rights organization is in sight, the media ignore ANY potentiality (no matter how hard to avoid) of racism, and the news item is given minimal coverage if any.

its the standard procedure.

its no different in this murder case... the media obviously don't WANT to talk about the obvious racial angle.

you know and I know (although you won't admit it) that if that beautiful blonde reporter would have been black, and her attacker/rapist a white thug, you'd have no problem in thinking about the potential racist angle, and certainly the media would be right there talking about "investigating a potential hate-crime"...

Edited by lictor616

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The point I'm trying to make is that there are many potential angles the media could examine, but each one would be speculative, until all the facts come out. Lictor only sees one possibility, that the crime was motivated by race; I'm just trying to show him that there are other possibilities. If the media doesn't mention race, it's probably because there isn't anything to tie racial motivation to the case. Sometimes crime is just about opportunity, not some grand scheme to bring down Whitey.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you know and I know (although you won't admit it) that if that beautiful blonde reporter would have been black, and her attacker/rapist a white thug, you'd have no problem in thinking about the potential racist angle, and certainly the media would be right there talking about "investigating a potential hate-crime"...

So what you are saying, then, is that the whole thing is media bias, and there was no racial motivation on the part of the rapist/murderer in this case?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The point I'm trying to make is that there are many potential angles the media could examine, but each one would be speculative, until all the facts come out. Lictor only sees one possibility, that the crime was motivated by race; I'm just trying to show him that there are other possibilities. If the media doesn't mention race, it's probably because there isn't anything to tie racial motivation to the case. Sometimes crime is just about opportunity, not some grand scheme to bring down Whitey.

yes but conveniently, it never occurs to the media to "speculate" about racial angles when the crime victims of the news story they're covering happens to be WHITE...

the record is painfully obvious. the examples lifted are a solid indictment of clear and indisputable bias.

Edited by lictor616

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yes but conveniently, it never occurs to the media to "speculate" about racial angles when the crime victims of the news story they're covering happens to be WHITE...

the record is painfully obvious. the examples lifted are a solid indictment of this bias.

Is speculation productive, though? We could speculate that this crime was racially motivated, or that it was motivated by gender, or that it was motivated by financial gain... in the end, though, it is all speculation until the facts come out. Why would you want the media guessing, possibly incorrectly, about this man's motivation?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is speculation productive, though? We could speculate that this crime was racially motivated, or that it was motivated by gender, or that it was motivated by financial gain...

and yet it didn't stop the media of making a media circus around the DUke Lacrosse "rape" incident (even if the speculation was badly unwarranted), before the facts were known, it didn't stop them speculating about racism when the Byrd draggin death happened in texas...

why do we see no such speculation in the channon murders?

no such speculation about the Stansfield dragging death?

no such speculation in this horrible act of savagery?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

and yet it didn't stop the media of making a media circus around the DUke Lacrosse "rape" incident (even if the speculation was badly unwarranted), before the facts were known, it didn't stop them speculating about racism when the Byrd draggin death happened in texas...

why do we see no such speculation in the channon murders?

no such speculation about the Stansfield dragging death?

no such speculation in this horrible act of savagery?

Well, in the Byrd dragging death, the three men who did it were known white supremicists, so it isn't a big stretch to speculate the crime was racially motivated. And was it the media that first raised the issue of race in the Duke lacrosse scandal, or was it the lawyer for the young woman who was violated? The wikipedia article about Patricia Stansfield has been removed (cue eerie music... could this be media bias???) As for the Channon murder, this was one of the most horrific crimes I've ever read about... but there is no indication it was committed based on race. Again, why should we speculate that race was the motive, rather than money or gender?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As for the Channon murder, this was one of the most horrific crimes I've ever read about... but there is no indication it was committed based on race. Again, why should we speculate that race was the motive, rather than money or gender?

no indication it was a hatecrime? oh really now!?!!

speculate on gender and ignore race in this!? Yoy don't see any evidence or potential of hatred in the Channon murder/rape/torture?

what is wrong with you?

no... yes ... no reason at all, that thuggish rap listening "kill whitey" screaming(who have been told all their lives taht they are victims of white oppression) southern blacks would attack "white devils"... yeah its not like they selected their victims at all because they were white in the wrong part of town.. oh no...

no this was more like a love-crime!

I no longer think i'll be able to carry on a conversation with you without resorting to ad hominems, i think your comment is disgusting and execrable and quite frankly I don't think I'll be able to give you the respect demanded by the forum rules. I'll leave it at that

Edited by lictor616

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

no indication it was a hatecrime? oh really now!?!!

speculate on gender and ignore race in this!? Yoy don't see any evidence or potential of hatred in the Channon murder/rape/torture?

what is wrong with you?

no... yes ... no reason at all, that thuggish rap listening "kill whitey" screaming(who have been told all their lives taht they are victims of white oppression) southern blacks would attack "white devils"... yeah its not like they selected their victims at all because they were white in the wrong part of town.. oh no...

no this was more like a love-crime!

I no longer think i'll be able to carry on a conversation with you without resorting to ad hominems, i think your comment is disgusting and execrable and quite frankly I don't think I'll be able to give you the respect demanded by the forum rules. I'll leave it at that

Oh dear, I've made you crawl away and sulk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, in the Byrd dragging death, the three men who did it were known white supremicists, so it isn't a big stretch to speculate the crime was racially motivated. And was it the media that first raised the issue of race in the Duke lacrosse scandal, or was it the lawyer for the young woman who was violated?

The media and the prosecutor were both happy to bandy about the claim that it was a hate crime.

There *was* a hate crime committed. The victims were 3 priveleged white frat-boys. The perpetrators were media-types looking for a big story, and a prosecutor looking for a high-profile case to boost his chances of re-election. The prosecutor was disbarred and did jail-time for his part. I don't know if anybody in the media has ever said so much as "oops."

The wikipedia article about Patricia Stansfield has been removed (cue eerie music... could this be media bias???)

If the implication is that the event never occured, well, I was wondering about that myself.

If the only citations for this event are from white supremacists, that does seem awfully suspicious.

However, I did find this citation, from Jim Kuypers, a professor of communications studies at Virginia Tech University. He sounds like a pretty credible guy.

As for the Channon murder, this was one of the most horrific crimes I've ever read about... but there is no indication it was committed based on race. Again, why should we speculate that race was the motive, rather than money or gender?

Considering that both Channon and her boyfriend were raped and murdered, it doesn't sound like gender was a factor. Sounds quite equal-opportunity. Likewise, I'm not sure how money explains the event either. They didn't need to rape, torture, and murder the young couple if all they were after was their money or their bank cards.

In the other thread I provided examples of remarkably different media coverage of remarkably similar events. I pointed out that the media excuse that it's not the color of the victims that determined the amount of coverage but rather the racial motive falls completely flat when their definition of a blatant racial motive is entirely dependent on the color of the victims. I provided an example of an attack on a white teenager for blatantly racial reasons that received zero national media coverage, disproving the idea that a blatant racial motive is in itself newsworthy. I provided Canadian examples of the news media declining to mention race in coverage of crimes committed by non-white people even when race was a relevant aspect of the news story. I provided caught-in-the-act proof of Canadian reporters trying to attach a hate-crime element to a story to make it more newsy.

And the only response I received to any of that has been "uh... hey, look! It's Lictor! Let's talk about that Kenyan marathoners thing instead!"

-k

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"...rather than a male-on-female crime?"

Melanie, thank you for bringing in this context. I was kind of wondering if it would come up.

My D-I-L works for a womens shelter. We have such shelters because of 'hate crimes.' How often do we hear that some woman was beat up, threatened or raped by a former spouse? Maybe the media has an anti-woman bias as well?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

no evidence!?!?? The Newsome murder, Patricia Stansfield, Carignan Agression, the Byrd dragging death, duke lacross team, jena 6 trial... if you can't see that the races in all of these crimes receive very different attention, then as I said you're simply playing dumb, and rejecting facts out hand and obscenely asking "what the big deal's all about".

many examples were lifted, but your anti-white bias (which is present in every line your write) shows that you're not interested in being objective on the matter.

We've shown case after case of non racist events (Courtenay, Duke Lacrosse rape incident) where the media goes berserk and starts throwing "bigottry" and "racist" accusations, human rights leagues are apoplectic and threaten to demonstrate... the NAACP demands the heads of the accused!

yet when you reverse the races, no human rights organization is in sight, the media ignore ANY potentiality (no matter how hard to avoid) of racism, and the news item is given minimal coverage if any.

its the standard procedure.

its no different in this murder case... the media obviously don't WANT to talk about the obvious racial angle.

you know and I know (although you won't admit it) that if that beautiful blonde reporter would have been black, and her attacker/rapist a white thug, you'd have no problem in thinking about the potential racist angle, and certainly the media would be right there talking about "investigating a potential hate-crime"...

Lictor, you're simply wrong here. It's dishonest for you to say that I reject your examples out-of-hand. In fact, I looked into the first four examples and explained why your assertions were incorrect and didn't hear back from you.

We've seen in those examples that white-on-black and black-on-white crime generally didn't make national news unless the legal authorities indicated that racist ideology was a motivator. And the one exception - that you brought out - was an example of black-on-white crime.

I've been very patient and given you the benefit of the doubt in looking through your examples and yet you accuse me of rejecting out-of-hand. That's quite dishonest and ungentlemanly of you given the effort I've put in.

You're either being lazy or dishonest in your arguments - which is it ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...