The Treyvon Martin shooting has been the subject of our
dinner conversations for several weeks now, and, not surprisingly, it has evolved into a debate among my children and I regarding the influence the media has in shaping public opinion. Though I was initially outraged by the blatant racial overtones
and disregard for justice (why wasn’t Zimmerman arrested?), I have since come
to appreciate how much more complex the case really is. Racism and disrespect of our legal system is clearly present, but it doesn't take much to see that the roles presented by the media are deceptive and frustrate the need to gather truth.
The death of Treyvon Martin is a tragedy that requires justice, but for justice to be served, due processes is necessary to discover who the victim/perpetrator really are. Catapulting this case into the mainstream without carefully considering every element of the story is an irresponsible manipulation of media. In it we find a serious, indeed alarming, situation in which our
legal system’s standard of justice, i.e. innocent until proven guilty and trial
by jury, is being disregarded.
The force driving the Martin/Zimmerman controversy is not racism per se. If it were then front page news would state the case plainly: the vast amount of violence against Blacks in America is not being perpetrated by Whites. Rather, it is being perpetrated by Blacks themselves, and to a significant degree. In addition, where is the Latino voice in all this?
The force driving the Martin/Zimmerman controversy is not racism per se. If it were then front page news would state the case plainly: the vast amount of violence against Blacks in America is not being perpetrated by Whites. Rather, it is being perpetrated by Blacks themselves, and to a significant degree. In addition, where is the Latino voice in all this?
The underlying issue has nothing to do with
addressing real issues of violence or solving real problems of racism. Instead,
the momentum seems to be effectively increasing the amount of hatred American’s
feel towards one another. Doing so increases racial tension and leads to what?
Class war?
I am not politically sophisticated enough to answer that question, but there doesn’t appear to be a more explosive issue,
or one that is more easily manipulated, and this case-presented in the media’s
carefully crafted light -is doing an excellent job of it. However, if our
nation is to function on principles of justice then it is critical for Americans to use caution in developing public opinion,
and the best way to do that is to connect the political dots.
It was revealing to me to look at the role the radical
Black Panthers have had in biasing this case. In a recent press conference the new Black
Liberation Militia revealed its intention to perform a citizen’s arrest on
Zimmerman, offering a $10,000 reward for anyone assisting in his “capture”, and
provided flyers with such blatant provocations as “Murdered in Cold Blood” and “Child
Killer of Trayvon Martin-Wanted Dead or Alive”. Where is the standard of being
innocent before proven guilty? Even former NAACP leader C.L. Bryant accused longtime
Black Panther supporters Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton of exploiting the case
in order to racially divide the nation. And indeed, how effective they’ve been.
I’m not using this blog to plead the cases of
Zimmerman or Martin. Both are surrounded in controversy that warrants careful and
judicious consideration, but that is my point exactly. Our Founder’s understood, and in
fact the history of the nation has demonstrated, that for justice to prevail it
is best that a legal system restrain human emotion, not to be dictated by it.
This is no small thing. Mob violence was and is a very real concern, one that
needs to be prevented. There is no way for justice to be served unless it
is carried by the protective restraints of law and order.
Law and order require evidence and until the
legal system can do its job, the only noncontroversial facts in this case are
that Treyvon Martin was killed by a bullet from George Zimmerman’s gun and Zimmerman
has claimed self defense. Short of that, the evidence being present by the
Court of Media is tainted.
The public outcry is that Zimmerman was racist,
yet the most recent report indicates that the 911 record did not reveal racism.
Zimmerman’s history as a neighborhood watch didn’t reveal racism (he intervened
with Whites, Hispanics as well as Blacks, had black friends and black family
members). In addition, Treyvon was not an innocent boy as his posted pictures
indicate. He was a 6’2” football player kicked out of school for drug related
issues who left a series of tweets that reveal a not-so-innocent young man.
Does it matter whether George had black friends
or how big Treyvon was or that he liked to smoke pot? Maybe, maybe not, but at
this point no one knows-nor will they- until the police and the justice system
has had the opportunity to gather the facts.
Unfortunately, the media has lost no time in
creating a public opinion tsunami which does not serve justice. Media-consumers
need to recognize how dangerous this can be and take caution that their
sentiments are being developed through careful consideration of the facts,
which takes time and deliberation. It doesn’t appear that the Black Panthers
are going to be spoon feeding any such unbiased information. The public will
have to do that on its own.
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/03/23/arrest-demand-grows-in-florida-teens-shooting-death/?test=latestnews
http://hardincountyconservatives.blogspot.com/2012/03/race-card-hypocrisy-in-black-florida.html
http://hardincountyconservatives.blogspot.com/2012/03/race-card-hypocrisy-in-black-florida.html
Part One:
ReplyDeleteWhile Ms. Sexton’s analysis of the media involvement in Travyon Martin’s killing holds merit, key additional factors are missing from the conversation. Inclusion of these substantially changes her portrayal of the media as a monolithic institution that seems to be polarizing and polluting justice.
Ms. Sexton argues that the media’s “carefully crafted” portrayal of Martin’s death shapes the public’s concept of justice and how it should be pursued. Fox News commentators, MSNBC commentators, Rush Limbaugh, and Rachel Maddow have all provided commentary and “talking points” from their perspectives. Ms. Sexton seems to believe that the media has latched on to details like Martin’s skin color and past drug involvement, and Zimmerman’s size and ethnicity, to paint a picture of blatant racism. Thus, she argues that the public should be wary of the “Court of Media” “tainting” public information.
It is certainly true that public media does influence and shape public opinion. Inevitably, some participants skew information primarily to make news “entertaining.” Since we live in a free society where any who disagree are free to state their view and make their case (and do so routinely via Facebook, Twitter, and the blogosphere), the argument that this translates into a “public opinion tsunami” that “does not serve justice” is extraordinarily unpersuasive. Many people do understand the facts of the case. They express their opinion every day through public, interactive media. The fact of the matter is that substantial parts of our society do not agree that justice has been served in this case. And they are being influenced by a participative democracy.
The public’s reaction to Martin’s killing has been substantial and unprecedented, and some have certainly latched onto issues of race. With a deeper and more careful look, however, many people reach a completely different conclusion… the over-riding issue is Florida’s “Stand Your Ground” law that grants immunity to “people who act to protect themselves if they have a reasonable fear they will be killed or seriously injured.” Given that additional eyewitnesses to the actions of Mr. Zimmerman have not yet emerged, the use of this law as a defense for his actions cause many reasoned people to question the basic tenet(s) of the law itself. That’s a far cry from viewing this case only through the lens of “racism”.
Part One Continued:
ReplyDeletePerhaps, those who chose to first follow the case through traditional media saw the killing through the scope of race, which then broadened the news-audience and made this a nation-wide issue. Certainly, the amount of media attention focused on things like Geraldo Rivera’s exhortations to not wear “hoodies” show (at the least) a lack of sensitivity as to the discussion of race in the country (both by Rivera and other commentators). However, as coverage has broadened and the intensity of the dialogue increases so does the degree of specialization of news and information the public receives. As a result, laws like “Stand Your Ground” come into broader question and under substantial challenge. Perhaps, rather than fear discussion and disagreement, we might experience a positive reaction that will hopefully better define and refine the nation’s laws, and prevent tragedies like this from ever happening again.
Ms. Sexton points out that the New Black Liberation movement has called for a citizen’s arrest with an award of $10,000 for anyone “assisting in” Zimmerman’s “capture”. She observes that some believe that media personalities like Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson have exploited the case to racially divide the nation.
The truth of the matter is that the nation remains racially divided by injustices that have occurred routinely over many generations. Clearly, today’s Black Panther movement is entirely separate from that of the media. Estimates are difficult, but, the original Black Panther Party was thought to have a membership of 10,000 members in 1969, and a whopping 27 members by 1980. That is 0.0000009% of US citizens.
While the New Black Liberation movement may have more members, even if each member told ten friends (or for that matter, a hundred friends) about its “citizen justice” initiative, few will be persuaded to action. The movement knows that; however, their message is intended quite differently. It is designed to clearly illustrate the fears and misunderstandings of a large segment of white America who are willing to pass laws that enable one to take action first (like having a role in killing an unarmed person in cold blood), and answer hard questions later. Their “call to action” thus serves to emotionally emphasize the fundamental injustice in the case – and argues that this case is really about a law that needs to be changed. Since the influence of the New Black Panther Party’s movement is largely constrained to its size, the message is the medium.
Part Two:
ReplyDeleteMuch of the public outcry at the killing is therefore constructive. Florida’s Stand Your Ground law is being called into question as Florida lawmaker Chris Smith creates a task force to review and change the law (Jones). Facebook and Twitter members encourage civic engagement by joining and re-tagging groups such as #travyonmartin and #MillionHoodies that promote nationwide marches protesting the “injustice” of Martin’s killing.
It certainly is up to the news-consumer to analyze and sift through information that “the media” provides. However, “the media” is hardly monolithic. Some media is more “democratic” and interactive than other types. Yes, “the media” can have both positive and negative effects, and it is the duty of the citizen to review the news and act upon it. By naming the New Black Panther Party’s actions as unavoidable consequences of an aggressive and entertainment-focused media is therefore a unilateral viewpoint that doesn’t effectively describe the whole picture.
I do not dispute that the public should be careful in filtering the information that it receives from the media. To look only at the New Black Panther Party’s actions, however, is a limiting and ineffective analysis of public reaction. In reality, much of the public reaction (the task force, interactive media, and public marches), asks for a search for justice that does not in any way circumvent the law.
http://www.kctv5.com/story/17353756/task-force-evaluating-stand-your-ground-law
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/17/us/justice-department-investigation-is-sought-in-florida-teenagers-shooting-death.html?scp=1&sq=travyon%20martin&st=cse
http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/03/21/death-of-florida-teen-spurs-national-outrage-and-action/?scp=4&sq=travyon%20martin&st=cse
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/compost/post/no-geraldo-rivera-hoodies-werent-to-blame/2012/03/23/gIQAdA65VS_blog.html
In her recent post, Give Justice a Chance, my colleague Ms. Sexton discusses the Trevon Martin shooting in Florida and the media storm that has surrounded this issue. She eloquently lays out the main players in the story and describes the environment that each is trying to create. Being born after the Civil Rights movement, I have always wondered what it must have been like for minorities at lunch counters and at sit-ins across the country. What strength and courage it must have taken to stand up to the avalanche of repression that was present at that time and how committed those men and women were to achieve what they did.
ReplyDeleteThe Civil Rights movement also served to bring race to the forefront of everyone’s mind, forcing everyone to choose where they stood ideologically on the issue. In very few occasions has there been such a polarizing force on our national stage. Those ripples are still being felt today, as evidenced by the media circus that has erupted around the Martin case. No time was wasted by many news outlets to paint this as a case of racial violence perpetrated by a white man on black, and there was no shortage of listeners. Radio talk shows, morning shows, newspapers and of course fringe elements on the web clamored to have a new angle or to excise some salient point that would set them apart and the truth was trampled somewhere in that stampede. Did a white man kill a black man? Yes, as far as I understand. Was the black man armed? No. Does that make this case racially motivated? That is unknown at this time. We may never know that answer. How do you measure intent? Would Zimmerman have been suspicious of Martin wandering the streets if he were a white kid? Or a Latino? Or Asian? That is the question to which we will probably never have an answer. Ms. Sexton accurately points out that the media hasn’t stopped to find that piece of information yet, and most likely because it isn’t as exciting as conjecture and sensationalism.
I think that racial issues have been blown out of proportion recently and this may be another example. Given the recent police shooting in Austin and the recent post on ESPN regarding Jeremy Lin that got 3 staff members fired, it seems that many including Rep. Chu want to keep race in the spotlight. Was that the intent of the civil rights movement though? Or was it more about moving race to the background, so that what a man or woman did and said mattered more than their skin color? I think that as long as media and others continue to remind us of our differences in a negative light, that dream will continue to be put on hold.