The media we have, not the media we wish we had.

[dude1394]

Is there any wonder that the media is less trustworthy than congress? Keep reading at the link, there are 12 of these. And now somehow BET has made these kids heroes, is there no wonder that values are out of whack.

http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/1024/p09s01-coop.html

Media myths about the Jena 6
A local journalist tells the story you haven't heard.
By Craig Franklin

Jena, La.

By now, almost everyone in America has heard of Jena, La., because they've all heard the story of the "Jena 6." White students hanging nooses barely punished, a schoolyard fight, excessive punishment for the six black attackers, racist local officials, public outrage and protests – the outside media made sure everyone knew the basics.

There's just one problem: The media got most of the basics wrong. In fact, I have never before witnessed such a disgrace in professional journalism. Myths replaced facts, and journalists abdicated their solemn duty to investigate every claim because they were seduced by a powerfully appealing but false narrative of racial injustice.

I should know. I live in Jena. My wife has taught at Jena High School for many years. And most important, I am probably the only reporter who has covered these events from the very beginning.

The reason the Jena cases have been propelled into the world spotlight is two-fold: First, because local officials did not speak publicly early on about the true events of the past year, the media simply formed their stories based on one-side's statements – the Jena 6. Second, the media were downright lazy in their efforts to find the truth. Often, they simply reported what they'd read on blogs, which expressed only one side of the issue.

The real story of Jena and the Jena 6 is quite different from what the national media presented. It's time to set the record straight.

Myth 1: The Whites-Only Tree. There has never been a "whites-only" tree at Jena High School. Students of all races sat underneath this tree. When a student asked during an assembly at the start of school last year if anyone could sit under the tree, it evoked laughter from everyone present – blacks and whites. As reported by students in the assembly, the question was asked to make a joke and to drag out the assembly and avoid class.

Myth 2: Nooses a Signal to Black Students. An investigation by school officials, police, and an FBI agent revealed the true motivation behind the placing of two nooses in the tree the day after the assembly. According to the expulsion committee, the crudely constructed nooses were not aimed at black students. Instead, they were understood to be a prank by three white students aimed at their fellow white friends, members of the school rodeo team. (The students apparently got the idea from watching episodes of "Lonesome Dove.") The committee further concluded that the three young teens had no knowledge that nooses symbolize the terrible legacy of the lynchings of countless blacks in American history. When informed of this history by school officials, they became visibly remorseful because they had many black friends. Another myth concerns their punishment, which was not a three-day suspension, but rather nine days at an alternative facility followed by two weeks of in-school suspension, Saturday detentions, attendance at Discipline Court, and evaluation by licensed mental-health professionals. The students who hung the nooses have not publicly come forward to give their version of events.

[Mavdog]

from the article:

The committee further concluded that the three young teens had no knowledge that nooses symbolize the terrible legacy of the lynchings of countless blacks in American history.

this says one of two things: 1) the "committee" is trying to contain the damage with a story about the supposed ignorance of the students who put up the noose, or 2) the schools of jena are doing an incredibly poor job of teaching american history/social studies to their students.

as for the items in the story, there's nothing new that hasn't already been in other news stories. so much for the medias "failure".

the bottom line, the district atty realized what was just, he changed the bailey's charged crime to assault from attempted murder. that says a lot, and the town can move forward.

[Usually Lurkin]

I thought there was a whites only tree.
I thought the noose was aimed at black students.
I'd heard the beating referred to as a "school yard fight," and had no idea it was as callous as this guy claims.
I thought the beating was in direct response to the nooses.
I'd heard plenty about the two levels of justice in Jena.

I didn't build these views from talking to people who were there, or experiencing them first hand. I've relied on internet news and television news to tell me what happened. If what this guy says is true really is true, then these are myths I've gotten from the media.

[Jack.Kerr]

Different topic, but....

I loved the verb ("confront") that the NYT used to describe the incident yesterday when the nut-job Code Pink terrorist accosted/threatened/almost-assaulted the Secretary of State yesterday in a Democrat-led hearing.

What was dismaying to me, is that not one of the pussy-men spectators in the audience so much as lifted a finger to stop that lunatic from approaching Secretary Rice. And can you imagine the press uproar if a pro-war white male had approached say...Barak Obama that way? With a noose no less?

As far as I'm concerned, Code Pink should be put on notice---if another of you b*tches so much as looks cross-eyed at a member of the administration, concerned citizens will take you down forcefully and violently, i.e. "confront" you, to eliminate you as a threat.

Enough is enough.

[Usually Lurkin]

Just like so many reports before it, a joint survey by the Project for Excellence in Journalism and Harvard's Joan Shorenstein Center on the Press, Politics and Public Policy — hardly a bastion of conservative orthodoxy — found that in covering the current presidential race, the media are sympathetic to Democrats and hostile to Republicans.

Democrats are not only favored in the tone of the coverage. They get more coverage period. This is particularly evident on morning news shows, which "produced almost twice as many stories (51% to 27%) focused on Democratic candidates than on Republicans."

The most flagrant bias, however, was found in newspapers. In reviewing front-page coverage in 11 newspapers, the study found the tone positive in nearly six times as many stories about Democrats as it was negative.

more: http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArti...78808786575124