Daily Bread for 6.9.20

Good morning.

Tuesday in Whitewater will be partly cloudy, with scattered late afternoon thundershowers, and a high of eighty-six. Sunrise is 5:16 AM and sunset 8:32 PM, for 15h 16m 45s of daytime.  The moon is a waning gibbous with 84.3% of its visible disk illuminated.

Today is the one thousand three hundred ninth day.

 Whitewater’s Public Works Committee meets at 6 PM via GoToMeeting.

On this day in 1973, Secretariat wins the Triple Crown.

Recommended for reading in full —

Nichol Turner Lee asks Where would racial progress in policing be without camera phones?:

In today’s world, virtually anyone can be a videographer and filmmaker. The combination of smart phones, video recording apps, and social media platforms have generated a revolution in public empowerment. Rather than having to take the word of African Americans over the police, people can see the violence for themselves and demand justice.

These factors should explain why recorded observations of police brutality against African Americans trigger protests, even during a global pandemic. Technology is becoming part of the story regarding how marginalized populations in the U.S. and across the world are recording injustice and thereby, gaining personal empowerment. Leveraging the internet, civilian-generated video content can move public opinion toward more critical views of law enforcement and mass incarceration.

  Margaret Sullivan writes What’s a journalist supposed to be now — an activist? A stenographer? You’re asking the wrong question:

The core question is this: In this polarized, dangerous moment, what are journalists supposed to be?

Pose that question to most members of the public, and you might get an answer something like this: “Just tell me the bare facts. Leave your interpretation out of it. And don’t be on anyone’s side.”

Every piece of reporting — written or spoken, told in text or in images — is the product of choices. Every article approaches its subject from somebody’s perspective. Every digital home page, every printed front page, every 30-minute newscast, every one of the news alerts blowing up your phone, every radio talk show is the product of decision-making.

We choose what to focus on, what to amplify, what to investigate and examine.

That’s why the simplistic “just the unadorned facts” can be such a canard. And that’s why the notion to “represent all points of view equally” is absurd and sometimes wrongheaded.

“Journalism is not stenography” is a refrain from an astute editor I know.

Let’s take the New York Times example. Plenty of well-respected media people are saying that the much-discussed opinion piece by Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) [advocating the use of the active military to suppress civilian protests] absolutely should have been published.

“We need to hear all points of view, especially those we disagree with,” is their reasoning. And some even argue that those who object to the piece on the grounds that it is incendiary and factually flawed are a mob of coddled activists masquerading as objective journalists.

That argument can be dismantled in a nanosecond. Should the denialist views of, say, Alex Jones of Infowars on the Sandy Hook massacre be given a prestigious platform, too? But Cotton is a prominent political figure, you say? By that logic, the lies of White House adviser Kellyanne Conway should be welcomed on news-discussion shows daily because she’s close to the president.

 Why NASA Waited 9 Years To Send Astronauts Into Space From the US:

Notify of

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments