Home » Blog » Media Roulette – Ferguson

Media Roulette – Ferguson

AMI Media roulette1

Well, it had to happen sooner or later. Given the Y axis of poor (or nonexistent) journalism getting compulsively published (on Twitter) by desperate producers and the X axis of consumer-focused partisan media, sooner or later news agencies were going to come out and essentially call the competition a liar.


Here’s the setup, you get to choose the news…


ABC says they have a source close to Ferguson officer Darren Wilson who claims that the officer suffered a “severe facial injury” for which he was treated at a local hospital. The Assistant Police Chief took him to the hospital.


Meanwhile, at FOX, the officer was “badly beaten,” suffering a fractured orbital socket and extensive bruising.


Then CNN entered the fray, publishing a story quoting yet another “anonymous source” saying Wilson’s xrays were negative and his eye was not bruised.



After the FOX and ABC stories broke, the web immediately took sides. The right—including American Thinker, The Blaze and The New American—came out in support of the cop. Some on the left stuck to the “no justification for lethal force” argument.


Today, almost as if they had the stories already written (of course they did) the web media’s left flank fired back. Stories popped up on DailyKos, PoliticusUSA, Slate and Salon essentially accusing the “right” of lying.


To be fair (and balanced?) to The Blaze, they immediately also published the new report. They did, however, quote Nancy Grace, which should never happen in a civilized society.


So… who’s right? Who knows? What I do know is that your major, multi billion dollar media outlets and their pet bloggers are reporting tweets from anonymous sources just to keep you all churned up. They want you to pick a side.


What happens next is up to you.






You must be logged in to post a comment.