ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 1st March 2019, 08:29 PM   #2161
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 18,544
So, today, WaPo issued an "Editor's Note" that included the following:

“Subsequent reporting, a student’s statement and additional video allow for a more complete assessment of what occurred, either contradicting or failing to confirm accounts provided in that story — including that Native American activist Nathan Phillips was prevented by one student from moving on, that his group had been taunted by the students in the lead-up to the encounter, and that the students were trying to instigate a conflict.”


That's the best they could manage. They "contradicted or failed to affirm", i.e. in some cases, they "failed to affirm", which means that we really can't tell from the videos, and since we didn't say which ones were contradicted, and which ones were simply "not affirmed", there's a possibility of any one of them being true. Although at least one of our statements must have been false.


What weasels.


Couldn't they just say, "We apologize for not checking out the story before we ran it."


I suppose not. Their legal department has pretty good lawyers, and a statement like that has absolutely zero to do with human decency at this point. It's all about avoiding punitive damages. I can't blame them in that regard. If I were being sued for 250 million dollars, I would do whatever my lawyers told me to do.



One thing that really bugged me about the coverage of this incident is the narrative, so incredibly common in the first couple of days after the incident, that the original video was contradicted by later videos. No. That's not true. None of the videos were altered. They all show the same thing. It's just that the original video didn't provide a lot of information, but was consistent with Phillips' story. They didn't bother to ask anyone from Covington what their version of the story was. They ran with a story without bothering to do a little bit of research to find out what really happened. Then, when more video giving a more complete picture surfaced, it turned out Phillips was lying. Worse yet, some of the media outlets actually embellished the lie, especially in the opinion pieces. Then, when it became obvious that the story was false it took these media outlets a very long time to pull down their stories.


It was really bad journalism in a lot of ways. My opinion is that neither Nick Sandmann nor Lin Wood ought to get rich off of it, but this is America, so somebody probably will.

Last edited by Meadmaker; 1st March 2019 at 08:32 PM.
Meadmaker is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd March 2019, 05:19 AM   #2162
applecorped
Rotten to the Core
 
applecorped's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 19,016
Lies are always printed on the front page in bold letters, retractions are usually buried in very small print many pages back, if at all.
__________________
All You Need Is Love.
applecorped is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th March 2019, 08:07 AM   #2163
varwoche
Penultimate Amazing
 
varwoche's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Puget Sound
Posts: 12,602
Originally Posted by The Shrike View Post
... Phillips could have replied to that question over the years with something like "I was a Marine Corps Reservist stationed in California, 1972–1976" and maybe we wouldn't be having this discussion. Instead, he seems to have most often described himself as a "veteran from the Vietnam War era", which is evidently accurate, but douchey.

Why he chose to describe his service that way is to me a puzzle. I'm not convinced that he's been doing that to glom on to some greater prestige than he's due. For one, I actually find the former, more detailed description a lot more impressive than the vague Vietnam era stuff.

And why would he need greater stature? The dude is already a hero to the DAPL protestors. His activist-cred is sky high.
And yet, accomplished, seemingly respectable people exaggerate their experience in much the same way. It happens frequently.

Quote:
Most important, Phillips must know that claiming military cred he hadn't earned would be a one-way ticket to the dung heap of history in the eyes of veterans who saw combat.
It's hard to grasp. And yet, prominent people do the same thing. It happens frequently. People lie about their military service, and other things that can easily be fact-checked. People are strange.

To be clear, I'm not cutting Phillips slack just because he's not alone. I think he's a liar and, may Odin forgive me, a grifter.
__________________
To survive election season on a skeptics forum, one must understand Hymie-the-Robot.
varwoche is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th March 2019, 05:34 PM   #2164
applecorped
Rotten to the Core
 
applecorped's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 19,016
How
__________________
All You Need Is Love.
applecorped is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th March 2019, 05:44 PM   #2165
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 32,432
Originally Posted by varwoche View Post
I think he's a liar and, may Odin forgive me, a grifter.
Odin doesn't forgive. You pay the weregild, or you take your chances.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th March 2019, 11:20 AM   #2166
MRC_Hans
Penultimate Amazing
 
MRC_Hans's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 21,800
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Odin doesn't forgive. You pay the weregild, or you take your chances.
Correct. The forgiving god is a later invention. And a deception.

Hans
__________________
Experience is an excellent teacher, but she sends large bills.
MRC_Hans is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th March 2019, 02:02 PM   #2167
Chris_Halkides
Philosopher
 
Chris_Halkides's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 9,313
involuntary versus limited-purpose

"Or Sandmann could be considered an involuntary public figure who has been thrust into the public spotlight against his will. This can apply to anyone at the center of a public controversy despite whether or not that person willed it. If Sandmann is determined to be a public figure of any classification, he will need to demonstrate not only that the Post published false statements with negligence, but that it acted with “reckless disregard” for the truth as outlined in New York Times v. Sullivan." Atlantic.

I had not heard of an involuntary public figure. I have to wonder why there is even a distinction between "involuntary" and "limited-purpose" public figures; I don't see a practical difference at least in this case.
__________________
“Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had
happened.” – Winston Churchill
Chris_Halkides is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th March 2019, 02:16 PM   #2168
portlandatheist
Illuminator
 
portlandatheist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,005
Originally Posted by Chris_Halkides View Post
"Or Sandmann could be considered an involuntary public figure who has been thrust into the public spotlight against his will. This can apply to anyone at the center of a public controversy despite whether or not that person willed it. If Sandmann is determined to be a public figure of any classification, he will need to demonstrate not only that the Post published false statements with negligence, but that it acted with “reckless disregard” for the truth as outlined in New York Times v. Sullivan." Atlantic.

I had not heard of an involuntary public figure. I have to wonder why there is even a distinction between "involuntary" and "limited-purpose" public figures; I don't see a practical difference at least in this case.
The designation of involuntary pubic figure seems problematic and sketchy to me. Reporting about him now, weeks or months after the incident, seems like at this point he qualifies as an "involuntary public figure" but at the time of the writing, and for legal purposes, I think he should be considered a private citizen. It was the media shame mob that turned him into an involuntary public figure. Seems like trying to have your cake and eat it too.
portlandatheist is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th March 2019, 02:33 PM   #2169
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 32,432
Originally Posted by Chris_Halkides View Post
"Or Sandmann could be considered an involuntary public figure who has been thrust into the public spotlight against his will. This can apply to anyone at the center of a public controversy despite whether or not that person willed it. If Sandmann is determined to be a public figure of any classification, he will need to demonstrate not only that the Post published false statements with negligence, but that it acted with “reckless disregard” for the truth as outlined in New York Times v. Sullivan." Atlantic.

I had not heard of an involuntary public figure. I have to wonder why there is even a distinction between "involuntary" and "limited-purpose" public figures; I don't see a practical difference at least in this case.
On the other hand, if the people who thrust him into the spotlight against his will are the same ones who defamed him, and it was in fact their defamation that made him a public figure, then that defense probably goes out the window.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th March 2019, 02:55 PM   #2170
Giz
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 8,259
Originally Posted by portlandatheist View Post
The designation of involuntary pubic figure seems problematic and sketchy to me. Reporting about him now, weeks or months after the incident, seems like at this point he qualifies as an "involuntary public figure" but at the time of the writing, and for legal purposes, I think he should be considered a private citizen. It was the media shame mob that turned him into an involuntary public figure. Seems like trying to have your cake and eat it too.
Indeed. Publicly defaming an unknown and then justifying it because they are now known by all those who had read the defamation... seems an itsy bit wrong.
Giz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th March 2019, 03:58 PM   #2171
Chris_Halkides
Philosopher
 
Chris_Halkides's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 9,313
involuntary, limited-purpose public figure?

"Plaintiff Merle Dameron appeals from the district court's grant of summary judgment to the defendant in this defamation action. We agree with the district court's conclusion that the alleged libel was protected, but differ on the basis for such protection. The district court found that the defendants' statements about Dameron derived from an official report of a government proceeding. We do not believe the official report privilege applies in the circumstances of this case. However, we find that Dameron's role in a major public occurrence resulted in his becoming an involuntary, limited-purpose public figure. Under the controlling precedents, this status also forms a basis for protection, at least in the absence of actual malice by the alleged defamer. Accordingly, we affirm the court's grant of summary judgment." Link embedded in The Atlantic article.

It sounds as if an involuntary public figure is in essence still a limited-purpose public figure.
__________________
“Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had
happened.” – Winston Churchill

Last edited by Chris_Halkides; 8th March 2019 at 04:34 PM.
Chris_Halkides is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th March 2019, 03:08 PM   #2172
The Big Dog
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 29,551
Quote:
BOY vs GIANTS: They Messed With the Wrong Kid! Covington Student, Nicholas Sandmann, Is Taking On the Goliath Corporations that Smeared His Good Name and Endangered His Life and Future. Please Watch. Like. Retweet. Together We Will...
Teen sues mega-media Conglomerate CNN

ENTER SANDMANN! Play it loud!
The Big Dog is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th March 2019, 09:48 AM   #2173
sackett
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Detroit
Posts: 5,400
Originally Posted by The Big Dog View Post
Childish.
__________________
Fill the seats of justice with good men; not so absolute in goodness as to forget what human frailty is. -- Thomas Jefferson

What region of the earth is not filled with our calamities? -- Virgil
sackett is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th March 2019, 10:03 AM   #2174
The Big Dog
Suspended
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 29,551
Originally Posted by sackett View Post
Childish.
Their attacks on the teen DID expose the mega-media machines as childish and grossly incompetent by swallowing the sleazy spin of certified race grifters.

Another great post!
The Big Dog is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:10 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.