Rittenhouse: The 'Media Accountability' Project

Homepage Forums Politics Rittenhouse: The 'Media Accountability' Project

This topic contains 70 replies, has 7 voices, and was last updated by  TheEncogitationer 3 months, 1 week ago.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 71 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #41728

    Autumn
    Participant

    The long and short of it is that Kyle Rittenhouse and his representation are planning litigation against news networks and media personalities who made reference to him as a murderer, white supremacist, or racist.

    https://www.foxnews.com/media/kyle-rittenhouse-media-accountability-project

    In linking to Fox footage, it’s not because I’m longing for some deep dive discussion on the merits of the views presented. Rather, it’s the comments. The comments are about what you’d expect, but they also highlight what product is increasingly being marketed first and foremost: emotional outlet.

    In this case, Fox, like many media outlets, generates revenue from running the story and getting people all riled up. But Rittenhouse also gets to sell his story in exchange for donations to his legal fund which supposedly promotes ‘media accountability’ but thus far only seems intended to go after the segments of media that were unfavourable to Kyle. And that funding is important because the lawsuits are a long shot. The best case scenario is out of court settlements, but Rittenhouse’s claims may be rejected before it even comes to that.

    This particular brand of opportunism isn’t a left or right thing per se. Which is to say opportunists can exploit nearly any cause if people have strong feelings associated with it (e.g. pinkwashing). But with this Rittenhouse case, it feels like it’s revealing just how thinly veiled the profit motive can be and still pass muster.

    #41729

    TheEncogitationer
    Participant

    Autumn,

    The First Amendment of the U.S. Bill of Rights prohibits prior restraint of media providers by government as well as fines and imprisonment for content and opinion, but it does not prohibit civil lawsuits for libel and slander.

    People who throw around false accusations of “racism” need this good and hard and people who throw around false accusations of “murder” need it even harder.

    The State can’t even press murder charges without an indictment before a Grand Jury, which requires some form of evidence, and can only convict and punish someone for murder if all elements of the offense are proven without a reasonable doubt.

    Some washed-up comedian on some old biddy talk show throwing around accusations of “murder” could stand to bear some burden of proof too!

    #41730

    TheEncogitationer
    Participant

    Autumn,

    Oh,and let’s not forget Hoveround Joe and “The One” Obama, who both used their Executive position to run their mouths to the public and tried to bias the court cases of Kyle Rittenhouse and George Zimmerman, respectively.

    #41731

    Autumn
    Participant

    …but it does not prohibit civil lawsuits for libel and slander. People who throw around false accusations of “racism” need this good and hard and people who throw around false accusations of “murder” need it even harder.

    No one said he can’t file a suit. That doesn’t mean the suit is likely to be successful in court or even that a judge would allow the case to move forward. It’s unlikely statements that he is a murderer or that he is racist will qualify as calumny. Certainly ‘media accountability’ is a grandiose way of saying, “help me pay to sue people and organizations for airing opinions about me I don’t like.”

    #41732

    jakelafort
    Participant

    Interesting timely topic typical of Autumnal testimony…

    Yeah i have been wondering how the Ukraine news has become all-consuming 24/7 on the popular networks. Can’t help but juxtapose the relative harm with other invasions/civil wars/genocides. And of course it is Russia/USSR which is a super power and has had a profound influence on history of the west…it is Whites not others…and it potentially may lead to WW111 so there is THAT. On the other hand it does not explain the failure to furnish any or nearly any coverage of other humanitarian horror shows.

    I suspect capitalism is the major reason for the differential treatment of humanitarian crises. The revelation of algorithms’ role in causing fanatical polarization in the USA and elsewhere came as a real eye opener. There is no way the drafters of the bill of rights could have foreseen that. And with that polarization is the realization that having boogeymen sells. Sells bigtime! How long can you hate Trump? Day after day of portraying that evil bastard moron as an evil bastard moron. The audience on the left loved it. It became a religion to feed the narrative so that even when Trump said something that was accurate or inoffensive you could not report it or you had to spin it.

    So now Putin and Russia are the boogeymen. Give the media outlets more instances of killing babies and pregnant mothers, targeting civilians, throw in other atrocities cuz that shit sells, sells bigtime! The profit motive meets human emotions and inflames those emotions in turn altering history. Like that popular song goes…money changes everything.

    As to Rittenhouse my guess is his claims will be dismissed in summary judgment. I recently spoke to an assistant district attorney who indicated that the atmosphere is so charged with anti-racism that legit cases are rejected by grand juries when the specter of racism is included even when racism has nothing to do with the case. And how bizarre is it when just under two centuries ago even abolitionists held prejudiced views of Blacks and now anti-racism is exposed and exploited even if it is not present?

    #41733

    Autumn
    Participant

    I suspect capitalism is the major reason for the differential treatment of humanitarian crises. The revelation of algorithms’ role in causing fanatical polarization in the USA and elsewhere came as a real eye opener. There is no way the drafters of the bill of rights could have foreseen that. And with that polarization is the realization that having boogeymen sells. Sells bigtime! How long can you hate Trump?

    I’d wager there are two things that make this war more marketable. i) It upsets our sense of how the world works and how power needs to remain balanced. ii) It can be painted more readily in simplistic terms of good guys versus bad guys. Both are very emotionally appealing.

    This is in no way to suggest that people don’t have legitimate or sincere concern, mind you.

    This was, perhaps, part of what made Trump so significant as well. For him or against him, his presidency carried a sense that it would upset the status quo either to combat corruptions, or to be the straw that broke the camel’s back into a complete descent into corruption. He was also very simple to love or hate depending on what side of that line you were on. While Obama, and Bush before him, were both met with quite vocal opposition, I don’t know if either presidency was as exploitable as Trump’s highly polarizing time in office.

    #41734

    jakelafort
    Participant

    Autumn,

    Good v. evil is an old and emotionally appealing theme. But isn’t that present in all of the humanitarian crises?

    Upending status quo is also present in all conflicts. The difference in the case of Ukraine is that it threatens a democracy and a part of the planet that feels more relevant to the dominant groups. I agree though that notion of status quo is very relevant. Trump exploited the fears of his base in regards to status quo. There were external threats that he would demolish or negate in making America great again. The poorest Whites before emancipation were the most rabid haters of Black slaves. They wanted to retain their status in the social hierarchy. It seems like every novel from the 19th century has that element of class consciousness. In all of the iterations of discrimination that are front and center in contemporary society that seems to be the one that has the least exposure.

    #41735

    Autumn
    Participant

    Autumn, Good v. evil is an old and emotionally appealing theme. But isn’t that present in all of the humanitarian crises?

    Not sure. I’ve fallen out of touch with that. There are principles, convictions, dysfunction, and harm amongst a few other variables I tend to consider. But the whole good and evil thing for me has become gibberish. I’ve been in that bubble for so long that I’ve lost touch with what’s generally true regarding people’s sensibilities on good and evil.

    Perhaps if my home were being invaded, I’d need to see the invaders as evil just to make some sort of sense out of the senseless. I can’t really imagine watching the pizza place next door get taken out by a wayward rocket and thinking, “Unfortunate, but it’s important to hear both sides in a disagreement.” I’d probably be shocked, then thinking about survival, and later on as my mind reeled to process traumatic events, maybe I’d think vehemently, “Those murdering fuck heads,” and want my pound of flesh.

    Upending status quo is also present in all conflicts.

    It is, but I also feel defending it is very frequently present in people’s mindsets as well. A fear of change and instability can be pretty compelling.

    The difference in the case of Ukraine is that it threatens a democracy and a part of the planet that feels more relevant to the dominant groups.

    And I think it threatens our sense of global positioning for our own respective nations. We’ve centred so much on a global political structure that plays by certain rules (whether those rules are fair to everyone or not). That structure has tried to move past the cold war and preceding conflicts. I’m not suggesting it’s risen above violence. Just that there are specific conflicts we’ve wanted to have in the rearview mirror. Every time Russia moves, it provokes the sort of response like those of abuse victims. Putin raises a nuclear hand, and we curl up like we’re about to hit. The idea of getting hit is, in itself, violent. Whether that’s hypocritical of nations that also bolster similar armaments or not, who wants to live acknowledging that anything we’ve built or established could be half erased at just about any time?

    I agree though that notion of status quo is very relevant. Trump exploited the fears of his base in regards to status quo. There were external threats that he would demolish or negate in making America great again. The poorest Whites before emancipation were the most rabid haters of Black slaves. They wanted to retain their status in the social hierarchy. It seems like every novel from the 19th century has that element of class consciousness. In all of the iterations of discrimination that are front and center in contemporary society that seems to be the one that has the least exposure.

    In the Rittenhouse case too, we see this sort of dynamic. In the grand scheme, Kyle is likely pretty unimportant, but he’s become emblematic of either the violence that preserves an oppressive and abusive status quo, or of a resistance to a violent threat to tear apart the stability that allows Americans to live free. Kyle is a lightning rod for so many issues and feelings that have been brewing for many decades longer than Kyle has been alive. That being the case, his legal team stands to make bank off that, and they’ll fund it by milking the emotions from the engorged teats of people whose anger has been cultivated for far too long.

    #41736

    _Robert_
    Participant

    Oh damn, he dropped his ice cream cone…

    #41737

    TheEncogitationer
    Participant

    Fellow Unbeoievers,

    Oh, and how could I forget? Freedom of speech and expression does not mean the “right” to create fake “hate crimes” hoaxes that extort taxpayers the cost of the police overtime investigating the non-existent crime, as well as rile up needless anger and hate in an already riled-up, high-crime, racially, ethnically, sexually tense city and nation. Evidently, I am not alone in my sentiments about Jussie Smollett and his cream-puff sentence for his ugly, grandstanding hoax:

    Even at his sentencing, Jussie Smollett played the victim

    The “Empire” actor could have owned a deception that diverted precious police resources from solving real crimes against people of color and his LGBTQ sisters and brothers.
    By Laura Washington
    March 12, 2022 06:00 AM
    https://chicago.suntimes.com/columnists/2022/3/12/22973208/sentencing-jussie-smollett-victim-jail-laura-washington-column

    • This reply was modified 3 months, 2 weeks ago by  TheEncogitationer. Reason: Early morning spelling
    #41739

    TheEncogitationer
    Participant

    Robert,

    And how would react if you were accused of murder and racism and you were on trial for your life for it?

    And did you ever ask who were these three men shot by Kyle Rittenhouse? Somebody did. Man, these three would make excellent Catholic and Protestant clergymen!

    What We Know About the 3 Protesters Shot by Kyle Rittenhouse
    by Jaquelyn Gray
    November 15, 2021

    What We Know About the 3 Protesters Shot by Kyle Rittenhouse

    And, if anyrhing, it is these three thugs who bad no business being out.

    #41740

    _Robert_
    Participant

    Yes, I did and do know all about the three he shot. What a fucking hero pudgy Kyle is. If his stupid ass wasn’t there, 2 people would still be alive and nothing to even note would even have happened. Celebrating some “proud boys” even. If it is a goal is to become a white national piece of shit, then they should all be proud.

    #41741

    jakelafort
    Participant

    Encotunes,

    Fake hate crime hoaxes are not under first amendment umbrella?

    Is that what you are saying? If so what happened to your unsophisticated blanket view? Is it because the content is offensive to you?

    #41742

    jakelafort
    Participant

    From Autumn:

    In the Rittenhouse case too, we see this sort of dynamic. In the grand scheme, Kyle is likely pretty unimportant, but he’s become emblematic of either the violence that preserves an oppressive and abusive status quo, or of a resistance to a violent threat to tear apart the stability that allows Americans to live free. Kyle is a lightning rod for so many issues and feelings that have been brewing for many decades longer than Kyle has been alive. That being the case, his legal team stands to make bank off that, and they’ll fund it by milking the emotions from the engorged teats of people whose anger has been cultivated for far too long.

    Well said…

    #41743

    Autumn
    Participant

    Evidently, I am not alone in my sentiments about Jussie Smollett and his cream-puff sentence for his ugly, grandstanding hoax: Even at his sentencing, Jussie Smollett played the victim The “Empire” actor could have owned a deception that diverted precious police resources from solving real crimes against people of color and his LGBTQ sisters and brothers. By Laura Washington March 12, 2022 06:00 AM

    Smollet garnered sympathy when the story was believed to be true. Many didn’t want to believe it was false. To that extent, he was able to run a narrative exploiting people’s emotional investment in addressing racism and homophobia. But ultimately, he was convicted, and while I am sure he still has fans and people who believe he’s innocent, largely he lost sympathy in the end. He’s not the best example of the issue I raised in the OP.

    And, if anyrhing, it is these three thugs who bad no business being out.

    They actually did. They were all free to be there. They had business being out if they felt they had business being out. Whether or not they were ‘thugs’ doesn’t enter into it.

    And how would react if you were accused of murder and racism and you were on trial for your life for it?

    I know that was addressed to Robert, but personally, I have the good fortune when I cry or show remorse that it doesn’t look like bad acting, so at a bare minimum, I guess I would have read better on camera. I can’t know what it feels like to be Kyle, but were I in his shoes, I’d have probably been fairly consumed by the fact that because I was such a colossal fuck up, two people died, and one was seriously injured. But I’m not Kyle and I’ve never fucked up that hard, so moot point, I guess.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 71 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.