Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: Another Example of Biased Reporting by WAPO

  1. #1
    Team Gunsnet Platinum 06/2016 ltorlo64's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Back in the Pacific Northwest!
    Posts
    8,174

    Another Example of Biased Reporting by WAPO

    This is another example of a biased news story. The story is so biased, in fact, as to almost call the veracity of the whole article into question. First, the 4th paragraph begins with the words “two armed citizens became self-appointed protectors”. This ignores the civic duty that all citizens have to protect each other and tries to evoke visions of vigilantism. This is verified when about 6 paragraphs later the authors use an earlier quote by a OKCPD spokesman that says “We don’t want people to be vigilantes”. According to the dictionary a vigilante is “a member of a self-appointed group of citizens who undertake law enforcement in their community without legal authority, typically because the legal agencies are thought to be inadequate.” A citizen protecting another citizen is not trying to undertake law enforcement any more than a citizen who is trained in CPR is trying to undertake medical practice when providing first aid to a person with a heart attack. They are being a conscientious citizen.

    Next there is the way the shooting is described. The authors barely mention the fact that there was no specific target, that the shooter was just shooting anyone who happened to be there. They do make a big deal over no one being killed except for the criminal who was shooting people randomly. They pretty much ignore the fact that if the two men did not intervene there would assuredly been more innocent victims. In fact, the way the authors describe the criminal shooter you get the impression that he was an innocent victim.

    Last I will call attention to the headline “In all reality, there were three shooters.” This title attempts to lump the two people who risked their lives to stop a massacre in with the one intending to perpetrate a massacre. There were three people who fired their weapons, one shooter and two protectors. When referring to the “shooter” most people will associate that term with the person perpetrating the crime. The authors try to equate two very different people, and motives, to the individuals involved.

    It is sad and telling that this story was written and published by what used to be one of the most trusted news organizations. Just another reason why people distrust the news so much.

    https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/‘i...cid=spartanntp
    "Nothing ever gets so bad that government "help" can't make it worse." Pat Garrett, March 22, 2014

    "HATE IS GOOD, WHEN ITS DIRECTED AT EVIL." PROBASCO, April 20, 2012

    I tried to push the envelope, but found that it was stationery.

    Have you heard about the new corduroy pillows? They're making head lines!

    NRA Endowment Member

  2. #2
    Senior Member tank_monkey's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Kalifornia
    Posts
    7,017
    Wow. Disgusting! But I expect nothing LESS from WAPO.

  3. #3
    Team GunsNet Bronze 07/2011 T2K's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Charleston, South Carolina
    Posts
    945
    "Tilghman [the attacker] did not kill anyone..."

    No, he didn't, but he likely would have if two armed citizens hadn't responded so quickly.

  4. #4
    Team Gunsnet Platinum 06/2016 ltorlo64's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Back in the Pacific Northwest!
    Posts
    8,174
    Quote Originally Posted by T2K View Post
    "Tilghman [the attacker] did not kill anyone..."

    No, he didn't, but he likely would have if two armed citizens hadn't responded so quickly.
    Exactly. This statement also tries to insinuate that the motive of the protectors was to kill the shooter, but the shooter in not killing anyone was really an innocent bystander who didn't need to die. It also goes back to my earlier point about vigilantism, the article makes out that the protectors were judge, jury and executioner. However, if the shooter had put down his weapon when told to instead of shooting at the protectors he would be alive. No, that story is all sorts biased and factually challenged.
    "Nothing ever gets so bad that government "help" can't make it worse." Pat Garrett, March 22, 2014

    "HATE IS GOOD, WHEN ITS DIRECTED AT EVIL." PROBASCO, April 20, 2012

    I tried to push the envelope, but found that it was stationery.

    Have you heard about the new corduroy pillows? They're making head lines!

    NRA Endowment Member

  5. #5
    Team GunsNet Bronze 07/2011 T2K's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Charleston, South Carolina
    Posts
    945
    You are, of course, correct. The simmering bias in this article about a situation where without any doubt two armed citizens saved lives is evident.

  6. #6
    Team Guns Network Silver 04/2013 alismith's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    44th "Free" State
    Posts
    19,013
    Using firearms to protect anyone would insinuate that the firearm does have a purpose in society. That goes against the Communist agenda, therefore the Controlled News has to be biased.

    Treating the incident as justifiable and necessary just won't do.
    "Valar morghulis; valar dohaeris."

    Commucrats are most efficient at converting sins and crimes to accidents or misunderstandings.-Oswald Bastable

    Making good people helpless won't make bad people harmless.

    Freedom isn't free.

    "Attitude is the paintbrush that colors our world." TV Series, Haven.

    My Spirit Animal has rabies.

    I'd rather be an American than a Democrat.

    "If you can make a man afraid, you can control him" Netflix Series, The Irregulars

  7. #7
    Team GunsNetwork PLATINUM 10/2012 rci2950's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    under your bed
    Posts
    4,720
    Look at that honker...

    Gunsnet member since 2002
    Salt Water Cowboy - Dolphin 38

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •