SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
Journalists under teargas attack from police in Ferguson, Missouri. (USAToday.com screenshot via FAIR)
Ferguson Case Poses Test for Corporate Media
The killing of Michael Brown, an African-American man, by a white police officer in Ferguson, Missouri, posed a test for corporate media. The story was hard to avoid once the local community came out in protest, still ongoing, and were met harshly by police. Probably more significant for the press corps, the online community-in this case largely black social media-erupted in pain and anger, with some of their criticism directed at the press itself.
Aug 14, 2014
The killing of Michael Brown, an African-American man, by a white police officer in Ferguson, Missouri, posed a test for corporate media. The story was hard to avoid once the local community came out in protest, still ongoing, and were met harshly by police. Probably more significant for the press corps, the online community-in this case largely black social media-erupted in pain and anger, with some of their criticism directed at the press itself.
Some media have hewed to troubling practices that privilege police accounts and play up the specter of unruly mobs, as with the USA Today story (8/14/14) that rhetorically balanced "angry calls for reform and tear gas lobbed at protesters," in a piece that glossed the use of dogs, submachine guns and riot gear as police "seek[ing] order." And some will always choose to bland it out, like the L.A. Times' reference (8/13/14) to "an unsettled national conversation over race and policing."
The surprise, then, has been the extent to which some media seem to be taking the outcry seriously, talking about the militarization of police-brought home by the rough treatment given to reporters covering the story-and the criminalization of black people.
But there's still a question of how deep they'll delve. Media were especially taken with the hashtag campaign #iftheygunnedmedown, in which black men posted two different pictures of themselves-one in cap and gown, for instance, and another in which they looked "tougher" or "rougher"-and rhetorically asked which image media would use if they were killed by police. The campaign garnered a front-page story in the New York Times (8/12/14) and a Time magazine plaudit (8/11/14) for "What Hashtag Activism Does Right."
Sadly, the point wasn't that it was an interesting question, but that we already know the answer.
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, The U.S. is on a fast track to authoritarianism like nothing I've ever seen. Meanwhile, corporate news outlets are utterly capitulating to Trump, twisting their coverage to avoid drawing his ire while lining up to stuff cash in his pockets. That's why I believe that Common Dreams is doing the best and most consequential reporting that we've ever done. Our small but mighty team is a progressive reporting powerhouse, covering the news every day that the corporate media never will. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. And to ignite change for the common good. Now here's the key piece that I want all our readers to understand: None of this would be possible without your financial support. That's not just some fundraising cliche. It's the absolute and literal truth. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. Will you donate now to help power the nonprofit, independent reporting of Common Dreams? Thank you for being a vital member of our community. Together, we can keep independent journalism alive when it’s needed most. - Craig Brown, Co-founder |
© 2023 Fairness and Accuracy In Reporting (FAIR)
Janine Jackson
Janine Jackson is Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR) program director and producer/co-host of FAIR's syndicated radio show CounterSpin. She contributes frequently to FAIR's magazine, Extra! and co-edited "The FAIR Reader: An Extra! Review of Press and Politics in the '90s" (2019).
The killing of Michael Brown, an African-American man, by a white police officer in Ferguson, Missouri, posed a test for corporate media. The story was hard to avoid once the local community came out in protest, still ongoing, and were met harshly by police. Probably more significant for the press corps, the online community-in this case largely black social media-erupted in pain and anger, with some of their criticism directed at the press itself.
Some media have hewed to troubling practices that privilege police accounts and play up the specter of unruly mobs, as with the USA Today story (8/14/14) that rhetorically balanced "angry calls for reform and tear gas lobbed at protesters," in a piece that glossed the use of dogs, submachine guns and riot gear as police "seek[ing] order." And some will always choose to bland it out, like the L.A. Times' reference (8/13/14) to "an unsettled national conversation over race and policing."
The surprise, then, has been the extent to which some media seem to be taking the outcry seriously, talking about the militarization of police-brought home by the rough treatment given to reporters covering the story-and the criminalization of black people.
But there's still a question of how deep they'll delve. Media were especially taken with the hashtag campaign #iftheygunnedmedown, in which black men posted two different pictures of themselves-one in cap and gown, for instance, and another in which they looked "tougher" or "rougher"-and rhetorically asked which image media would use if they were killed by police. The campaign garnered a front-page story in the New York Times (8/12/14) and a Time magazine plaudit (8/11/14) for "What Hashtag Activism Does Right."
Sadly, the point wasn't that it was an interesting question, but that we already know the answer.
Janine Jackson
Janine Jackson is Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR) program director and producer/co-host of FAIR's syndicated radio show CounterSpin. She contributes frequently to FAIR's magazine, Extra! and co-edited "The FAIR Reader: An Extra! Review of Press and Politics in the '90s" (2019).
The killing of Michael Brown, an African-American man, by a white police officer in Ferguson, Missouri, posed a test for corporate media. The story was hard to avoid once the local community came out in protest, still ongoing, and were met harshly by police. Probably more significant for the press corps, the online community-in this case largely black social media-erupted in pain and anger, with some of their criticism directed at the press itself.
Some media have hewed to troubling practices that privilege police accounts and play up the specter of unruly mobs, as with the USA Today story (8/14/14) that rhetorically balanced "angry calls for reform and tear gas lobbed at protesters," in a piece that glossed the use of dogs, submachine guns and riot gear as police "seek[ing] order." And some will always choose to bland it out, like the L.A. Times' reference (8/13/14) to "an unsettled national conversation over race and policing."
The surprise, then, has been the extent to which some media seem to be taking the outcry seriously, talking about the militarization of police-brought home by the rough treatment given to reporters covering the story-and the criminalization of black people.
But there's still a question of how deep they'll delve. Media were especially taken with the hashtag campaign #iftheygunnedmedown, in which black men posted two different pictures of themselves-one in cap and gown, for instance, and another in which they looked "tougher" or "rougher"-and rhetorically asked which image media would use if they were killed by police. The campaign garnered a front-page story in the New York Times (8/12/14) and a Time magazine plaudit (8/11/14) for "What Hashtag Activism Does Right."
Sadly, the point wasn't that it was an interesting question, but that we already know the answer.
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.