Mediaboss Marketing

Too young, too black... Daudi Abe

When The Stranger asked me to attend and write about A Conversation with the Parents of Trayvon Martin at Town Hall, which happened last night, I hesitated. Not because this isnt important stuff, but because its such a tough topic for me. I have a son who is close to Trayvons age, and the seemingly constant barrage of black death caught on camera phones has become too much for me to keep watching. The sadness and grief that surround these stories are hard to hear. But the work is important. I attended the event.

A little background: Trayvon Benjamin Martin was born on February 5, 1995. On the evening of February 26, 2012, he was shot to death as he walked home from the store by George Zimmerman, a volunteer neighborhood watchman. He was 17. He was unarmed. When Zimmerman (who is a white Latino) spotted the seventeen-year-old Martin walking back to his fathers home in Sanford, Florida, he called 911 to report a suspicious person and was instructed to remain in his car. Instead, Zimmerman confronted Martin, and, after a brief altercation, Martin was shot. Zimmerman was charged with second-degree murder, claimed self-defense, and was found not guilty by a jury on July 13, 2013. On February 15, 2017, Trayvons mother, Sabrina Fulton, and father, Tracy Martin, spoke at Town Hall in Seattle.

When Trayvon's parents walked out on stage with moderator and local icon Vivian Phillips, I suddenly noticed the large percentage and racial mix of young people in attendance. A black mother herself, Phillips did a masterful job of guiding the conversation with empathy, yet pressed both parents to expand in detail on the unimaginable. For me, the most poignant moment of the evening was Tracys story of finding out Trayvon was the unidentified young man the media had been reporting for hours as shot to death. Father, unable to locate son, calling sons phone and going straight to voicemail over and over, calls the police who arrive, get a description, go back to the squad car and return with a folder containing a photo of Trayvon dead on the ground. The silence and focus of the crowd during that telling was an emotional peak, or valleynot sure which.

Because so much has happened since then, it can be easy to forget that George Zimmerman, whose name neither Fulton nor Martin said the entire night, wasnt arrested for 44 days, and that the trial is commonly referred to as the Trayvon Martin Trial even though he wasnt technically on trial, and that Martin was basically blamed for his own death by defense attorneys for the shooter, and also that when Sabrina Fulton sees a picture of her son, she sees an average teenager.

But Trayvon stopped being an average teenager that fateful moment nearly five years ago when George Zimmerman laid eyes on him. I wondered how these parents could not be totally consumed with anger and revenge, given not only what happened to Trayvon, but also given the way the Sanford Police Department and other local authorities treated the family in the aftermath. However, I sensed that speaking about their feelings on this topic numerous times has been therapeutic. Indeed, Tracy Martin, who was raised in East St. Louis, mentioned how he had to really restrain himself from going East St. Lou many times while in those moments of pain.

Fulton and Martin said they initially felt optimistic that President Obamas comments on the case might make a difference, but soon realized how powerful institutionalized racism is within the justice system, especially in the Deep South. Fulton in particular challenged the crowd: If you dont stand up to this kind of injustice, you are part of the problem. And added: Knowing that Trayvon was killed because of the color of his skin, you are obligated to do your part.

The phenomenon of fatal encounters with law enforcement for African Americans has a long local history. In 1938, three white Seattle police officers were fired, charged, tried, convicted and sentenced to 20 years each in the death of 26-year-old Berry Lawson, an African American waiter who was asleep in a chair in the lobby of the Mt. Fuji Hotel. Ninety minutes after being contacted by the officers, Lawson was pronounced dead at the hospital with a fractured skull. Soon after being convicted, all three officers were pardoned by the governor. A more recent example was the 2016 shooting by two white officers of Che Taylor, an African American who police said had a gun in his car. Curiously, an inquest found that Taylor was complying with officers commands, while also stating that the officers feared for their lives.

Trayvon Martins story has proven to be a catalyst in the discussion of race and policing. In the aftermath of this case and a social media celebration of Zimmerman turning the hooded black male predator into prey, Black Lives Matter was created by three community organizersAlicia Garza in Oakland, CA; Patrice Cullors in Los Angeles, CA; and Opal Tometi in Phoenix, AZ.

Initially a rallying cry and a hashtag on social media, Black Lives Matter was at its core a plea for humanity within the context of what seemed to be inhumane circumstances, in this case involving a minor. The profile of Black Lives Matter was raised significantly with its national freedom ride and the resulting protest presence in Ferguson, Missouri, after the 2014 fatal police shooting of unarmed, eighteen-year-old Michael Brown.

The trivializing nature of response phrases like All Lives Matter further reinforced the need to articulate the sentiment of Black Lives Matter in the first place. As my then 15-year-old daughter told me: By definition, all lives cant matter until black lives matter.

For those locally who dismiss out of hand a statement like "Black Lives Matter," I can only hope that not too many of you work in education or law enforcement. However, given the fact Seattles Public Schools and Police Department have recently been the subjects of federal investigations related to mistreatment of African Americans and other people of color, I think we already know the answer.

More here:
Trayvon Martin at 22 - TheStranger.com

The infamous Pasco County case from three years ago underscores the relevance of the law.

Eric Glasser, WTSP 6:32 PM. EST February 17, 2017

Former Tampa Police captain Curtis Reeves Jr. is suspected of fatally shooting Chad Oulson, 43, and wounding his wife, Nicole, 33. Tampa Bay Times photo

NEW PORT RICHEY, Fla. -- Just over three years ago, an argument over texting inside a Wesley Chapel movie theater got out of hand. Words flew. Then popcorn. A cell phone, and finally - a bullet.

On Monday, Curtis Reeves, 74, a retired Tampa police officer, will argue he was standing his ground when he shot and killed 43-year-old Chad Oulson.

Prosecutors will say Reeves is a hothead who lost his temper when Oulson was texting during the movie previews.

His defense attorneys will portray Reeves as an aging senior citizen who feared for his life when a far younger man stood up and confronted him.

Reeves' hearing is the latest in a series of high-profile Florida cases that show no clear-cut consistency when it comes to the Stand Your Ground defense.

Authorities say Curtis Reeves used this gun, a .380 caliber pistol, to shoot Chad Oulson in a Wesley Chapel movie theater. Pinellas-Pasco State Attorney's Office

Perhaps the best-known case is that of George Zimmerman, who was acquitted in the 2012 death of unarmed teenager Trayvon Martin.

But in 2010, a jury rejected the Stand Your Ground defense argument made by Trevor Dooley, who shot his neighbor David James on a Tampa basketball court.The argument was over a skateboarding disagreement. After several years behind bars, Dooley is currently out of prison pending an appeal.

In 2012, Michael David Dunn opened fire on a group of teenagers at a Jacksonville gas station.The so-called loud music shooter tried to invoke Stand Your Ground, but jurors said it was irrelevant and convicted Dunn on three counts of attempted murder.

In 2013, also in Jacksonville, Marissa Alexander fired a warning shot at what she called an abusive husband. She, too, tried to claim Stand Your Ground, but was convicted of attempted murder.

High-profile Tampa criminal attorney Barry Cohen, who has used Stand Your Ground as a defense, says there are key issues in Reeves case.

What's holding up the Curtis Reeves trial?

He's claiming that he took the life of the decedent in this case, because he was in a reasonable fear of having his life taken, or being suffered great bodily injury. Maybe he thought the telephone was a deadly weapon. Maybe he thought that he was going to choke him, or hit him, said Cohen.

Prosecutors will disagree.

The state will argue that this is not a Stand Your Ground case, said Cohen, But rather this was a police officer, a detective, who didn't get the respect that he thought he was entitled to. So, he says to the guy when he comes back, I told you, turn the phone off. The guy may say F you, throw popcorn in his face, or whatever, and he says, you know what? F me? I'll F you, I'll show you. Boom.

10Investigates reviews how suspect was taken into custody

If Curtis Reeves wins his Stand Your Ground hearing, it's over. He gets to walk out of court a free man.

But because there are so many arguable issues in this case, Cohen believes that the judge will move the case forward and leave those decisions to a jury.

( 2017 WTSP)

WTSP

State Attorney: Stand Your Ground expansion "a very bad situation"

WTSP

Bill thats shifts burden in Stand Your Ground passes Senate panel

Here is the original post:
Was fatal shooting inside Pasco movie theater justified? | WTSP.com - WTSP.com

CBS Local

In Chicago, Trayvon Martin's Parents Reflect On Race And Justice CBS Local They had the gun, he was changing his story and the lead detective said George Zimmerman was lying. Still, he walked free, Martin said. Neither believes their son's death and others like it have changed Florida's criminal justice system. They said ... SLOGTheStranger.com Trayvon Martin's parents remember his life, nearly 5 years after he was killedWGN-TV Trayvon Martin's Parents Coming To DuSable Museum In Washington Park FridayDNAinfo all 5 news articles »

Visit link:
In Chicago, Trayvon Martin's Parents Reflect On Race And Justice - CBS Local

FrontPage Magazine

The New Black Panther Party: Black Racism Personified FrontPage Magazine In March 2012, NBPP weighed in on the explosive case of Trayvon Martin, a black teenager who had recently been shot and killed under disputed circumstances by a white Hispanic named George Zimmerman in Sanford, Florida. Declaring that White ...

See more here:
The New Black Panther Party: Black Racism Personified - FrontPage Magazine

Fox News yesterday told the Erik Wemple Blog to be ready to discuss the very broad topic of media bias and the 2016 election on our appearance last night on Tucker Carlson Tonight. Instead, host Tucker Carlson wished to discuss the appearance in The Washington Post of native-advertising supplements promoting Russia what he termed paid propaganda for the Kremlin. He folded this offense into the larger context of discussions about fake news.

So this was purposely deceptive ambush journalism. So what?! From watching a great deal of Tucker Carlson Tonight, its clear that blindsiding his guests and keeping them from issuing fully formed answers is the official MO. Plus, this blog has been critical of Carlsons work, both at the Daily Caller and at Fox News. There was no question that he was using the smokescreen of a vague topic to blast away at the Erik Wemple Blog. Deal with it.

Another level of deception occurred on air, when Carlson alleged that the Erik Wemple Blog fails to provide accountability coverage of The Post. In contrast to Carlson himself who doesnt referee Fox Newss mistakes and formerly ordered his underlings at the Daily Caller not to criticize Fox News this blog has repeatedly criticized The Post over a number of journalistic and management issues. News outlets commonly dont allow such internal scrutiny.

We pointed out to Carlson that wed written a critical piece of The Post just last month, after the newspaper stumbled by inaccurately reporting that Russian hackers had penetrated the U.S. electrical grid. Our post explored the mistakes and what we viewed as the insufficient explanation for them.

In our chat last night, Carlson didnt view the post as a work of accountability. You didnt interview the reporters who wrote the story and then you end with this, the missteps mar an otherwise spectacular run for the Post. Now when you write something that brown nosy, do you feel guilt?

Since we had no idea Carlson would pursue this line of argument in the segment, we didnt have the post in front of us. But we did remember that we didnt end the post with those words. So we implored Carlson to provide the context necessary to properly inform the viewers eager to see the Erik Wemple Blog bloodied on live television. Now to the transcript:

CARLSON: Now when you write something that brown nosy, do you feel guilt?

ERIK WEMPLE BLOG: No.

CARLSON: Do you feel like Im doing my job as a hard-hitting media reporter, a spectacular run of my own publication, my own employers?

ERIK WEMPLE BLOG: Finish the post, Mr. Carlson. Read till the end, please.

CARLSON: Thats actually the last thats the end of it, and then you go

ERIK WEMPLE BLOG: No, read until the end. Read the entire last paragraph, please, for me.

Carlson declined to do so, choosing instead to deflect the request.

The notion that we chose to end this post with these words is an out-and-out lie. Have a look at the the following paragraphs of the post, which include the ending. Bolding is inserted to highlight the words that Carlson decided to pluck for his broadcast:

So theres a duel going on at The Posts website between a more recent story that features correct information and a more dated one that oversells the hacking threat. The result is a clicky version of Russian roulette: If you choose the wrong version, you get the wrong news.

A number of critics have blasted The Post for its handling of the story, and this blog will forego a laborious reconstruction of the affair.

What stands out about the incident, however, is that the newspaper published its salacious story based on the accounts of the officials, though without input from the utility folks. Burlington Electric executive Neale Lunderville told Vermont Public Radio, It could have easily been corrected, well first, had this federal official not leaked this information inaccurately, and second had the news outlet got in touch with us to confirm it or deny it, and we would have told them, Not so. Thats not the case. And they could have printed a correct story the first time around.

The Erik Wemple Blog today asked top Post officials for interviews on the screw-ups, though we didnt get any sit-downs. Kris Coratti, a spokeswoman for the paper, issued this statement: We have corrected the story, prominently displayed the correct information after further reporting, evaluated what transpired, and had the appropriate discussions internally to make sure something similar does not occur again.

Again would be the third time, considering that The Post was forced to publish an editors note over a Thanksgiving-weekend story fingering Russia for assisting in the spread of fake news.

The missteps mar an otherwise spectacular run for The Post, which nailed exclusive after exclusive in the presidential campaign. With traffic surging and editorial ranks growing, The Post, you might suppose, would have the self-confidence to sit for an extensive interview about its occasional failings. Apparently not.

Selective editing is a scourge of news production, and one that has frequently angered conservatives vis-a-vis mainstream media outlets. Think of NBC Newss handling of the 911 call in the George Zimmerman-Trayvon Martin incident or the extremely legitimate complaints about how a Katie Couric gun documentary slimed Second Amendment advocates.

Though the Erik Wemple Blog makes no claim that weve endured the same degree of distortion, theres one thing that generally knits together these instances. The unmolested record, that is. On the one hand, we have Carlsons statement that he read the end of the post in question; on the other, we have the post itself, which refutes his claim in a consequential way. The material before and after his quote provides critical coverage of this newspaper. The lesson here about Tucker Carlson Tonight is that surprise, surprise its all about in-the-moment entertainment. The folks who have filled our Twitter mentions with TUCKER-DESTROYED-YOU messages, after all, dont seem to care much about the actual circumstances. They got the fact-challenged presentation that Carlson so reliably and brilliantly delivers.

Not all of Carlsons fans, however, bought the presentation. One viewer from Maryland emailed the Erik Wemple Blog last night:

I saw your interview on Tucker Carlson show tonight and was intrigued by the back and forth you two had on the Vermont power plant story.

Im a big fan of Tuckers and think he usually brings up some interesting points and unique takes on the days events. I wanted to see what you had written and if you were as critical of your own papers reporting as you had claimed, so I went back and reread your piece.

I was shocked to see how wrong Tucker was on this topic. He really did cherry pick some points on his claims that you did not interview the reporters of the story without mentioning their unwillingness to answer your questions. It would be harder to be more critical of anyones reporting as you were of these reporters, let anyone reporters who write under the same banner as you.

I commend you for maintaining your composure during that onslaught of an interview. Im sure youre aware of the type of interviews Tucker likes to conduct and how we would try to frame you as a typical liberal media operative, and yet you still went on to defend your work.

I write this as someone who usually agrees with Tuckers points but felt you really got railroaded on this segment tonight.

I also write this as a subscriber to the Washington Post and reader of your columns, and just want to thank you for putting out honest writing in the face of such a combative and divided atmosphere.

1:28 p.m.: Updated to include reader email.

On Wednesday, Dec. 14, the Erik Wemple Blog conducted a phone interview with FOX News anchor Megyn Kelly. This is a part of their conversation. (Adriana Usero/The Washington Post)

Read more here:
The stupendously dishonest Tucker Carlson - Washington Post (blog)