Buckeyes Riot Burn Destroy Property, Not A Thug In Sight
- Thread starter Turtle
- Start date
There's an infinite number of Blogs that people can link to to bolster their own opinion, but I'm most concerned with how the press actually reported the news. Identical happenings are reported differently, depending on whether the participants are black or white. Those who think white people can't riot even when they're rioting will point to "this didn't happen" or "well, they didn't do that" as proof that it's not a riot. Not only is that a logical fallacy, it's patently incorrect. The litmus test for what qualifies as a riot is not whether a business is burned or looted, it's whether or not the event it "a noisy, violent public disorder caused by a group or crowd of persons." In legal terms, a riot is defined as "a disturbance of the public peace by three or more persons acting together in a disrupting and tumultuous manner in carrying out their private purposes."
If the police feel the need to distribute copious amounts of tear gas and pepper spray, it's a riot, right? They wouldn't do that during a celebration, would they? Of course not.
If the rioters are white, the press (and a really lot of white folks) give them a pass, but if they're black, they are treated much more harshly by the press (and a really lot of white folks). If you set a fire to a dumpster, a building or a couch, it's still arson.
The perfect tweet left out a couple of pictues:
IMHO there's a big difference between a group of people whose intent is to loot, burn and destroy their own community and other people's businesses as opposed to those who have been partying all day and night and celebrating a championship win by their football team (at the encouragement of their University, I might add). So far I've seen no reports of any businesses being burned or looted and no significant property destruction other than a few dumpsters and trash bins; nothing at all to compare with that of Ferguson's riots.
Ohio State and nearly every other college with a big-time football program implicitly encourage this kind of behavior. Their budgets for their football programs are larger than any pro team; their stadiums hold over 100K people and they spend millions of dollars more promoting athletics than they do academics. On football weekends the parties and tailgating start the day before the game and the festivities are primed by rivers of booze and stimulated by bands and social gatherings of all sorts to whip up the festival atmosphere surrounding the upcoming game. It should come as no surprise that all these fans - most of them drunk and in their late teens or early 20s - take to the streets to celebrate a championship victory. But then when it does happen, the community leaders and campus administrators are aghast when these rabid fans they've developed over the years don't react like the gallery at the Masters when the winner sinks the final putt. According to some reports, the riot in 2002 after OSU defeated MI was worse than the one Monday night.
Bottom line is, there's a significant difference between a celebration involving a crowd of drunken brats and a crowd of people intent on looting and burning down a neighborhood or business district. Evidence of the difference can be seen in the amount property damage, number of arrests and people sent to the hospital. In either case, these mobs should disperse when ordered to by the police - but it doesn't always work that way. Columbus, OH and OSU should have known something like this was going to happen if the Buckeyes won, and should have prepared accordingly.
The perfect tweet left out a couple of pictues:
IMHO there's a big difference between a group of people whose intent is to loot, burn and destroy their own community and other people's businesses as opposed to those who have been partying all day and night and celebrating a championship win by their football team (at the encouragement of their University, I might add). So far I've seen no reports of any businesses being burned or looted and no significant property destruction other than a few dumpsters and trash bins; nothing at all to compare with that of Ferguson's riots.
Ohio State and nearly every other college with a big-time football program implicitly encourage this kind of behavior. Their budgets for their football programs are larger than any pro team; their stadiums hold over 100K people and they spend millions of dollars more promoting athletics than they do academics. On football weekends the parties and tailgating start the day before the game and the festivities are primed by rivers of booze and stimulated by bands and social gatherings of all sorts to whip up the festival atmosphere surrounding the upcoming game. It should come as no surprise that all these fans - most of them drunk and in their late teens or early 20s - take to the streets to celebrate a championship victory. But then when it does happen, the community leaders and campus administrators are aghast when these rabid fans they've developed over the years don't react like the gallery at the Masters when the winner sinks the final putt. According to some reports, the riot in 2002 after OSU defeated MI was worse than the one Monday night.
Bottom line is, there's a significant difference between a celebration involving a crowd of drunken brats and a crowd of people intent on looting and burning down a neighborhood or business district. Evidence of the difference can be seen in the amount property damage, number of arrests and people sent to the hospital. In either case, these mobs should disperse when ordered to by the police - but it doesn't always work that way. Columbus, OH and OSU should have known something like this was going to happen if the Buckeyes won, and should have prepared accordingly.
Right, most of it had to do with young college kids that were drinking all day. A big difference between the Ferguson riots and Ohio State.
The Ohio State riot was fire to dumpsters, trash cans, couches in the streets, and a temporary HighSchool goal post knocked down . No overturned vehicles or car fires. No looting of businesses.
The Ferguson riots had looting, multiple vehicles destroyed, and businesses burned to the ground or severely damaged.
Buildings destroyed in Ferguson riots worth millions - St. Louis Business Journal
The press DID refer to the OHIO STATE incident as a RIOT in many stories. The police also brought out the riot gear and used pepper spray and tear gas on the crowd. Even on many of them that happened to be white and some who were just walking on the sidewalk.
Pepper spray use on Ohio State revelers to face Columbus police review | The Columbus Dispatch
Pepper spray use on Ohio State revelers to face Columbus police review | The Columbus Dispatch
Again, this is not about police overreaction as they are wont to do, it's about the disparity of the tenor and tone of the language and phrasing used in the reporting of the press when blacks riot versus when whites do it. It's an observational fact that is indefensible. Rioting is rioting, no matter to what degree, no matter who does it. It cannot be defended.
There are plenty of headlines/ stories that say the Ohio State incident was a RIOT.
Here is a report about the Ferguson riot. No mention of the word thug. The word thug very rarely appears in new reports from a news organization.
Here is an example of story about Ferguson. They use words like 'protesters', 'crowd', and a tweet that says 'unruly crowd'.
Gunshots, looting after grand jury in Ferguson case does not indict officer in Michael Brown shooting | Fox News
Here is a report about the Ferguson riot. No mention of the word thug. The word thug very rarely appears in new reports from a news organization.
Here is an example of story about Ferguson. They use words like 'protesters', 'crowd', and a tweet that says 'unruly crowd'.
Gunshots, looting after grand jury in Ferguson case does not indict officer in Michael Brown shooting | Fox News
The Ferguson rioters were thugs, so were the OSU rioters. A spade is always a shovel. I don't recall many on the news using the word "thug", too bad, they are. Call it like it is.
The term thug is rarely used much by the press in news reports. It is used by commentators, twitter users, and in blogs when giving their opinions.
I know, it's not a "PC" word. We have to sugar coat things these days and we excuse thuggery.
Yes, I know. Thank you very much, though.
This isn't a contest to go out and cherry pick stories that make the case you're trying to make. Especially since that particular story helps make my point. The simple fact is the press (and you, apparently) give whites a pass when they riot but not blacks. It's a stark double standard that ironically the very same people get all riled up about when a black cop shoots an unarmed white man and there's no massive press coverage or rioting (of which a near identical mirrored incident happened in Utah 2 days after the Ferguson shooting). If you can recognize the double standard of the reporting of black cops shooting white men, but not the reporting double standard of rioting, then it can only be for one reason, and it ain't a flattering one.
The story you linked above makes my point, when compared with a story at Fox News about the Ohio State riots, as in the story above it refers to violent protesters and vandals, and journalistically detailed the damage to make it as repugnant as possible (first sentence in first paragraph), and in the Ohio State story the "the revelry quickly got out of hand," and it was a "rowdy crowd," and glossed over the damage, softening it up and moving it down in the story. Here's a piece that compares those two stories, in fact. I realize this article singles out My Precious in an unflattering manner and deals with the practical application of abstract journalistic concepts, and because of that this thread has a very good chance of going dramatically off the tracks, but I will do me best to refrain from being a part of that.
If all I knew about the event was in that headline, [which is true of a lot of readers], I'd think the "revelers" were celebrating by singing loudly and maybe snatching an occasional police officer's cap, and the pepper spray was an overreaction.
When the streets are full of rampaging people, it's a totally different slant depending on their skin color, mainly.
Despite Pilgrim's allegations, I highly doubt the protesters in Ferguson intended to loot and destroy businesses - that was the work of the opportunists who appear for just that reason. The photos we all saw make it look as if the protesters and the looters were one & the same, but that's simply not true.
In the OHIO STATE riot they were described as revelers because they were REVELING. It was also described as a RIOT because they were RIOTING.
With the Ferguson riot. They were described as PROTESTERS as LOOTERS because they were PROTESTING and LOOTING.
The news coverage treated both protesters and looters as one mob, no difference.
It's silly when I see some complaining about the perceived double standard with the Ohio State riot and the Ferguson riot.
They complain that the Ohio State rioters aren't being called thugs in the news reports yet the Ferguson protesters weren't called thugs either in the news reports by news organizations. They try to argue that the riots are completely the same, while dismissing obvious facts that make them quite different.
They even make statements like this--
'Celebrating a win versus complaining about an injustice. And yet, extreme jubilation and extreme frustration both yield the same results.'
The difference is with one you had buildings burned to the ground and stores looted. Millions of dollars in damages. The other you had fires in trash bins and couches. And there was a goal post torn down. Yet some want to say the two riots yielded the same results. They try to make it seem like it's exactly the same with tweets that distort the facts and by their omission of photos. Some also will inflate what happened in the Ohio State riot by giving erroneous information, like the OP did, that cars were set on fire. There haven't been any reports of this that I've seen. Anything to fit the false narrative.
They complain that the Ohio State rioters aren't being called thugs in the news reports yet the Ferguson protesters weren't called thugs either in the news reports by news organizations. They try to argue that the riots are completely the same, while dismissing obvious facts that make them quite different.
They even make statements like this--
'Celebrating a win versus complaining about an injustice. And yet, extreme jubilation and extreme frustration both yield the same results.'
The difference is with one you had buildings burned to the ground and stores looted. Millions of dollars in damages. The other you had fires in trash bins and couches. And there was a goal post torn down. Yet some want to say the two riots yielded the same results. They try to make it seem like it's exactly the same with tweets that distort the facts and by their omission of photos. Some also will inflate what happened in the Ohio State riot by giving erroneous information, like the OP did, that cars were set on fire. There haven't been any reports of this that I've seen. Anything to fit the false narrative.
Stop. Just stop already. We've already been through this. You don't know what you're doing. You've got your own definitions for words, and you don't understand what you read. It's clear you haven't understood even half of what I've written in this thread. Everything you're posted about this has been off the mark. Every single one of your sentences in the quoted post above that attempts to summarize what I've said is completely wrong. It's astonishing how you can read something, and come away with something other than what was written, and at the same time think you understand what you read.
I'm not complaining about the presence or absence of specific keywords, I'm talking about the way the stories are crafted and presented. I didn't argue the riots are completely the same. In fact, I made a distinction between them. I never said the two riots yielded the same results. I noted that they did not yield the same results, actually. Nor did I inflate anything, much less by giving erroneous information about cars being set on fire (I said "according to reports", one of which is the Columbus Dispatch, who several cars were on fire, and they had a picture of one overturned car). Just because you haven't any reports of something doesn't mean it didn't happen. I don't have any inclination nor desire to inflate anything. It is what it is. Nothing needs inflating. Nor does it need to be softened and excused by you because of some bias.
I completely understand that you think if blacks riot, and they burn and loot businesses, then it's bad, bad, bad, and if whites do it, as long as they don't burn or loot businesses, that it just ain't that big a deal. You think the Ferguson and Ohio State riots are totally different, like night and day, not even comparable. Riotous protesters are not the same as drunken revelers. I get it. There's really nothing else you need to post here to convince me of that.