You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.
Go to Page...
Thank you for crosschecking our sponsors!
About This Page: This is a discussion on Politics within the LetsGoKings.com forums, at Los Angeles Kings Hockey Fan Forum. The paper ignores the heroes and exacerbates the department's problems
By Robert C. J. Parry
October 21, 2007
In its most recent editorial about the May Day demonstrations at MacArthur
The paper ignores the heroes and exacerbates the department's problems
By Robert C. J. Parry
October 21, 2007
In its most recent editorial about the May Day demonstrations at MacArthur Park, The Times again showed its historic disregard for facts and history in its coverage of the Los Angeles Police Department and in its slavish devotion to the concept of police "reform," regardless of cost, consequences or wisdom.
The editorial, published in response to the Oct. 9 release of the LAPD's report on the MacArthur Park disturbance, described the scene at the park as "chaos" resulting from "missteps" by the department.
How did this terrible situation come to pass? Well, the editorial noted, among other things, that training "seems to have lapsed perilously -- the Metropolitan Division's basic training course was cut in 2005." It also described Chief William Bratton's ongoing struggles with the department's "cultural and institutional defects" connected to this lapse.
Yet, astonishingly, the paper failed to point out that it was Bratton's own decision to eliminate that training. Instead, the editorial praised the chief's "deserved" second term and his "impressive response" to the events of May 1. It seems that publicly condemning your subordinates for problems you helped cause impresses The Times.
Sadly, this intellectual dissonance is true to form. Looking back at The Times' coverage of the LAPD, it's easy to see decades of factual omissions, routine second-guessing of police officers and a consistent support of activist agendas.
For instance, the "Rampart scandal" is a frequent point of reference for The Times, in both news stories and editorials. Yet the paper rarely mentions that four of the nine Rampart officers were not ultimately convicted of the charges against them -- and that three of them have successfully sued the city for "malicious prosecution." (The city is appealing the $15-million jury award.) As late as the summer of 2006, a Times story opened with a reference to the nine prosecutions, ignoring their outcomes except in an info box at the end of the 1,828-word article.
For instance, the "Rampart scandal" is a frequent point of reference for The Times, in both news stories and editorials. Yet the paper rarely mentions that four of the nine Rampart officers were not ultimately convicted of the charges against them
Doesn't that mean that 5 of the 9 WERE convicted? Hell, that's over 50%!
That means it was an overkill with their internal investigation, which cost the city MILLIONS.
sadly it doesn't COST the city dick, it costs the taxpayers.
IMO thats part of the problem. everyone reads it cost the CITY and they say wow that sucks. If they realized it cost THEM, the taxpayers maybe they would at think twice when they vote
Small fact about the news, that should be apparent but isn't.
Of course the news, all news, reports the "bad" side of the LAPD/Fire dept/Mayor/whoever. The reason for this is NOT the liberal media bias, or hatred for cops or authority. The reason that news outlets report bad news is because it is rare.
The events that make news are not common, thats what makes it news. Good things happen every minute, while bad things are fairly rare. Nobody wants to hear about the things they see everyday, we want to hear about whats interesting. Interesting events are not commonplace.
The irony is that because the news outlets report all the bad news, people assume that the negative events happen all the time when in fact they are relatively rare.
So all you cops... stop feeling persecuted, the papers just picking on the guys that give you a bad name. And maybe a little less of the "blue wall" would help your reputation.
And all you cop haters... don't assume that since you see a story about corrupt cops that a broad swath of them are corrupt.
As an aside, cops have only been *******s to me when they think I was hiding something that I wasn't. When I've been in the wrong, they've always been professional.
So all you cops... stop feeling persecuted, the papers just picking on the guys that give you a bad name. And maybe a little less of the "blue wall" would help your reputation.
And all you cop haters... don't assume that since you see a story about corrupt cops that a broad swath of them are corrupt.
As an aside, cops have only been *******s to me when they think I was hiding something that I wasn't. When I've been in the wrong, they've always been professional.
WRONG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! the media is liberal and there no side stepping that. NEXT, we are not feeling persecuted at all, BUT be fair in your representation and DONT sensationalize. The media and special interest groups (the classic example is Al Sharpton and the Lancaster incident with the school girls and security guard) are very famous for this. As cops, WE want the bad cops to be brought to justice and dealt with. LASTLY, when a cop is shot and killed doing his job, DON'T bury the story on the back page or page 4 of the newspapers. A police officer protecting your neighborhood that is murdered should be a front page story and not some miscellaneous news item.
WRONG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! the media is liberal and there no side stepping that. NEXT, we are not feeling persecuted at all, BUT be fair in your representation and DONT sensationalize. The media and special interest groups (the classic example is Al Sharpton and the Lancaster incident with the school girls and security guard) are very famous for this. As cops, WE want the bad cops to be brought to justice and dealt with. LASTLY, when a cop is shot and killed doing his job, DON'T bury the story on the back page or page 4 of the newspapers. A police officer protecting your neighborhood that is murdered should be a front page story and not some miscellaneous news item.
I generally find that when police are killed it does make a significant part of the L.A. times. Granted, it isn't always "front page" news, but the A section of the L.A. Times is mostly international news. A cop killed in the line of duty, even in an auto accident, makes front page in the california section everytime because it is most relevant to that section of the paper. And don't assume that only "liberal" news outlets sensationalise their stories. And always remember, the biggest problem with the news business... is that it IS a business, and therefore money and circulation trump whatever political leaning an outlet has. This is why I generally take everything I read and hear with a huge helping of salt.
So all you cops... stop feeling persecuted, the papers just picking on the guys that give you a bad name. And maybe a little less of the "blue wall" would help your reputation.
I don't feel persecuted. Being indicted twice and having been shown to not been guilty does leave a crap taste in my mouth sometimes. Having to sue the city for my back pay and damages was no fun. Funny thing is...I still love my job and helping people when they need it. Regarding the liberalism of the media...I think some are left and some are right. LA Times does have a bone to pick with us. You sometimes read the same incident on 4 different local newspapers and you get a completely different spin. But then again, look at reviews of any movie from professional critics. They rate it all the way from an A+ to an F-. I think its kind of the same for us. You are going to have people grade from A to F. Chances are none of them are right most of the time.
Diablito93
Covering only the LAPD's bad side 
