The Dolphins Make Me Cry.com - Forums

Column: Media got Zimmerman story wrong from start
Rem Rieder, USA TODAY 10:47 p.m. EDT July 14, 2013


The role of the media cannot be ignored in the Zimmerman case.

It's complicated.

Life is packed with nuances and subtleties and shades of gray.

But the news media are often uncomfortable in such murky terrain. They prefer straightforward narratives, with good guys and bad guys, heroes and villains. Those tales are much easier for readers and viewers to relate to.

Which brings us to Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman.

The story of their tragic confrontation on February 26, 2012, in Sanford, Florida, was framed early on. Zimmerman, then 28, was the neighborhood watch captain/"wannabe cop" who racially profiled and ultimately killed Trayvon, an unarmed, hoodie-clad black teenager out on the streets of the gated community Retreat at Twin Lakes simply because he wanted some Skittles.

The storyline quickly took root, amplified by the nearly ubiquitous images of the two: a sweet-looking photo of a several-years-younger Trayvon released by his family, and a mug shot of Zimmerman from a previous arrest in which he looks puffy and downcast. The contrasting images powerfully reinforced the images of the menacing bully and the innocent victim.

Some of the media's major mistakes stemmed from stories that fit neatly into that widely accepted narrative. NBC News edited Zimmerman's comments during a phone call to inaccurately suggest that he volunteered that Trayvon seemed suspicious because he was black. In fact, Zimmerman was responding to a question when he mentioned the teenager's race. The network apologized for the error.

Similarly, ABC News broadcast a story reporting that a police surveillance video showed no evidence that Zimmerman suffered abrasions or bled during the confrontation with Trayvon. Shortly thereafter, it "clarified" the situation, reporting that an enhanced version of the video showed Zimmerman with "an injury to the back of his head."

When it emerged that Zimmerman's mother was Peruvian, some news outlets took to referring to him with the rarely used phrase "white Hispanic," which is kind of like calling President Obama "white black."

Mark O'Mara, Zimmerman's lawyer, was brutal in his post-acquittal comments about the press' treatment of his client. Hard to blame him.


George Zimmerman's defense attorney, Mark O'Mara, said that the news media were the reason that he was painted as a monster and that they took the story and 'ran him over' with it.

After the Sanford police originally declined to prosecute Zimmerman, State Attorney Angela Corey charged him with second-degree murder in the wake of the flurry of news coverage, street protests and a powerful campaign on social media.

But there was much more to the story, as the obvious weakness of the prosecution's case against Zimmerman and the jury's not-guilty verdict make abundantly clear. There was evidence that Zimmerman decidedly got the worst of it during the struggle before he shot Trayvon. Trayvon was an athletic 17-year-old, not necessarily a helpless victim. Zimmerman may well have been acting in self-defense.

This is hardly to suggest that Zimmerman is a candidate for canonization. This is on him. It was his reckless behavior that set this tragedy in motion. If he had stayed in his vehicle as he was told to do by the police, Trayvon Martin would be alive today.

As more details emerged, so, too, did a fuller picture of the events of February 26, 2012. But by then the popular view of what had happened had hardened.

Conservatives see this episode as yet another manifestation of the pervasive bias of that dreaded liberal media. But there's something else at play. Journalists are addicted above all else to the good story. And the saga of the bigoted, frustrated would-be law enforcement officer gunning down the helpless child was too good to check. It's also another example of how groupthink can shape news coverage.

A healthy dose of skepticism should always be part of the journalism process. And in this case there was a particularly strong reason for caution. While some residents of the complex saw some parts of the conflict, only two people knew, really knew, how it went down. And one of them was dead. Under those circumstances, certainty was elusive.

Back in 2006, the nation's media gave huge play to a saga in which three Duke University lacrosse players were charged with raping a stripper at a team party. But the case collapsed, the prosecutor was disbarred and many news organizations looked seriously foolish.

Asked what had gone wrong by journalist Rachel Smolkin for a reconstruction of the episode in American Journalism Review, Daniel Okrent, a former New York Times public editor, responded: "It was too delicious a story."

Sound familiar?

But the Duke lacrosse fiasco also provides some hopeful guidance for the media in dealing with the next Trayvon Martin/George Zimmerman story. Well before the case imploded, Stuart Taylor of National Journal and Joe Neff of the News & Observer in Raleigh did topnotch, against-the-grain reporting, poking holes in the prosecution's overwrought version of history.

Let's hope we see much, much more of that the next time the news media encounter a story that's "too delicious."

Rem Rieder writes about media for USA TODAY.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/07/14/zimmerman-trayvon-martin-nbc-news-column-rieder/2516251/

Perhaps the media should take this advice and lay off of Aaron Hernandez.  He, too, deserves a healthy dose of skepticism, and we haven't heard his side of the story.  Maybe he was acting in self-defense!

In all seriousness, I think this line of complaint is a joke.  Where were these people after the Casey Anthony verdict?  Where were these people after the OJ verdict?

The only reason why people are now Very Concerned with unfair media bias is because they have a political axe to grind on the subject matter of the case.  No one gives a damn about maintaining media objectivity for someone accused of kidnapping and murdering a pretty teenaged white girl, but when the case is politically inconvenient for one side or the other, now the media needs to back off and let the facts speak for themselves?

Perhaps the media should take this advice and lay off of Aaron Hernandez.  He, too, deserves a healthy dose of skepticism, and we haven't heard his side of the story.  Maybe he was acting in self-defense!

The police did a complete investigation into Zimmerman and concluded that there wasn't enough evidence to arrest him or charge him. 

So if I understand correctly, the police did a "complete investigation" and couldn't find enough evidence to charge him... yet the trial judge saw enough evidence to reject the defense's request for summary dismissal?  How does that work?

The investigation by the police was, frankly, pathetic and half-hearted.  I presume you are referring to the same complete investigation that did a toxicology test on Martin (but not Zimmerman) and investigated the criminal history of Martin (but not Zimmerman), are you not?

Justice has prevailed.  This isn't Roodey King as much as you and many want it to be, it just ain't. 

To keep it on par with the comparisons that are actually being made you should have said Edmund Till.

Judges are elected in Florida.  If the judge had accepted the request for summary dismissal she would be out of a job.

You need probable cause to do a toxicology test on someone who is living.

Both of them had their criminal history ran.

"I just shot that guy in the chest" sounds like probable cause to me. 

Are district attorneys not elected in Florida?  Because he didn't seem to be too worried about it.

To run a toxicology report?  You don't understand PC in the least. That is not PC that one is under the influence of drugs.  

Red eyes, slurred voice, unable to walk a straight line, etc.

Wouldn't be surprised in the least if he is challenged, b/c of his reluctance.  Also the DA did eventually cave in to political pressure.

Anyone who thinks that the verdict was wrong, ask yourself this. Do you personally know more about the facts of this case than the Los Angeles PD, original district attorney, and the jury? If you answer yes, you are lying to yourself. If you answer no, you now know that you have been emotionally hijacked or have racial issues. Either way, the case is over and the jury has spoken. Legally, no crime has been committed by OJ Simpson

What you also fail to mention is that this charge was expunged from Zimmerman's record after completing an alcohol awareness course.

The result of what three jurors' initial reaction doesn't qualify whether something is illegal or not.

So we have someone who has been previously suspended from school THREE times, kicked out of his house by his mother, bragging about fighting different people and drug use.  No need to check him for being a thug, though.  He seems legit.

Equally true as everything you just said.

If it was expunged, then you would not be able to find it in the records.  Q.E.D.

The charge was waived after Zimmerman agreed to undergo an alcohol awareness course.  The arrest and charges were not expunged from his record.

Furthermore, to tell the whole story you should probably also mention the restraining orders (for domestic violence) on Zimmerman and his ex-girlfriend from 2005.

So we have someone who has been previously arrested for violent, disorderly conduct while drinking, and has had a restraining order granted against him on domestic violence grounds.  No need to check him for BAC, though.  He seems legit.

Good point!  If Martin had just killed someone and the police had investigated him with any sort of serious diligence, I would have expected him to be (at a very minimum) arrested, and almost certainly charged with a crime.

Instead of, you know, simply taking his word that he's a Good Guy and letting him wander around a police station unescorted for a few hours.