Reporter doubles down on her stupid narrative

DrScaryGuy

🌈 Loves rainbows 🌈
2A Bourbon Hound 2024
2A Bourbon Hound OG
Supporting Member
Multi-Factor Enabled
Joined
Nov 11, 2019
Messages
17,426
Location
Outside Fayetteville
Rating - 100%
19   0   0
Here are a few excerpts that irritated me...

OPINION: My experience covering a pro-gun rights march

1633003509488.png
As a woman and a journalist, pro-gun rallies aren’t for me.
...
It was a jarring experience for a few reasons: the rain was freezing, there were more weapons than I’d ever seen in a public space and it was my first time covering a protest like this.
...
At this point in my life, I’d seen my fair share of videos of reporters being verbally or physically harassed while covering right-wing protests, and it was hard to gauge going in whether or not this would be that type of crowd.
...
We never ended up leaving for lack of safety, but the environment was nevertheless not one that felt welcoming to us.
...
The one thing that seemed to happen every time I spoke to someone was this infinitesimal shift in demeanor when we announced to people that we were reporters. People’s friendly expressions turned ever so slightly guarded, and we were greeted with a few looks of genuine anxiety when we identified ourselves.
...
it was a pretty well-established theme that they did not have a positive relationship with the media. Various speakers at the event talked about how gun owners were always being misportrayed as extremists or terrorists in the news, and that they didn’t feel they could trust journalists to report objectively on their movement.
...
But the point still stands that journalists should never have to feel unsafe in these situations, regardless of how people feel about the state of the media.
...
Beyond everything else, it’s just plain weird to stand in the middle of a group of people who are incredibly different in worldviews and backgrounds from yours, knowing that you can’t insert any of your opinions into the way you cover them and their cause.
...
I wasn’t necessarily concerned for my physical safety — there was a pretty heavy police presence and I was never by myself without another reporter — but there was a constant sense that in a different set of circumstances, where these people knew what my thoughts were about their cause, things could have been much messier.
...
The participants at the Capitol were nearly all white and male, and the atmosphere created by some speakers perpetuated an overall vibe of homophobia that made it clear that their movement had only had space for a narrow demographic of people.
...
It’s common knowledge that Black and transgender people are targets of violence on a daily basis, something that should have fallen under the gun right’s movement’s conceptualization of bearing arms for self-defense, but I think you’d be hard-pressed to find people in the crowd last Thursday whose views on gun rights didn’t have addendums of their views on race and gender.
 
I can’t imagine why this…. 😂

The one thing that seemed to happen every time I spoke to someone was this infinitesimal shift in demeanor when we announced to people that we were reporters. People’s friendly expressions turned ever so slightly guarded, and we were greeted with a few looks of genuine anxiety when we identified ourselves.
 
“Journalists” are part of the problem. They will never be welcome around me. Even in neutral or “feel good” harmless stories, they have grossly misquoted me and/or changed the context. Can’t wait to see what they do when I’m unlucky enough to be involved in something contentious.
 
"The participants at the Capitol were nearly all white and male, and the atmosphere created by some speakers perpetuated an overall vibe of homophobia that made it clear that their movement had only had space for a narrow demographic of people."

This is nonsense, we proudly have @Jeppo and @Chdamn as members
 
i read the article…

it seemed like she just covered her own feelings and biases and not the rally…it’s says opinion and the title says it’s all about her so i guess that makes sense

is there a link to her actual “news” story or just the opinion piece?
 
Well…

When you make it a practice to distribute propaganda instead of objectively reporting the truth, then, have the damned gall to refer to yourself as a “journalist”, don’t blame others for their skepticism…

the fault falls squarely on YOUR shoulders.
 
is there a link to her actual “news” story or just the opinion piece?
The march has been going on for about a decade, and every year it gets a small blurb.
It's actually a boring event, because every year it's organized and peaceful. The bulk of the coverage centers on how rifles are allowed in the capitol building, but protest signs are not. The history tells us that there have been no shootings, but plenty of people injured with signs, and that signs block things way more than rifles do.
 

Lily is a student at Michigan State University’s James Madison College studying International Relations and Journalism. Her background is in community-level political organizing and involvement, as well as analytical, topical journalism. Lily is currently a city reporter at The State News in East Lansing and a staff writer for Michigan State’s HerCampus magazine, where she covers politics, news, and culture. Her past work includes local and state-level political campaigns, community outreach through group organization, and various retail experience.
 
Last edited:
Proof that she wasn't even listening to what they said:

Their rhetoric felt harsh and not quite cohesive with the event’s message that pro-gun activists are reasonable, regular people who just want to keep their guns in the house.
No, miss. Every person at that rally wants to be able to keep firearms on their person, which you could have guessed without even talking to them by looking at all of the guns that they had on their persons.
 
So she's some college kid that's only had one job that lasted more than 3-4 months.

And we're supposed to take her seriously? Yet..she's writing articles that get wide distribution.
 
“Journalists” are part of the problem. They will never be welcome around me. Even in neutral or “feel good” harmless stories, they have grossly misquoted me and/or changed the context. Can’t wait to see what they do when I’m unlucky enough to be involved in something contentious.

My second job out of college was newspaper reporter. I got calls from people saying "I didn't say that" or "you took that out of context." So, I'd go to my editor. In an effort to make my article fit a specific copy he'd chop and edit. Never in an attempt to necessarily change anything, but to simply make the copy fit the space. He'd call the person back, apologize, and issue a correction in the paper. It didn't happen a lot, but from time to time.

Your example, yeah, those journalists exist, without a doubt. A lot of times though what hits the paper or website or whatever is the product of an editor, not the original writer.
 
Your example, yeah, those journalists exist, without a doubt. A lot of times though what hits the paper or website or whatever is the product of an editor, not the original writer.
Point taken.

Lesson learned: put all the editors on the ship with journalists and then torpedo it.
 
Point taken.

Lesson learned: put all the editors on the ship with journalists and then torpedo it.

I had a great editor; he never attempted to change the tenor or nature of an article. That said, you'd have to a blind man to not have seen the increasingly rapid shift of journalism over the past two, three decades to the left. Used to be some media markets and publications, now it's damn near all of them. Gone are the days when people just wanted to report on something. Now, there has to be a particular slant or bias.
 
I had a great editor; he never attempted to change the tenor or nature of an article. That said, you'd have to a blind man to not have seen the increasingly rapid shift of journalism over the past two, three decades to the left. Used to be some media markets and publications, now it's damn near all of them. Gone are the days when people just wanted to report on something. Now, there has to be a particular slant or bias.
That right there is the point to analyze. If there ever was a "redo" of the Bill of Rights, it would behoove everyone to try to figure out how to prevent this slip toward bullsh!ttery.
 

Lily is a student at Michigan State University’s James Madison College studying International Relations and Journalism. Her background is in community-level political organizing and involvement, as well as analytical, topical journalism. Lily is currently a city reporter at The State News in East Lansing and a staff writer for Michigan State’s HerCampus magazine, where she covers politics, news, and culture. Her past work includes local and state-level political campaigns, community outreach through group organization, and various retail experience.

Yep.

A "BA candidate"...meaning "student".

She has a limited worldview. But even so, I thought her article wasn't all that bad. She clearly spoke of her experience and acknowledged that her worldview was different than those at the protest. The article wasn't about pro-gun rights or pro-gun control. It was about her experience.

And we can't deny her experience any more than we can deny the experience of anybody else on this site. We can agree or disagree with some views or conclusions, certainly, but not the experience itself.

She's young...but I see hope for her on this subject by some of her comments:

"These people probably didn’t know that I was nervous talking to them and being at their event, but it was a pretty well-established theme that they did not have a positive relationship with the media."

"On our end, it felt like they saw us as part of their larger enemy, aligned with the politicians and businesses that they felt shortchanged by."

"For me, it was difficult at first to coexist in my anxiety about the event and the reality that my job as a journalist is to go places that feel uncomfortable sometimes to get people the information they need."

"Beyond everything else, it’s just plain weird to stand in the middle of a group of people who are incredibly different in worldviews and backgrounds from yours, knowing that you can’t insert any of your opinions into the way you cover them and their cause."


These statements tell me that she's TRYING to be an actual responsible journalist. She recognizes there is a lack of trust in the media in many circles, and a bit on why. She knows that despite her discomfort, it's part of her job to mingle and interact with people outside her comfort zone. And she knows that she can't insert any of her opinions into the way she covers other people and their causes.

She sounds like a bright student who WANTS to be good in her chosen field. Time will tell on how this works out in the long run.
 
My second job out of college was newspaper reporter. I got calls from people saying "I didn't say that" or "you took that out of context." So, I'd go to my editor. In an effort to make my article fit a specific copy he'd chop and edit. Never in an attempt to necessarily change anything, but to simply make the copy fit the space. He'd call the person back, apologize, and issue a correction in the paper. It didn't happen a lot, but from time to time.

Your example, yeah, those journalists exist, without a doubt. A lot of times though what hits the paper or website or whatever is the product of an editor, not the original writer.
In the digital age there is zero need to edit for space. Any editing done is for content.

In the paper age they had space limits they had to meet so I can see that as part of the issue. But it assumes that all editers were just interested in meeting that space and not interested in changing the meaning.
 
Yep.

A "BA candidate"...meaning "student".

She has a limited worldview. But even so, I thought her article wasn't all that bad. She clearly spoke of her experience and acknowledged that her worldview was different than those at the protest. The article wasn't about pro-gun rights or pro-gun control. It was about her experience.

And we can't deny her experience any more than we can deny the experience of anybody else on this site. We can agree or disagree with some views or conclusions, certainly, but not the experience itself.

She's young...but I see hope for her on this subject by some of her comments:

"These people probably didn’t know that I was nervous talking to them and being at their event, but it was a pretty well-established theme that they did not have a positive relationship with the media."

"On our end, it felt like they saw us as part of their larger enemy, aligned with the politicians and businesses that they felt shortchanged by."

"For me, it was difficult at first to coexist in my anxiety about the event and the reality that my job as a journalist is to go places that feel uncomfortable sometimes to get people the information they need."

"Beyond everything else, it’s just plain weird to stand in the middle of a group of people who are incredibly different in worldviews and backgrounds from yours, knowing that you can’t insert any of your opinions into the way you cover them and their cause."


These statements tell me that she's TRYING to be an actual responsible journalist. She recognizes there is a lack of trust in the media in many circles, and a bit on why. She knows that despite her discomfort, it's part of her job to mingle and interact with people outside her comfort zone. And she knows that she can't insert any of her opinions into the way she covers other people and their causes.

She sounds like a bright student who WANTS to be good in her chosen field. Time will tell on how this works out in the long run.

Those statements show me that she is well versed in the liberal tactic of inserting her opinions in her articles while pretending she isn’t.
 
In the digital age there is zero need to edit for space. Any editing done is for content.

In the paper age they had space limits they had to meet so I can see that as part of the issue. But it assumes that all editers were just interested in meeting that space and not interested in changing the meaning.

True about the electronic media. Non-print media is a game changer.
 
Most of the above consists of her telling us what she felt. Her feelings were completely subjective, and were influenced substantially by her own prejudices. Therefore they have no place in a news report, in my opinion. I remember when reporters told us what happened, instead of how we should feel because of what happened.
 
With all of the other topics for her whining, it is amazing she didn't at least mention some apprehension about being fat-shamed at the rally.
have you seen most gun people? they're in no position to do any shaming
 
Most of the above consists of her telling us what she felt. Her feelings were completely subjective, and were influenced substantially by her own prejudices. Therefore they have no place in a news report, in my opinion. I remember when reporters told us what happened, instead of how we should feel because of what happened.
i sent her an email and that's basically the gist of what i wrote

i asked her if she had done any research on the decade or so the march has been happing every year, and there have been no incidents that i can remember.
I asked her if she looked at the list of past speakers, because Rick Ecktor has spoken a few times, and he just finished organizing that free shooting event for ~4,000 women - also, he's a black man supporting women shooting, which seriously contradicts her ideas...
 
I greet all journalists nowadays with the opening questions: "How does it feel to be part of an organization whose reputation for integrity is lower than used car salespeople? Do you ever wonder if the reason the majority of people out here in flyby hate you has nothing to do with them being stupid bumpkins but rather that your profession are almost universally liars with an agenda so large that truth doesn't even matter?"

The conversation kind of goes downhill from there, usually :).
 
“But the point still stands that journalists should never have to feel unsafe in these situations, regardless of how people feel about the state of the media.”

Why ?
Who said ?
What law or privilege is this?
When did we accord this “status” to them ?

I don’t think we did. I think they claimed it for themselves in their vain imaginations.

The heart of a liberal or socialist or whatever is elitism. They just aren’t smart enough or self-aware of this to admit it. The bottomline is they feel superior to everyone and feel the imagined guilt of their superiority. That’s why they adopt “pets” to take care of, whether the pet wants it or not. Because they know best, just ask them. Or not, they’ll eventually tell you anyway, because you’re a pet too. Sociopaths come in different flavors.
 
Last edited:
Next month I will celebrate my One Year Anniversary of not watching or reading a single "news" production. I "feel" better. So now I can add "journalist" to my list of "never ever ever gonna need one". Along with Show folks, team sports players, actors, academia and....the list gets longer every day.
 
Since when did the opinions and feelings of an understatement graduate college student about something she does not understand become news?
was that supposed to say undergraduate?
because she lists she's a student. not a graduate student...
nothing about the "james madison college" at MSU she goes to says it's a grad school on their page. In fact, it says "Graduates of James Madison College go on to careers in government, politics, business, education, and human services, as well as continue their education at top graduate and law schools."

So she's probaby under 21 and knows nothing of the world.
 
was that supposed to say undergraduate?
because she lists she's a student. not a graduate student...
nothing about the "james madison college" at MSU she goes to says it's a grad school on their page. In fact, it says "Graduates of James Madison College go on to careers in government, politics, business, education, and human services, as well as continue their education at top graduate and law schools."

So she's probaby under 21 and knows nothing of the world.
It should have been undergraduate. I suppose I need to proof read better. This auto stuff really makes some strange sentences. Thanks for catching that.
 
It should have been undergraduate. I suppose I need to proof read better. This auto stuff really makes some strange sentences. Thanks for catching that.
that's okay, earlier today i tried to use swype keyboard to say "you" and it came out as "tú".
It was right either way... but i took offense at my phone telling me i need to speak more spanish.
 
Back
Top Bottom