DebateGate
General Category => 3DHS => Topic started by: sirs on October 24, 2011, 05:52:03 PM
-
Shootings way up in two weeks
Bullets are flying over Broadway -- and everywhere else in the city.
The number of people shot surged 154 percent two weeks ago -- to 56 from 22 over the same week last year -- and spiked 28 percent in the last month.
Last week tallied another increase in victims -- 22 people had been hit through Friday, including the three victims gunned down outside a Brooklyn school Friday.
Last year, only 17 shooting victims were logged for the entire week.
The recent gunplay has now pushed the number of shooting victims this year slightly above last year’s tragic tally -- to 1,484 from 1,451 -- through Oct. 16.
Four high-ranking cops point the finger at Occupy Wall Street protesters, saying their rallies pull special crime-fighting units away from the hot zones where they’re needed.
Since Occupy Wall Street took over Zuccotti Park on Sept. 17, the NYPD has relied heavily on its borough task forces, the department’s go-to teams for rowdy crowds.
But such protest duty takes the special units away from their regular jobs -- patrolling public housing and problem spots and staking out nightclubs plagued by violence, supervisors said.
“Normally, the task force is used in high-crime neighborhoods where you have a lot of shootings and robberies,” said one source.
“They are always used when there are spikes in crime as a quick fix. But instead of being sent to Jamaica, Brownsville and the South Bronx, they are in Wall Street.”
Another NYPD boss is troubled by the resulting slowdown in stop-and-frisks.
When OWS marches, as many as 3,000 cops a day could be called on to keep the peace. That’s about 10 percent of the total force.
“The city is going crazy with demonstrations and protests, and I’m lucky if I can get four cars out there,” said Deputy Inspector Ted Berntsen, commander of the 13th precinct in Chelsea.
As the NYPD deals with depleted ranks, fewer thugs are going to jail. The Organized Crime Control Bureau -- an elite unit of hundreds of cops fighting drug dealers and gun runners -- has seen arrests plummet 19 percent this year.
Article (http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/shootings_way_up_in_two_weeks_rajGrOA0bMpTBslidEUgOI)
-
As the NYPD deals with depleted ranks, fewer thugs are going to jail.
If only congress would get off their ass and pass the jobs bill.
-
LoL....indeed
-
The govt and the media feed off each other.
-
A Democrat govt and the media feed off each other.
-
No it happens with the GOP too.
-
Yea, it happens in how they're fed negative/unflattering coverage, compared to that of the Dems......for the most part.
-
Dig a little deeper. Why would a reporter feed info for the administration? What do they get in return? And would that not apply to GOP administrations?
-
I've been plenty deep. Consistently the media feed Democrats plum stories and Republicans get the lemons. This is a prime example with your reference to "more jobs"...feeds Obama's and the Democrats' punch lines.
ergo, a Democrat govt and the media feed off each other
-
The answer I was looking for was access. They print the disquised as news press releases in exchange for access to other more career building stories. It's about building relationships. And Reporters need relationships with the GOP as well as the Dems. Its a win win for both sides.
-
In theory perhaps. In practice, it continues to be a Democrat govt and the media feeding off each other
-
Nothing in theory about it. Notice how the media cooperated in the run up to the Iraq War.
-
Not really. And then subsequent to that war, it was body count story, after more troop story, after quagmire story
-
The media shifted when wmd's were not found. They probably thought Kerry had a chance, they also probably thought that the dems would retake congress by at least the 06 election.
The fact remains that a reporter with ambitions will develop resources no matter the party, and part of the bargain is the occasional fluff piece. They may be predisposed to backing lib causes but that doesn't exclude them from doing what is necessary to protect relationships with the conservative side of the aisle.
-
Four high-ranking cops point the finger at Occupy Wall Street protesters, saying their rallies pull special crime-fighting units away from the hot zones where they’re needed.
Since Occupy Wall Street took over Zuccotti Park on Sept. 17, the NYPD has relied heavily on its borough task forces, the department’s go-to teams for rowdy crowds.
But such protest duty takes the special units away from their regular jobs -- patrolling public housing and problem spots and staking out nightclubs plagued by violence, supervisors said.
“Normally, the task force is used in high-crime neighborhoods where you have a lot of shootings and robberies,” said one source.
“They are always used when there are spikes in crime as a quick fix. But instead of being sent to Jamaica, Brownsville and the South Bronx, they are in Wall Street.”
Another NYPD boss is troubled by the resulting slowdown in stop-and-frisks.
When OWS marches, as many as 3,000 cops a day could be called on to keep the peace. That’s about 10 percent of the total force.
“The city is going crazy with demonstrations and protests, and I’m lucky if I can get four cars out there,” said Deputy Inspector Ted Berntsen, commander of the 13th precinct in Chelsea.
Which is actually a two-fer. You have a shortage of cops that leads to the increased crime that the Obama jobs bill would help with and then you have the OWS sucking up resources that could be put to better use fighting crime. So was the OWS jab a favor for cons or libs?
-
The media shifted when wmd's were not found. They probably thought Kerry had a chance, they also probably thought that the dems would retake congress by at least the 06 election.
The fact remains that a reporter with ambitions will develop resources no matter the party, and part of the bargain is the occasional fluff piece. They may be predisposed to backing lib causes but that doesn't exclude them from doing what is necessary to protect relationships with the conservative side of the aisle.
No, they shifted far sooner than that, I'm afraid. Troop build up, war escalation costs, frequent broadcasting of Democrat politicians denouncing the run up. Heding that the Dems may retake 06 was pretty much their expectation, being that they were helping to facilitate the political landscape, with their biased reporting. Sorry Bt, the bias has been ongoing for many an administration.
The fact remains, that while a reporter may attempt to curry what can be done for better access, the portrait of the stories consistently paint 2 different patterns, depending on the party that the reporter is targeting
-
Is there a diffrence in the way that Republicans respond to reporters currying favor?
Is there documentation or polling for the purportion of journalists who are actual Democrats?--Republicans?
I think that there is a large disproportion of liberals vs conservatives in the corps of journalists, and no matter how well intentioned or ethical there is a handicap in explaining the opponents thoughts , which you may not understand as well as someone who actually thinks the same.
-
Good point, Plane. When you surround yourself with likeminded folks, even an acutely biased template will seem to be perfectly mainstream
-
Here's an example of a press release disguised as a news story. I planted it.
http://www.atlantaregional.com/File%20Library/Local%20Gov%20Services/Topical%20Resources/Green%20Communities/37-Mtn-Park-Rain-Barrels.pdf (http://www.atlantaregional.com/File%20Library/Local%20Gov%20Services/Topical%20Resources/Green%20Communities/37-Mtn-Park-Rain-Barrels.pdf)
(http://alt.coxnewsweb.com/cnishared/tools/shared/mediahub/03/19/28/slideshow_628193_1wl9zg2l.JPG)
Lloyd Hendricks, a blacksmith in the tiny north Fulton town of Mountain Park, built a stand for one of the rain barrels he's installed.
That story doubled sales.
In exchange i gave her deep background info on the behind the scenes maneuvering concerning lake restoration litigation.
-
You'll get back to us when you have lead stories at the NY Times and anchors for messers NBC & CBS frequently applying the same standard as your Atlanta PDF file
Remember, no one here is claiming its 100% liberal bias, where there are zero stories that might favor Republicans. The claim, supported by the mountains of ongoing reinforcement, is in the predominant left leaning bias in the MSM.
Yes, access to both sides is nice, and I'm sure a goal with most reporters. But that isn't at issue here. The issue is the claim that that "Government and the MSM feed off each other". That claim is incorrect, unless the clarification is applied of a positive feeding with Democrats, while negative with Republicans
-
The issue is the claim that that "Government and the MSM feed off each other".
Nonsense. I just proved my point on a smaller scale. They do in fact do that it, it matters little what party you are with.
What you are doing is taking a simple statement of fact and insisting on a qualifier, not to fine tune the statement of fact, but to buttress your meme of the unfairness of the press.
They are two separate issues. Bias vs access. Conflating them does not change that fact.
-
The issue is the claim that that "Government and the MSM feed off each other".
They are two separate issues. Bias vs access. Conflating them does not change that fact.
Nor did I. In fact, I'm the one that has been attempting to deliniate the 2 with my ongoing concession that access to a party is a hopeful goal by any reporter ::)
-
While insisting that the arrangements lean left , and that is not the case. Access is access, bias is bias.
-
The arrangements frequently lean postively left and negatively right, when said article comes out. And the reporter remains giddy with their access
-
The arrangements frequently lean postively left and negatively right, when said article comes out. And the reporter remains giddy with their access
Perhaps you can show the class where this is true. Perhaps an example of a conservative staffer suggesting a story advocating x and the reporter delivered y and still maintained access to said staffer.
I'm sure you can do that. You wouldn't just make it up would you?
-
Been there done that....adnauseum. The current article even helps reinforce that, in the inferrence that the Obama's Jobs bill needs to be passed. I have no need to keep repeating example after example after example of the bias. And as I've said, I'm sure any reporter would be happy to gain any access they can
-
Here's an example of a press release disguised as a news story. I planted it.
http://www.atlantaregional.com/File%20Library/Local%20Gov%20Services/Topical%20Resources/Green%20Communities/37-Mtn-Park-Rain-Barrels.pdf (http://www.atlantaregional.com/File%20Library/Local%20Gov%20Services/Topical%20Resources/Green%20Communities/37-Mtn-Park-Rain-Barrels.pdf)
(http://alt.coxnewsweb.com/cnishared/tools/shared/mediahub/03/19/28/slideshow_628193_1wl9zg2l.JPG)
Lloyd Hendricks, a blacksmith in the tiny north Fulton town of Mountain Park, built a stand for one of the rain barrels he's installed.
That story doubled sales.
In exchange i gave her deep background info on the behind the scenes maneuvering concerning lake restoration litigation.
Do you mean that boring storys are printed in quid pro quo for interesting info?
Well whaddya know?
So does Atlanta have room for more reservoirs?
-
Been there done that....adnauseum. The current article even helps reinforce that, in the inferrence that the Obama's Jobs bill needs to be passed. I have no need to keep repeating example after example after example of the bias. And as I've said, I'm sure any reporter would be happy to gain any access they can
No what you have done, with the help of MRC shown bias exists, even though MRC could just as easilly be accused of bias.
What you haven't done is examine the access relationship and what happens when that trust is abused.
-
Been there done that....adnauseum. The current article even helps reinforce that, in the inferrence that the Obama's Jobs bill needs to be passed. I have no need to keep repeating example after example after example of the bias. And as I've said, I'm sure any reporter would be happy to gain any access they can
No what you have done, with the help of MRC shown bias exists, even though MRC could just as easilly be accused of bias.
What you haven't done is examine the access relationship and what happens when that trust is abused.
Quid pro quo would apply to anyone with something to say and / or a little bit of dirt.
Doesn't explain the perception of bias.
I recall the recovery during the Bush years , after the .com bubble bursting the recovery seemed slow and jobless.
More recently after the house sales bubble bursting the recovery seems slow and jobless.
I would guess that the recovery was faster with Bush , but Bush caught more flack overall.
I don't recall a lot of press swooning over canadate Bush as Obama got either.
-
Been there done that....adnauseum. The current article even helps reinforce that, in the inferrence that the Obama's Jobs bill needs to be passed. I have no need to keep repeating example after example after example of the bias. And as I've said, I'm sure any reporter would be happy to gain any access they can
No what you have done, with the help of MRC shown bias exists, even though MRC could just as easilly be accused of bias.
Yea....and....the bias exists. Your glossing over it, doesn't remove that from our current reality or lessen my point as it relates to this thread. It's at the crux of the point I've made, while conceding that reporters do indeed hope for better access to all parties. both Dems and Republicans
-
Been there done that....adnauseum. The current article even helps reinforce that, in the inferrence that the Obama's Jobs bill needs to be passed. I have no need to keep repeating example after example after example of the bias. And as I've said, I'm sure any reporter would be happy to gain any access they can
No what you have done, with the help of MRC shown bias exists, even though MRC could just as easilly be accused of bias.
Yea....and....the bias exists. Your glossing over it, doesn't remove that from our current reality or lessen my point as it relates to this thread. It's at the crux of the point I've made, while conceding that reporters do indeed hope for better access to all parties. both Dems and Republicans
No what you said was this:
The arrangements frequently lean postively left and negatively right, when said article comes out. And the reporter remains giddy with their access[/quote]
Which implies that the access would still exist after the trust was abused.
I say it wouldn't. You say it would. I'm asking you to provide examples of that.
-
No, now you're misrpresenting me. While a reporter can be giddy to have said access, if a reporter abused their access, then their access is likely to be severely curtailed, if not abolished. Said reporter then would have to find access somewhere or with someone else
Remember, I never claimed bias was 100% one way, and 0% the other. The few supportive stories that reporters provide for the GOP is likely to give them continued access. The vast majority that abuse that, likely have far less access.
Understand yet?
-
No, now you're misrpresenting me. While a reporter can be giddy to have said access, if a reporter abused their access, then their access is likely to be severely curtailed, if not abolished. Said reporter then would have to find access somewhere or with someone else
Right so keeping the relationship trustworthy is important because developing sources and acquiring access can be time consuming. You threw me with your sentence structure where the reporter was still giddy after burning the source.
-
Not sure where I claimed he was giddy AFTER burning his source/access. Perhaps you can hilight that for me (and the rest of us), before you start misrepresenting my position, even further
-
Not sure where I claimed he was giddy AFTER burning his source/access. Perhaps you can hilight that for me (and the rest of us), before you start misrepresenting my position, even further
Right here.
The arrangements frequently lean postively left and negatively right, when said article comes out. And the reporter remains giddy with their access
Notices the reporter remains giddy . After burning their source.
-
Nice rearrangement of what I said and meant, but that hasn't stopped you before. Cudos :o
-
It is a direct quote. Those are your words. You can walk them back if you misspoke, but please stop with the misrepresentation nonsense, when the words in question are your own.
-
Yea, its a quote....YOU decided to make it mean that some reporter would be giddy AFTER burning his access. Kinda dumb to claim that, doncha think?? His giddiness was in HAVING the access. If he chooses to burn it, why the hell would I imply he'd still be giddy??
So, I'll ask now, civily, stop it please
-
Define remains
-
A typical sirs debate. Meaningless nonsense over the giddyness of a reporter.
-
And obviously, you haven't been paying attention. A typical Xo response...ignore specific debate questions, and instead provide perseverative meritless snarks and demagoguery
Cudos