Why is it that Jesse Smollett's possible lie....

[sheshe2]

Gains far more interest/attention than the deaths of so many black men and women that died unarmed at the hands of the police? There are a dozen or more posts per day about Jesse Smollett's possible lies, yet always few if any about those that actually died at the hands of the police.




This isn't even a full list. The women, like Sandra Bland and others.

.....

Police killings of black men in the U.S. and what happened to the officers

Terence Crutcher (Sept. 16, 2016, in Tulsa)

Philando Castile (July 6, 2016, in Falcon Heights, Minn.)

Alton Sterling (July 5, 2016, in Baton Rouge)

Walter Scott (April 4, 2015, in North Charleston, S.C.)

Eric Harris (April 2, 2015, in Tulsa)

Tony Robinson (March 6, 2015, in Madison, Wis.)

Rumain Brisbon (Dec. 2, 2014, in Phoenix)

Tamir Rice (Nov. 22, 2014, in Cleveland)

Laquan McDonald (Oct. 20, 2014, in Chicago)

Michael Brown Jr. (Aug. 9, 2014, in Ferguson, Mo.)

Eric Garner (July 17, 2014, in New York City)

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2018/03/29/police-killings-black-men-us-and-what-happened-officers/469467002/

....................

Did he lie? I have no clue, yet has been judged. However all in the above list were profiled by police officers and in a nanosecond judged as guilty and murdered. Yes, I know, they all feared for their lives. Dear Goddess. Do any one of you remember the police presence in Ferguson after Michael Brown was murdered? Tanks. Tear Gas. Military Garb.

Colin Kaepernick took a knee for all of them. We all should as well.

#BlackLivesMatter

Say their names.

Edit to add.

Please read the article and see how many officers got off scott free for murder of a black child/man and then read what is being said here at DU of Jesse.

[Zoonart]

1. Yes this!

[sheshe2]

2. Thank you, Zoonart.

You are the only one to respond.

[SunSeeker]

3. K & R

[EffieBlack]

4. +1,000

You're exactly right, SheShe - it's sickening how insistent people are to "wait to hear both sides of the story" because "there must be more to this than is being reported" and - of course - "we don't know what happened BEFORE the officer shot the unarmed black man in the back" when a white cop kills a black man, yet they have no problem jumping to conclusions before knowing "both sides of the story" when it comes to giving black men the benefit of the doubt, whether he's accused of a crime or alleging to be the victim of one.

And if it turns out that Smollett did engage in a hoax, one of the unfortunate things is that - as some people are already saying - the next black person who reports a hate crime will be less likely to be believed. Why should that be? Why does a false claim by one black person call all black people's claims into question, something that does not apply to white folk? White people often falsely accuse people of crimes, yet people don't assume that all other white people are lying when they report a crime. And as we've seen in the past couple of weeks, the fact that some women have falsely reported rape is considered completely irrelevant in assessing the credibility of the women who accused Justin Fairfax of rape - to the point that even any mention that it is possible that Fairfax has been wrongly accused is swarmed as some sort of attack on the accuser in particular and all rape victims generally. So, why are people wringing their hands and saying "if he's lying, it's going to make it so much harder for REAL hate crime victims to be believed"?

Thanks for calling out the double standard, SheShe. It's important to say it, even if it gets you a lot of grief here.

[sheshe2]

59. I posted the names last night.

It got late. I now want to post the justice each one recieved.

Terence Crutcher (Sept. 16, 2016, in Tulsa)


The conclusion: A jury acquitted her of first-degree manslaughter in 2017, and Shelby later resigned from the department.
Philando Castile (July 6, 2016, in Falcon Heights, Minn.)

The conclusion: Yanez was found not guilty of manslaughter in 2017

Alton Sterling (July 5, 2016, in Baton Rouge)


The conclusion: No charges will come against either officer, a state attorney general announced in March 2018.

Walter Scott (April 4, 2015, in North Charleston, S.C.)

The conclusion: A federal judge sentenced Slager to 20 years in prison.

Eric Harris (April 2, 2015, in Tulsa)

The conclusion: Bates received a four-year prison sentence in 2016, according to the Tulsa World, but was released in October 2017.

Tony Robinson (March 6, 2015, in Madison, Wis.)

The conclusion: A district attorney declared two months later that Kenny would face no charges.

Rumain Brisbon (Dec. 2, 2014, in Phoenix)

The conclusion: Months later, a county attorney announced there would be no criminal charges.



Tamir Rice (Nov. 22, 2014, in Cleveland)

The conclusion: A Cleveland grand jury declined to bring charges in December 2015. The city agreed to pay $6 million to Rice's family but admitted no wrongdoing. The city later fired Loehmann.

Laquan McDonald (Oct. 20, 2014, in Chicago)

The conclusion: Van Dyke was charged with murder a year later once the footage was released, with his trial slated for this summer. Other officers faced conspiracy and obstruction charges in the aftermath.

Michael Brown Jr. (Aug. 9, 2014, in Ferguson, Mo.)

The conclusion: The Justice Department did not bring criminal charges against Wilson in 2015, claiming he acted in self defense in an 86-page memo. Wilson later claimed he was unemployable.

Eric Garner (July 17, 2014, in New York City)

The conclusion: A medical examiner ruled Garner's death a homicide, but a jury declined to indict Pantaleo. Garner's family received $5.9 million from the City of New York in a settlement.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2018/03/29/police-killings-black-men-us-and-what-happened-officers/469467002/

Some got a little bit of justice. Others will never see it. Yet it is not really justice when their child, brother, sister, husband and mother is murdered and no one is willing to stop the next one from happening.

[MadDAsHell]

5. Everyone of the cases you list has had massive coverage nationally and on DU.

Last edited Sun Feb 17, 2019, 09:27 AM - Edit history (1)

Not that all of them ended up with the justice we sought, but what "interest/attention" are you seeking that isn't being given??

[EffieBlack]

7. All of those cases got "massive coverage" on DU?

No, they didn't.

[Demonaut]

9. they did,...every one listed, we, at DU, responded to their murders

[EffieBlack]

11. Some people responded - but they did NOT get "massive coverage"

SheShe is right. Maybe you should think about what she's saying rather than going into a kneejerk defense/denial?

[Demonaut]

12. what sheshe says it the TRUTH but what he did was to belittle their deaths and make more occurrences

more likely and have less coverage

[EffieBlack]

15. If Smollett lied about being the victim of a hate crime, he's responsible for more police murders

and for the reduced coverage of them when they occur?

Seriously?

That doesn't even make any sense.

[Demonaut]

17. and I asked you once if his lies would be ever justified..and you said "nope"..what changed?

do you need a link?

[EffieBlack]

22. I never said that to you

You have me mixed up with someone else.

[Demonaut]

23. see below

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=11821375

[EffieBlack]

26. Oh, good Lord - don't you even read things before you post them? I'm not Madville

From your link:

[Demonaut]

32. lol, I asked you a question and someone else replied

Last edited Mon Feb 18, 2019, 02:01 AM - Edit history (1)

[EffieBlack]

34. Yes. Something that was obvious on its face before you claimed I said something I didn't say

That's why DU puts our names next to our posts.

[Demonaut]

36. I made a mistake...I admitted it, will he? and will you agree he made a mistake?

[Empowerer]

58. You didn't admit a mistake

You just said someone else replied to your question.

But you didn't bother to confirm that it was Effie who responded before you accused her of it and even after she told you (very politely) that you had her mixed up with someone else, you still didn't bother to just look at the name of the poster but, instead, doubled down and accused her again even though if you had just looked at your own link, you would have seen that she was right.

That wasn't a "mistake" and you didn't admit to doing it after she called you on it.

[Demonaut]

75. I made a mistake on the identity of the responder...get a grip

[Empowerer]

81. Mistaking the poster is one thing, but accusing a DUer of saying something she didn't say and then

doing it again after she corrected you, even though the actual poster's identity was obvious, isn't just a "mistake." And you still haven't apologized to her for so blatantly misrepresenting her in order to try to make some point.

[Demonaut]

83. whatever...havaniceday

[madville]

109. I feel famous

[sheshe2]

55. Well.

Demonaut

12. what sheshe says it the TRUTH but what he did was to belittle their deaths and make more occurrences more likely and have less coverage

What he did is not a proven fact yet.

He belittled their deaths? Less coverage for what may have been done. Sadly their deaths with or without him will not get the coverage or the justice they seek. Fact.

[Demonaut]

57. that is a sad fact

[sheshe2]

60. Thank you.

[jberryhill]

102. "SheShe is right"

The statement of fact in question appears to be:

"There are a dozen or more posts per day about Jesse Smollett's possible lies, yet always few if any about those that actually died at the hands of the police."

Using the site search function here on OP's, it is readily apparent that there are not a dozen posts about Smollett's possible lies, let alone a dozen a day.

This is a straightforward statement of quantitative fact, and in quite a few of the instances it is simply not factually correct. Leaving aside discussions of BLM generally, which certainly spawned quite a lot of discussion at DU in the lead-up to the last election cycle, if one is interested in actual facts, instead of entirely subjective statements, one could apply one's remarkable skill of counting.

But just in terms of "mentions on DU" as a proxy for "attention", the numbers don't lie. Google can do the rough counting for you. Just picking a few names from the list:

1. "jussie smollett" site:democraticunderground.com

https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=%22jussie+smollett%22+site%3Ademocraticunderground.com


About 160 results (0.41 seconds)

2. "Philando Castile" site:democraticunderground.com

https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=%22Philando Castile%22+site%3Ademocraticunderground.com

About 288 results (0.35 seconds)

3. "Eric Garner" site:democraticunderground.com

About 510 results (0.37 seconds)

4. "Walter Scott" site:democraticunderground.com

About 210 results (0.38 seconds)


Eric Garner alone is mentioned 3 times more than Jussie Smollett in DU conversations.

Plus, the OP is specific to conversations about Smollett's apparent involvement with his alleged attackers, so the Smollett "mention score" would have to be reduced by the the number of mentions when, for example, the story broke and before it fell apart.

Smollett, of course, has nothing to do with the murders of black men by police officers, but is a figure from the entertainment world who would attract a certain amount of attention regardless of why he became suddenly newsworthy.

If we look at discussions of "Black Lives Matter" more generally at DU, the figure swamps anything having to do with Smollett by an order of magnitude:

5. "black lives matter" site:democraticunderground.com

About 2,550 results (0.37 seconds)

So, under what objective set of facts is SheShe "right"?

[Hassin Bin Sober]

115. Lol.

Nailed it.

[sheshe2]

13. One did.

Trayvon vs Zimmerman.

I seem to remember that many supported Zimmerman. Michael Brown, somewhat. Yet mostly from AA members and allies.The rest were a blip in the radar here.

Their was no massive coverage here. None.

[EffieBlack]

16. Yep

[sheshe2]

51. Yep.

[jberryhill]

103. Some blips from the radar.........

1. "jussie smollett" site:democraticunderground.com

https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=%22jussie+smollett%22+site%3Ademocraticunderground.com


About 160 results (0.41 seconds)

2. "Philando Castile" site:democraticunderground.com

https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=%22Philando Castile%22+site%3Ademocraticunderground.com

About 288 results (0.35 seconds)

3. "Eric Garner" site:democraticunderground.com

About 510 results (0.37 seconds)

4. "Walter Scott" site:democraticunderground.com

About 210 results (0.38 seconds)

5. "black lives matter" site:democraticunderground.com

About 2,550 results (0.37 seconds)

Collectively, discussions relating to "BLM" and to specific instances of police shootings of unarmed black men have attracted orders of magnitude more commentary on DU than anything having to do with the thoroughly irrelevant circumstances of Jussie Smollett.

[cwydro]

37. Yes they did.

And while we’re at it - why didn’t the recent Illinois shooting get the usual MAGA gun lover outrage?

Hmm?

[sheshe2]

74. You posted an OP about it?

You were outraged and no one responded?

Hmm?

Sorry. I am here on and off these days. Please link to your OP and I will respond. Umm.

[cwydro]

80. I post OPs once in a blue moon. Sorry.

Is that a requirement? That I have to post an OP in order to comment on lack of OPs?

Fascinating.

You seem willing to comment on certain types of hypocrisy, but not others. Tsk tsk.

[sheshe2]

49. Same national 24/7 coverage that the Disappearance of Natalee Holloway got?

I am seeking interest and attention to solving the problem. #BlackLivesMatter.

The military grade assault on protesters after Michael Browns murder and cover up was an assault on him once again. Do you remember the images and the rioters blamed. That was the 24/7 coverage...the rioters were blamed, not the man that got away with murder.

No justice no peace.

[MadDAsHell]

52. Stop watching Fox News. No other media outlet is covering stories like Holloway 24/7. nt

[sheshe2]

53. CNN did.

24/7.

[jberryhill]

117. No, CNN actually criticized other networks for their saturation coverage of that story

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disappearance_of_Natalee_Holloway

CNN ran a segment criticizing the amount of coverage their competitors gave to the story despite what they characterized as a lack of new items to report, with CNN news anchor Anderson Cooper calling the coverage "downright ridiculous".[195]

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0508/11/acd.01.html

COOPER: Well, in Aruba, not much happened in the 11th week of the disappearance of Natalee Holloway, but you'd never know that if you listen to just about every other cable news channel.

We did a number of stories after the American teen went missing and her family's anguish is and hard to imagine and we understand why they want the story to remain in the news, but we've been kind of stunned, because every night, our cable competitors devote hours and hours to this story, even though, sadly, nothing new is happening. We decided to start tracking their coverage, because to be honest, it's getting downright ridiculous. Here's what the other guys were reporting just last night...

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

BILL O'REILLY, FOX NEWS HOST: Not much new in the Natalee Holloway mystery.

RITA COSBY, MSNBC HOST: The big mystery, of course, is taking place on the island of Aruba.

DAN ABRAMS, MSNBC HOST: Let's go to Aruba. It's getting ugly. Natalee Holloway's mother is fighting back.

JOE SCARBOROUGH, MSNBC HOST: Meanwhile, a new battle is brewing between Natalee's mom and a key suspect. We brought you that story last night.

GRETA VAN SUSTEREN, FOX NEWS HOST: Tonight, Natalee Holloway's mother just received a tip in the search for her daughter.

Does this tip tend to corroborate existing theories or is this a new theory that's separate and apart from the three who have been suspects thus far?

BETH HOLLOWAY TWITTY, MOTHER OF NATALEE HOLLOWAY: Right now, I really don't want to comment on the nature of it, right now.

SCARBOROUGH: You're not going to believe it, courthouse filings today and Joran's lawyer's claiming that the Dutch boy's human rights were being violated. Are you kidding me?

VAN SUSTEREN: In terms of this tip, one-to-10 scale, 10 being the most helpful, how do you possibly rate this tip?

TWITTY: There's no way I can, Greta. There's no way I can.

O'REILLY: It's a phenomenon. It's a phenomenon.

VAN SUSTEREN: Are people responding or does it sort of seem unrelated to the tips coming in?

TWITTY: You know, I don't know, Greta.

O'REILLY: ... 2 1/2 months, I've never seen in my 30-year career, a crime story covered this way, ever. It's a mystery. It's a soap opera. It's a reality show and each night, people come in for the latest. I thought it would dissipate. I thought it would go away. It has not.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

COOPER: It truly has not. The only thing we can honestly report to you tonight is that a young woman is still missing. A family is still in anguish. Until something else happens, until there really are developments, we'll leave the rest to the other guys.

=======

The way that things seem to you, or your feelings about them, is hardly a good substitute for actual facts.

Black Lives Matter, and the various incidents under that topic, have received far more attention and discussion at DU than anything having to do with Smollett. It is quite simply to confirm that fact by using the site search function of Google, which generates the numbers I've posted elsewhere in this thread.

[sheshe2]

63. I did not say is...

I talked old news. Sorry you did not get that and attack me and accuse me of being a Fox News Watcher!

What exactly are you accusing me of? Are you saying I am a RWinger?

[SixString]

77. "Attack and accuse."

Hyperbole much?

[jberryhill]

106. A quantitative comparison of BLM vs. Natalee Holloway on DU:

Anyone can copy the search strings into Google to confirm there is no contest:

"natalee holloway" site:democraticunderground.com - About 81 results (0.37 seconds)

"black lives matter" site:democraticunderground.com - About 2,510 results (0.42 seconds)

BLM beats Holloway by a factor of 31.

(Although some of the Holloway mentions are, in fact, along the same vein of using the news coverage of her as a benchmark for "why aren't people talking about what I want them talking about" laments)

If you wanted a somewhat relevant comparison to the point you are trying to make, but which is not factually supported, you can do a head-to-head matchup of Natalee Holloway mentions on DU to Tawana Brawley:

"tawana brawley" site:democraticunderground.com - About 92 results (0.41 seconds)"

[theboss]

114. I bet nearly all those Brawley threads were during the 2004 primary

That was always good way to chum the waters.

[jberryhill]

116. Given that Google is a click away....

One needn't guess the context - most of the mentions (at least the top few I looked at) were about garnishment of her income to deal with remaining awards from the litigation.

[Ace Rothstein]

65. Yep

Saying that there was no coverage of any of those cases is revisionist history, both on DU and nationally.

[sheshe2]

70. Hey Ace?

Ace Rothstein

65. Yep

Saying that there was no coverage of any of those cases is revisionist history, both on DU and nationally.

The coverage you broadly speak of for all those "cases". Cases? How much of that coverage was positive or negative. How did those juries rule when an officer shot a child in the back? Children died. Men and women died. Murdered and you refer to them as cases.

Your response is heartbreaking.

[Calista241]

139. I agree. We talked about nearly all of these incidents.

And they were heavily covered by the media. You don’t think people protested in the streets, and NFL players started kneeline, because of something they heard through the grapevine.

[SixString]

6. "There are a dozen or more posts per day about Jesse Smollett's possible lies"

It seems the "dozen or more posts per day" accusation is a bit inflated.
Can you could provide the links?

But...Please proceed.

[sheshe2]

14. Read DU.

Thank you for your permission to proceed.

[cwydro]

39. I think I've seen maybe three.

This one will add to that total of course.

[Demonaut]

8. and he undermines all those you've listed..their injusties, their murders

[EffieBlack]

10. Who "undermines" those injustices?

Can you be more specific?

[Demonaut]

18. Smollett

[EffieBlack]

24. What does he have to do with those other incidents and how does he undermine them?

You do realize that all black people aren't responsible for the behavior of other black people, right?

[Demonaut]

25. when he claims it was a racist and trump related attack and it wasn't

what conclusion can be drawn?

[EffieBlack]

27. That he's a liar?

What does that have to do with anyone else?

[Demonaut]

28. give it a broader consideration

[EffieBlack]

29. Exactly what "broader consideration" would you like me to give it?

[Demonaut]

30. are you asking me to make up your mind?

[EffieBlack]

31. No, dear. I'm asking you to make some sense.

[Demonaut]

35. but you never answered my question, "would he be ever justified in lying"

[cwydro]

38. You really should think about leaving this Smollett case out of your problems with DU posters.

It’s not working out well for you.

[cwydro]

87. Lol.

No it’s not almost a...

Seriously? Wow.

[sheshe2]

19. He? Who?

[Demonaut]

20. see above

[Stonepounder]

21. Sheshe2, I wish I had a good response for you.

It is obvious to anyone with a functioning brain that, for reasons that aren't completely clear, that there are way too many cops who shoot first and ask questions later when they come into contact with a black man/woman/child.

Part of it today is Trump's overt racism toward anyone who isn't WASP (and a trump lover), but again, anyone who follows the news at all, knows it has been going on a hell of a lot longer than just Trump. And for every cop who actually gets some sort of discipline, at least 10-20 walk free from obvious murder.

And I don't know what the hell to do about it! As you say, when we try and protest we end up with tanks, water cannon, tear gas and riot squads. But if we sit quietly by, we end up with more murders by cop.

All I know how to do, for whatever it is worth, is to support any candidate I can find, from dog catcher up to President who is willing to speak out about Murder By Cop and start filing Federal or State Civil Rights cases against police who seem to be terrified by POC.

Don't get me wrong, there are a huge number of police officers who do their jobs in a color blind way. I read with awe about the black officer who endured the most vicious hate spew by a drunk woman with a history of vile hate for blacks and kept his professional cool. But there are too many who go out of their way to give a white a break and give a black a bullet and those need to be gotten rid of.

[Behind the Aegis]

40. The same reason no one gives a crap about real issues facing GLBT people....

...we DO NOT matter unless we are bad or have done (suspected of doing) something wrong. Gay people as a community are under assault, not only from the federal government, but also from a multitude of states, yet, NO ONE seems to give a shit. There are almost never stories about the assault on the GLBT community in MSM and if you really want to see the microcosm of it, just look at just about any story posted about GLBT rights being stripped and not only are there no or a few comments, people don't even bother to open the fucking threads to read it!

[sheshe2]

46. I know, BtA.

[JustAnotherGen]

119. +1000

Shit like this brings the bias to the forefront.

[cwydro]

41. I remember dozens of threads about those cases. Perhaps you weren't paying attention.

There was outrage all over DU.

Could you clue me as to why there was no outrage at the recent Illinois shooting? I think there was one thread, as opposed to the usual dozen expressing outrage at MAGAts and guns after a mass shooting.

Very curious.

[Dr. Strange]

43. I think that's a common error on DU: trying to gauge interest/outrage by the number of threads.

The topics that get lots of posts and threads aren't necessarily the ones that are controversial or outrageous; they're the topics that people have differing opinions on.

I don't think I ever posted on, for example, the Philando Castile case. Not because I didn't care. Quite the opposite: it pissed me right the hell off. But with everyone talking about how horrible the event was, I didn't have anything different to add. I felt much the same way.

This Smollet case is very different. For example, the issue of not turning over his phone, and then turning over his call log, but with some calls redacted: some posters thought it was weird (I know I did), while others thought there was nothing of interest there. This difference generated some discussion. In general, that's what generates the many posts and threads: differences in opinion. (Especially on a case involving an alleged hate crime.)

[Phentex]

44. You are exactly right!

DU is a funny/strange place at times.

I remember the forty bazillion threads asking about Oprah's opinion on certain issues as if she had already announced her candidacy. She clearly had not but that didn't stop DU from losing its mind over the thought. It certainly did not mean the subject was more important than any other issue at the time.

[theboss]

113. If you go through my posting history, it's mostly disagreements with other posters

I never really understood coming to a message board to vehemently agree with someone. What fun is that?

[jberryhill]

118. I vehemently agree with you

[sheshe2]

47. I remember support for Zimmerman. nt

[Empowerer]

62. There's always a cohort eager to explain/defend racist behavior

Whether it's police shooting black men ("He must have done something wrong - there's probably more to the story&quot , a Starbucks manager having black men arrested for trespassing ("It was her absolute right to decide who could and couldn't be in her coffeeshop - race had nothing to do with it&quot , MAGA students taunting a Native American man ("They were only reacting to a couple of black people calling them names dash did you see the WHOLE video?&quot , etc.

[sheshe2]

64. Spot effing on!

Preach!

[Glamrock]

42. Because it's bullshit.

We're talking about a few things here.

One being overt violence against members of the black community by sanctioned members of the government. And that flies directly in the face of what this country claims to stand for.

Two being the assumed fact that this asshole paid someone to kick the shit out of him to make a political statement regarding race and sexuality.

If you put the two together it makes total sense. We don't want to acknowledge the truth about systemic racism in our government and society because it's something that makes people uncomfortable. And now, here's some fuckwit that gives us a reason to ignore point one.

Elementary my dear Watson.

[Empowerer]

48. "now here's some fuckwit that gives us a reason to ignore point one"

Anyone inclined to ignore police violence doesn't need a reason, nor are they more inclined to ignore it because someone, be they a "fuckwit" or not, did something stupid.

[Glamrock]

69. In an ideal world, that would be true.

But that's not really how it works in the real world.

[Empowerer]

72. That's exactly how it works in the real world.

Ignoring or downplaying police violence against innocent black men because some other black man screwed up is the very definition of racial prejudice.

Would you try to justify ignoring or downplaying rape because some unrelated woman falsely accused a man of raping her? I doubt you would, because that would be misogynistic and you don't strike me as a misogynist.

So, why would anyone who is not a bigot try to justify ignoring or downplaying police brutality against black men by blaming an unrelated black man's bad behavior for their prejudgment?

Unfortunately, our real world is full of bigotry and prejudice.

[Glamrock]

73. Okay

Now I get what you mean. Yeah I agree. Essentially that's what I meant. My clumsy writing sometimes let's me down.

[cwydro]

88. Thank you.

Well said.

[Glamrock]

89. Thank you

[Caliman73]

132. We are infact talking about "a few things".

The problem is that those things are artificially linked together either on purpose, or subconsciously because of that bias.

What Smollet did or did not do has no bearing on the issue of what many police have done with unarmed Black people. The problem is that people WILL link the situations together for the exact purpose of diminishing the actual problem of Black people being disproportionately affected by lethal violence from the police.

I am not sure that I agree with the statement that those issues do not get the coverage that the reaction to Smollet's situation is getting, but I do think that it does trigger reactions to our own bias. As Empowerer said, people who WANT to dismiss the uncomfortable issue of racial bias will use Smollet's situation to dismiss the concerns of a whole group of people.

This is what I have learned through study and personal experience about racial bias.

When you are a person of color, you are often judged as a representative of your entire group. Blacks and Latinos commit crime because they are Black and Latino. Anything we do is added to the list of "why they are inferior. When we achieve, we achieve beyond our limits (race) and are an anomaly.

When you are White you are judged as an individual. When White people commit crimes, especially horrific crimes like shooting up a school full of children, or something else horrific, people make a special effort to point out how "deviant" that person was. They talk about "mental illness", or some other factor that makes that person "other". It is rarely ever discussed as a factor of hoe "White culture" is violent or lacking in some way the way it is discussed for Black people and Latinos.

I think that the OP was expressing frustration with how people discuss the ideas and how it changes based on the racial identity of the people involved.

If what has been revealed about Smollet recently is accurate, then he has real problems and there should be a consequence for his actions, a consequence for him and him alone, not for the validity of the experience of other people who look like him. White men do not get collective blame like people of color or women do and that is an issue that needs to be discussed.

[Glamrock]

133. Extremely well said!

[ck4829]

50. Good question.

[guillaumeb]

54. Trump sets the standard for serial lying.

And his racist and uninformed followers keep drinking the Trump KKKool Aid, and laughing at the lies.


And as you stated, at this point, it is only conjecture.

[SMC22307]

56. Speaking of names, isn't it "Jussie" not "Jesse"? (n/t)

[sheshe2]

66. Spelled both ways on the net.

But of course you will not answer the Op...

Figures.

Sad that I actually bothered to give you a heart when you had none. Sap that I am I gave you one even though you hate me and me.... I thought twice about it and gave you one anyway. That is who I am.

You're welcome.

[912gdm]

68. oh ffs.

all that needs a hashtag

[sheshe2]

71. ?????

[SMC22307]

122. #seriouslywhatthehellwasthat

[Hassin Bin Sober]

76. A lot of things are "spelled both ways on the net"

That doesn’t make them correct.

[betsuni]

79. "I think that there's a lot of people more concerned about being precisely, factually, and

semantically correct than about being morally right."

[SMC22307]

123. Seriously. Like 'Barack' and 'Barrack.'

The apoplexy over that! I'm not a spelling Nazi but feel that I should at least get a person's name right.

[Rob H.]

78. "Spelled both ways on the net" is no excuse

when you said of DU that “There are a dozen or more posts per day about Jesse Smollett's possible lies....”

And yet yours is the only OP that misspelled his name.

[Empowerer]

82. When you can't come up with a cogent response, try to deflect by taking away points for spelling

Bizarre, but very transparent

[George II]

86. Even though both spellings have been used on the internet.

[Empowerer]

92. And even if they haven't

Who cares?

[George II]

93. Exactly. The days of pointing out misspellings and mistakes in grammar, etc. ended in the 1990s

Interesting thing is that everyone knows EXACTLY who the OP was talking about.

[Empowerer]

96. Indeed

[SMC22307]

121. His official Twitter and .com site spell his name "Jussie."

Rather than make excuses, why can't people do the mature thing and admit to a simple error?

It's important to me to spell a person's name correctly, kinda like 'Barack' rather than 'Barrack.' Same with pronunciation, as illustrated in Kamala's delightful video. Respect.

[SMC22307]

124. Why not admit to a simple error?

I feel I should at least make an effort to get a person's name right ('Barack' not 'Barrack'). Same with pronunciation -- see Kamala's delightful video. It's clearly 'Jussie' on his social media and .com site. Respect, right? Especially for an African-American male with an unusual name.

As for the rest, does that sort of emotion/manipulation work IRL? It's so unnecesary. Thanks for the heart, though.

[namahage]

134. I agree, care should be taken to get names right.

But criticizing people for spelling while insinuating they're immature or racially insensitive, and putting down a gift--quite "unnecesary," wouldn't you say?

[Hassin Bin Sober]

61. Why can't you show him the respect to at least get his name right?

[George II]

84. Excuse me? Here is a report from a Southern California/LA online newspaper:

Jesse Smollett Attacker’s Released Due To New Evidence

http://www.canyon-news.com/jesse-smollett-attackers-released-due-to-new-evidence/88161

[lapucelle]

91. Folks just seem to be running around in circles given some of the reactions.

As pointless as shouting at the clouds.

[melman]

94. And here are dozens of sources that spelled it right

Canyon News

[George II]

95. Nice work, but you completely missed the point

Yes, Canyon News. Do you see where they're located?

Now google "Jesse Smollett" and see how many results you get.

[melman]

100. No I didn't

And those are the results from googling "Jesse Smollett''


That was the point.

[George II]

111. Yes you did; you must be using a different google. I got dozens of "Jesse Smollett" hits.

[pwb]

138. The gang is all here Mel.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

128. What the heck are you talking about? They refer to him as 'Jussie'

[George II]

129. It's been edited, the headline is now completely different. Did you bother to look at the link...

...which hasn't been edited?

http://www.canyon-news.com/jesse-smollett-attackers-released-due-to-new-evidence/88161

[Hassin Bin Sober]

130. Nonsense. The article clearly spells it Jussie. In the article and the tag.

HOLLYWOOD—Chicago detectives now believe the alleged attack on actor Jussie Smollett may have been staged.

Good lord.

[George II]

131. What does the URL say? THAT was the original headline and was reflected in the original...

...unedited article.

Good Lord indeed.....oh, and God Bless You!

[Autumn]

135. It looks like Sanestina Hunter, the author, spelled his name wrong and corrected it. Good for her.

Some people do have ethics.

[George II]

136. Shhhhh....

[WeekiWater]

85. I think it's the 24 hour news mentality and being constantly outraged.

The outrage is in the systemic racism in the US. From the federal government to the dog catcher to high school kids. It's baked into our laws and into the American psyche. Yet we keep picking up on each instance immediately not thinking if we know the truth about that one situation or not. We are usually correct when it comes to unequal treatment of minorities because that is the norm. When we hit the exception it is then used as comfort food for those who don't want to see the scope of the real problem. It's why in academics you will see these issues discussed in a macro sense, not micro.

[hughee99]

90. A gay black celebrity gets assaulted by two white Trump supporters

With bleach and a rope and you’re not sure why this is getting so much attention? Or are you not sure why it’s getting so much attention now that the original story seems to be falling apart?

[jalan48]

97. I think you nailed it.

[SMC22307]

125. Precisely. (n/t)

[FrankBooth]

98. Yes, it's DU's fault

Last edited Mon Feb 18, 2019, 03:15 PM - Edit history (2)

For just not caring enough. We're awful people who need to be reminded how awful we are at every opportunity. Thanks for such righteous oversight. And it's great that you have an encyclopedic memory allowing you to not only remember every thread that's been posted on DU, but to judge its impact so you can point out when/where we're falling down. Amazing.

[Bettie]

99. Because people are looking for an excuse

to feel justified in picking people apart?

[Bonx]

101. Whataboutism

[KayF]

107. yes that's what it looks like to me

and I don't like seeing that list of names being used like that.

[Me.]

104. In Part I Think It Has To Do With The Fact That When It Was First Reported

People were shocked/appalled and hearts went out to him. Then people began to learn it might be a publicity stunt and they felt like they were taken for fools. Anger surfaced, even though there isn't proof positive of the story being false. In addition, if he did cry wolf, that poses huge risks of disbelief for people who have been harmed and are telling the truth.

Also, I so wish DU had a spanking on the behind smilie so I could punish you for daring to spell his name as you did. I am devastated as it was the most important thing going on in my world and on DU. Now you've gone and ruined my day, if not my, usually perfect, week

[jberryhill]

105. Tamir Rice was 12 years old

I'm not sure how Tamir Rice got onto a list of "black men", but Tamir Rice's name appears on DU more than twice as much as Smollett's name:

"tamir rice" site:democraticunderground.com

About 374 results (0.45 seconds)

[madville]

108. 86 people have been shot in Chicago since Smollett allegedly faked his attack

14 killed and 72 wounded, almost all of them black males, someone gets shot everyday there. Barely gets any mention outside of Chicago on the national stage.

[Igel]

110. And that's also part of it.

Salience.

Smollett, on national tv show.

Others ... They typically start out as local incidents.

Lots of reasons, but people need to see just one and then ignore counterevidence. And by "people" I don't mean specifically "the poster of the OP".

[DashOneBravo]

120. +1

[SMC22307]

126. That's horrific. What are DUer's thoughts on making it stop?

Perhaps we should be discussing that.

Right-wingers on social media are all over Chicago violence. Same with San Francisco "filth."

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

112. He's an entertainer, he's been called a "star". He went on shows to publicize the attack.

So, yeah, he'll take up a lot of broadcast time.

If the attack was indeed faked, he'll be the Milli Vanilli of the BLM movement. Still, he'll be in need of help. To do something so desperate in the face of losing an acting role, a gig. Maybe he isn't cut out for show business, it's an insecure career for most.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

127. Good question!!