1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

I’m a cop. If you don’t want to get hurt, don’t challenge me.

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by YankeeFan, Aug 22, 2014.

  1. old_tony

    old_tony Well-Known Member

    Care to show me one?
     
  2. Dick Whitman

    Dick Whitman Well-Known Member

    A slave ship?

    Is there some question that these existed, and that Africans were brought to the colonies and, later, the United States, inside of them?
     
  3. Baron Scicluna

    Baron Scicluna Well-Known Member

    Damn those conservatives. Damn them to hell.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 15, 2014
  4. Baron Scicluna

    Baron Scicluna Well-Known Member

    Don't you know they came here by teleportation?
     
  5. da man

    da man Well-Known Member

    I think he means one alive today.
     
  6. Ben_Hecht

    Ben_Hecht Active Member


    Worked for him, the dear boy.
     
  7. Baron Scicluna

    Baron Scicluna Well-Known Member

    Hey, it worked for YF!
     
  8. YankeeFan

    YankeeFan Well-Known Member

    New York Times author, editor, and public editor forced to walk back the "no angel" description:

    Two words — “no angel” — have become a flash point for many of the difficult, contentious, entrenched issues that have arisen in Ferguson, Mo. On Twitter, in my email queue and across the Internet, many Times readers are angry and disappointed about the use of those words, which have become yet another Ferguson-related hashtag.

    Let’s get the obvious out of the way first: That choice of words was a regrettable mistake. In saying that the 18-year-old Michael Brown was “no angel” in the fifth paragraph of Monday’s front-page profile, The Times seems to suggest that this was, altogether, a bad kid.

    Some people take their protests further; they say that The Times is suggesting a truly repellent idea — that Mr. Brown deserved to die because he acted like many a normal teenager.

    I talked on Monday with both the article’s author, John Eligon, and the national editor, Alison Mitchell, who has been heading the Times coverage of Mr. Brown’s death earlier this month and its aftermath; the young black man was fatally shot by a white police officer, Darren Wilson.

    Mr. Eligon told me in a phone conversation that he proposed the idea of a profile of Mr. Brown — an in-depth article that would give readers insight into his life.

    “We wanted to tell the story of who he was, the deeper story,” Mr. Eligon said. Most of all, he had in mind telling the story of a young man who “despite his challenges and obstacles, was someone who was making it.” Mr. Brown had graduated from high school on time and was planning to attend college.

    As a 31-year-old black man himself, Mr. Eligon told me, he is attentive to many of the issues in the Ferguson case. During his time covering the Midwest for The Times, he has experienced apparent racial profiling — “I’ve had the cops called on me twice for looking suspicious” — and while covering courts in Manhattan, he once was told to sit down and wait for his lawyer to arrive.

    Mr. Eligon’s piece last week describing the mood in Ferguson was one of several in which he brought that awareness to his reporting.

    “I understand the concerns, and I get it,” Mr. Eligon said. He agreed that “no angel” was not a good choice of words and explained that they were meant to play off the opening anecdote of the article in which Mr. Brown saw an angelic vision. That anecdote “is about as positive as you can get,” Mr. Eligon said, and noted that a better way to segue into the rest of the article might have been to use a phrase like “wasn’t perfect.”

    “Hindsight is 20/20. I wish I would have changed that,” he said.

    In general, he said, the profile was a “full, mostly positive picture” of the young man.

    Ms. Mitchell told me that “the story basically says he’s human.”

    “If you read the full profile, it’s a sensitive, nuanced account of this young man,” she said. “There was certainly no hint that this poor young man should have been shot.” (I agree with Ms. Mitchell on this point).


    nyti.ms/1tCEMX2
     
  9. Songbird

    Songbird Well-Known Member

    Nuance.
     
  10. poindexter

    poindexter Well-Known Member

    So by writing "no angel", it was read by some people that the author was legitimizing that the got shot?

    I am lost.
     
  11. da man

    da man Well-Known Member

    Correction: In a recent profile, The Times wrote that Michael Brown was "no angel." In fact, he WAS an angel. The Times regrets the error.
     
  12. YankeeFan

    YankeeFan Well-Known Member

    I work with Dunkin Donuts franchisees every day, and you couldn't be more wrong, or more naive.

    Here's the story of Dunkin Donuts in Chicago:

    http://www.entrepreneur.com/article/61686

    So many of the franchisees I work with started out as immigrants working as hourly employees, at low wages.

    They proved themselves. They became managers. Then they became operating partners.

    Family members have pooled money. They've gotten other family members involved. They save all of their money to open up the next franchise.

    I really fucking wish that some of you would talk to a small business owner sometime.

    Dunkin' Donuts has turned hardworking immigrant entrepreneurs into millionaires.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page