A church leader was killed at a fundraiser in Newark, Delaware.
This is terrible reporting on the part of CBS. The headline reads "Suspect Arrested in Deadly Del. Church Shooting." The problem is, the shooting occurred at the Hilton Hotel where they were a fundraiser was being held to build a church in Elkton, MD. No one was shot in or near a church. How does that get past the editors?
Even more misreporting is found in the sidebar photo caption, which reads,
"Monir George, 58, was taken into custody in connection with the deadly
shooting of Malak Michael during a fundraiser for a Delaware church.
The article clearly states that the fundraiser was being held for a church to be built in Elkton, MARYLAND. With these kinds of factual errors I'm almost surprised I'm not reading an article from The News Journal.
The article states that the shooter had "two semi-auto handguns and 150 rounds of ammunition." Other than that there's no mention of guns or any anti-gun bias. Far better than the anti-gun drivel we'd see from the Washington Post or the Baltimore Sun Of course, had they held the fundraiser just down the road in Elkton this would have never happened, since you can't carry guns in Maryland. Had this happened in Maryland I'd bet they'd be quick to blame Pennsylvania's lax gun laws.
UPDATE - Edited because I forgot to post a link to the story. It should also be noted that two unarmed men were able to restrain the shooter, which probably saved many lives.
I think this quote is appropriate:
"Media carries with it a credibility that is totally undeserved. You have all experienced this, in what I call the Murray Gell-Mann Amnesia effect. (I refer to it by this name because I once discussed it with Murray Gell-Mann, and by dropping a famous name I imply greater importance to myself, and to the effect, than it would otherwise have.)
Briefly stated, the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect is as follows. You open the newspaper to an article on some subject you know well. In Murray's case, physics. In mine, show business. You read the article and see the journalist has absolutely no understanding of either the facts or the issues. Often, the article is so wrong it actually presents the story backward—reversing cause and effect. I call these the "wet streets cause rain" stories. Paper's full of them.
In any case, you read with exasperation or amusement the multiple errors in a story, and then turn the page to national or international affairs, and read as if the rest of the newspaper was somehow more accurate about Palestine than the baloney you just read. You turn the page, and forget what you know."
– Michael Crichton
Post a Comment