The 1992 Los Angeles riots was ignited by the verdict in the trial of the officers involved in the Rodney King beating. This news article from April 29th 1992, the day the riots started, details the outcome and immediate reaction to the case as it concludes. The text describes the arguments presented by both sides and why the jurors chose to acquit Rodney King. According to jurors and others close to the case, the defense argued that the officers were acting in accordance with standard procedure, and also “the role of a police force in protecting society from "the likes of Rodney King." ”(Mydans for the NY Times,1992). Additionally, the article mentions the beginning of riots and the tensions between races. It finally highlights the reaction of several high profile politicians and political figures.
This article highlights how the media distorts certain aspects of the situation to lessen the injustice that occurred. Throughout the article, the defenses argument is brought up, bringing up and repeating similar points. That: “They were afraid he was going to run or even attack them.” or that the police had a role in “ protecting society from "the likes of Rodney King." ”. It mentions that : “Mr. King was making potentially threatening movements”. While the article does mention the brutality of the beating and the reaction of certain high profile figures in opposition to the beating, it does so in much lower frequency, and also brings up those same figures calling for people to respect the legal process. To an extent this pushes the viewer towards siding with the defense and primes them against LA’s response to this case. By being repeatedly exposed to the idea that the police were acting within procedure or that King was potentially threatening, the reader will start to consider it more heavily.
It additionally brings up racial tensions and makes the issues seem like a black vs white issue. For example the article states “Loud arguments broke out between whites and blacks” and then highlights the violent acts committed by the rioters. It avoids calling the people in the streets protests or demonstrations but rather “angry groups” and looters. It mentions how . To the reader, this article makes those in the street seem like a violent angry mob taking advantage of the chaos to commit crimes rather than those acts being committed by a subsection of the demonstrations, which devalues the intense reaction to the verdict as a whole. The strategic organization of this article posts the violence committed in part in reaction to the riots after the case is explained, and then quoting various politicians calling for calm and peace, then finally bringing up the idea that the police are quote: “part of the line between society and chaos” or that the beating was “ "This is careful police work." ”. This primes the viewer to view the police brutality as almost justified and that their use of force is necessary to prevent the very violence present on the streets at the moment. It seems that this article is meant to garner a certain amount of sympathy towards the officers and lessen the importance of such a case.
Nicolas Menand
This article highlights how the media distorts certain aspects of the situation to lessen the injustice that occurred. Throughout the article, the defenses argument is brought up, bringing up and repeating similar points. That: “They were afraid he was going to run or even attack them.” or that the police had a role in “ protecting society from "the likes of Rodney King." ”. It mentions that : “Mr. King was making potentially threatening movements”. While the article does mention the brutality of the beating and the reaction of certain high profile figures in opposition to the beating, it does so in much lower frequency, and also brings up those same figures calling for people to respect the legal process. To an extent this pushes the viewer towards siding with the defense and primes them against LA’s response to this case. By being repeatedly exposed to the idea that the police were acting within procedure or that King was potentially threatening, the reader will start to consider it more heavily.
It additionally brings up racial tensions and makes the issues seem like a black vs white issue. For example the article states “Loud arguments broke out between whites and blacks” and then highlights the violent acts committed by the rioters. It avoids calling the people in the streets protests or demonstrations but rather “angry groups” and looters. It mentions how . To the reader, this article makes those in the street seem like a violent angry mob taking advantage of the chaos to commit crimes rather than those acts being committed by a subsection of the demonstrations, which devalues the intense reaction to the verdict as a whole. The strategic organization of this article posts the violence committed in part in reaction to the riots after the case is explained, and then quoting various politicians calling for calm and peace, then finally bringing up the idea that the police are quote: “part of the line between society and chaos” or that the beating was “ "This is careful police work." ”. This primes the viewer to view the police brutality as almost justified and that their use of force is necessary to prevent the very violence present on the streets at the moment. It seems that this article is meant to garner a certain amount of sympathy towards the officers and lessen the importance of such a case.
Nicolas Menand
No comments:
Post a Comment