Somewhere, someone is doing the math to compare the dollar cost of the CVS fire to the combined dollar cost of the burned churches. That somone will use the results of his calculations to justify the media’s lack of attention.
That someone is a racist asshole.
People in America can’t be indifferent or uncaring about things they aren’t actually told about. The news media hasn’t reported any of these with any volume; this is the first I’ve heard of any of these church arsons. The nation isn’t shrugging; the news media is.
Also, that someone is a proud Christian who thinks the country is going to hell in a handbasket because churches are no longer automatically the center of every community.
Ugh, not this tripe again.
CBS national: Five predominately black churches burn in St. Louis, arson suspected - CBS News
CBS local: CBS News - Breaking news, 24/7 live streaming news & top stories
Fox affiliate St Louis: http://fox2now.com/2015/10/17/5th-st-louis-african-american-church-burns-in-9-days/
NBC national: St. Louis Arson Investigators Probe Five Church Fires in Ten Days
Washington Post: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2015/10/20/the-arsonist-hes-not-my-enemy-st-louis-pastor-says-after-6-area-churches-are-torched/
Toronto Star: Six largely black churches torched in St. Louis days apart | The Star
New York Times: St. Louis Officials Believe Arsons at 6 Black Churches Are Linked - The New York Times
ABC national: Fires at Black Churches Could Be Caused By Same Person, Investigators Say - ABC News
Guardian: http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/oct/19/missouri-st-louis-black-church-fires-investigation
Buzzfeed: 7 Fires Set At Mostly Black Churches In St. Louis Area Ruled Arson
NPR: Investigators Probe Fires At 6 Black Churches In 5 Southern States : NPR
This is leaving out, of course, the individual fires which were also covered by local mainstream affiliates, and not bothering to list off covering it on more than one occasion.
Most covered same day as the US uncut story(again, barring the pieces on individual fires that I left out many of which came well before), some of them before the US uncut story went live, as best I can tell. And it’s not like this was obscure or hidden, either - these are literally the first bunch that came up with a quick google search, and some of them are national broadcasts. This is not even close to a comprehensive search or list.
Edit- fixed links.
The media really doesn’t seem to care what is going on in North St. Louis county. In addition to burning churches, we’re also about to be burning illegally dumped nuclear waste thanks to the West Lake Landfill fire.
I have so much civic pride right now you guys. So much.
I think you’re missing the part where broadcast media is the premier gauge of what this country is paying attention to, for better or for worse. The fact that the story is available in a static format for reading is not an indication that it’s being widely read, understood or disseminated through the public consciousness. Here’s a quick test: Ask people if they heard anything about it a week from now. Then ask people about the CVS thing. I guarantee you’ll see a significant disparity in the numbers there.
Ever think that the guys setting fire to churches want media recognition? Ever think that making a big deal of the fires will inspire other dipshits?
It’s unlikely that media is thinking this way. But media coverage of some stuff is, paradoxically, not always for the best.
What’s a CVS? Guessing it’s not an Anti-Submarine Arircraft carrier in this context.
I’m sorry, I didn’t say a damned thing about that. The claim is that the media yawned, didn’t cover it - which is clearly false, and trivially found so. I’m not stupid enough to claim that the public isn’t impressively ignorant, when taken as a group.
I think you’re missing the part where broadcast media is the premier
gauge of what this country is paying attention to, for better or for
worse.
American press institute disagrees.
But, if you want to take that route - many of those also publish direct to the internet, with RSS feeds and the like available. Even if we ignore the numbers on where people tend to get their news, and go with the assumption that nobody bothers with the broadcast media, most people still get their news directly from the news outlets - so they still would have seen those stories, from the mainstream media.
Here’s a quick test: Ask people if they heard anything about it a week
from now. Then ask people about the CVS thing. I guarantee you’ll see a
significant disparity in the numbers there.
And if I do, and come back in a week, you’ll immediately dismiss it if the majority they say they remember. Claims that the media are ignoring some major story are nearly as common as major stories, and that excuse comes up about as often. While the words are different, it’s not the first time I’ve danced along with this tune.
Edit - Bonus if you don’t follow the API, here’s a really interesting story from the other day about how US politics is adapting to media scrutiny. Worth the read.
It’s an American Pharmacy Chain, I think. Grain of salt, I’m not American, but if I’ve got it wrong someone will be along with the correct answer shortly.
“Nation yawns” is the headline.
But are you so ignorant as to claim that the media does not impose a great deal on what gets discussed according to the aggregate preferences of the media at large?
That’s not what the article says. The existence of diversity in news doesn’t dictate what news gets the most attention. And Americans are still looking at front pages (of websites or newspapers) more than anything else. From your link.
Traditional media remain important even for those Americans with the most gadgets. People who own and use more devices are no more or less likely to use print publications, television, or radio to access the news. For example, 62 percent of people who use only one internet enabled device say they used the print version of a publication to get news in the last week, as do 60 percent of those who use three or more mobile devices.
No please do it. Just make it statistically significant. You just don’t want to, and don’t have the money/time. But I like that you can predict my actions, that’s quite some trick.
[quote=“ActionAbe, post:12, topic:67888”]
No please do it. Just make it statistically significant. You just don’t want to, and don’t have the money/time. But I like that you can predict my actions, that’s quite some trick.
[/quote]Wait, money? You expect me to drop actual money having a firm do some sort of formal survey? Or the time to do a large enough survey that it would even approach being worth doing to prove something? And you know that anything less than that, you’d just dismiss it as anecdotal or otherwise flawed.
Jesus, dude, step away from the internet and go the fuck outside. I’m not dropping a goddamned dime or dozens of hours on some dumb argument in a website comment section, because it doesn’t matter. If you’re so desperate to find out that you think it’s worth the money, more power to you, I fully support your endeavor, but don’t ask me to help you.
We’re done, be good to yourself. Congratulations, you win the internet argument, crack some champagne and enjoy it.
As you point out, there was news coverage. You show that with your search. But is it close to the same volume level? Is it on broadcast? Are the 24Hour channels blabbing about it and placing it front and center in the national dialogue and making it impossible to ignore?
Cory asserts the answer is no, the attention level here doesn’t reach the “orgy” level of last year. To which you respond “Ugh, not this tripe again”. Your “proof” says little to nothing about whether the media is yawning or not.
Doing a google search for something you heard about it is not the same thing as hearing about it in the normal course of your life. Among other things, you have to know enough to do the search in the first place.
ActionAbe, one; Churba, zero.
Well played, sir.
FWIW, the TV (almost always tuned to CNN) by the security guard station at work was just talking about this particular story. Of course, we were talking about historic AF churches being burned back during the massacre at Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church. It would appear that the FBI isn’t making a great deal of headway.
I have been following the story, which I think was reported on network news. The Boing Boing report is the first one I have seen that identified the perpetrators as white supremacist terrorists. But it is disappointing that you do not reveal more information about the identity of the firebugs. What organization do they belong to? Do you have their names?
Who cares? Everyone’s using Git these days, anyway.
Can we stop calling everything terrorism? Arson, racially motivated hate crime or otherwise, in the early hours of the morning isn’t terrorism.
