Accuracy in Media

Anyone who has watched the Rittenhouse trial with anything other than a partisan lens has to be forced to admit, like Chicago Tribune was recently, that the lesson of the trial above all is that “We should be acknowledging there is plenty of blame to go around for this mess and it doesn’t matter what you think about race or politics or gun laws or anything else.” 

True enough, but not quite enough truth. 

That truth was better spoken by Rittenhouse presiding Judge Bruce Schroeder, who blasted the “grossly irresponsible media” for interjecting itself into the trial again and again and getting it wrong, just as they interjected themselves into the riots in Kenosha.

Kenosha is, after all, where CNN interjected the now-infamous “Fiery but Mostly Peaceful” caption of a burning building in an attempt to portray the protests as just a run-of-the-mill thing that no one should be worried about. 

Buildings burn down all the time. Nothing to see here, folks. 

This time around the judge blasted the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel for running a piece that was critical of the judge’s decision to wait on a motion for a mistrial in which an expert who the newspaper interviewed called the decision “odd.”

“The only reason I can think of for waiting is perhaps he wants to give the jury a chance to acquit so he doesn’t have to, but that’s speculation on my part,” Keith Findley, co-founder of the Wisconsin Innocence Project, said in an interview with the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel.

What’s odd is that the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel would go to the trouble of finding three experts quoted in the piece, each of who question why the judge waited, while not quoting one expert who agreed with waiting.  

It’s important because the case is with the jury now, where it should properly be decided. 




Ready to fight back against media bias?
Join us by donating to AIM today.

Comments