zlacker

I find it hard to take comments seriously when they make statements that just don't accord with reality.

The media treats cops according to what's best for the story. Lately, that involves being extremely critical of them. In other times when we aren't in the midst of a pandemic, mass unemployment and then nationwide protests, and the story is that the cops shot a criminal suspect, they use euphemisms like "officer-involved shooting." The media narrative today is extremely hostile to police.

So when I see "only a handful of incidents," I feel there might be a bit of an agenda behind that. Knocking down the World Trade Center twin towers and a side of the Pentagon were only a "handful of incidents," too. Not to mention the number of unarmed black people shot by police last year (nine total). All of those are a disgrace, but the sheer number of atrocities that happen are irrelevant to how unjust or outrageous the atrocities might be.

>>baryph+(OP)
Viewing the media's relationship to police as being simply for or against them based on swings of public opinion is incorrect, it is maybe partially true but there is a strong and consistent bias towards law and order by corporate (private for profit) media. There are numerous reporters in Seattle still uncritically reporting police lies. There are a handful who are being more critical. Guess who has more resources and broader reach?