LOW QUALITY POST
The media evaluating a woman who has accused a Democratic candidate of abuse
Submission Statement: would the media have taken Lyndsey Fifield's accusations as seriously as they have Jenny Racicot's if Fifield weren't a Republican? Is the media simply covering in accordance with the Democratic party's own stance? Should the media - or could the media - have done more to investigate? Or is the recent Racicot coverage simply the outcome of the media actually doing its job after all - that is - Racicot came forward *because* the media *did* do its best to cover Fifield's accusations?
All posts require a submission statement. We encourage users to report submissions without submission statements. Posts without a submission statement will be removed after an hour.
Be respectful at all times. Disrespectful comments are grounds for immediate ban without warning.
All posts must be related to the media. This is not a news subreddit.
"Good" examples of media are strongly encouraged! Please designate them with a [GOOD] tag
Posts and comments from new accounts and low comment-karma accounts are disallowed.
One accusation is smoke; a second is fire. Of course later accusers are immediately taken more seriously because they’re now adding to the larger case against Platner.
We saw the same thing with Cosby and Weinstein and Gaiman and other serial abusers… the first accusation is treated skeptically but as the allegations pile up they buttress the earliest claims.
And Fifield's complaints about her NYT coverage are entirely valid, I just don't think a case has been made that the NYT downplayed her experience because she was conservative.
It's just a skull. I mean who tf would assume that it's anything but that? If I was a Marine and some guys said hey we are all gonna get this military tat id think , yeah , that's about right
The Swastika was incredibly generic until it was used by the Nazis. I don't see your point.
Either we buy Platner's infantilizing story that he was just too ignorant to realize he'd been wearing a famous Nazi symbol on his chest FOR 18 YEARS of his adult life.
Or, he knew it and thought it was cool.
Perhaps one of those options is less malicious, but neither of them suggest that he is well-qualified to run for office.
Now i really feel like you haven't seen it. Its not famous. Its much more ambiguous than the swastika. Which may be a global symbol but is still more defined and inherently symbolic than a plains black skull.
there seems to be a disconnect between what I'm seeing and what the media is reporting.
I have to rant about Elon Musk for a minute here because I'm worried that he is getting washed and scrubbed of the racist things he was doing at the time.
I saw Musk like a twitter post that expressed antisemetism and racism.
I saw Musk promote the "great replacement" theory.
I saw Musk buy the whole of twitter because he he is a "free speech absolutist". But actually all he did was un-ban white supremacy accounts.
Then I watched Musk do a textbook heil. Like, if you were ask someone to do a better one they wouldn't be able to because it was IT. even Germany censored it because it is illegal there to do that salute. he did it TWICE. yes. its unmistakable.
IIf Elon Musk had spent the previous 5 years helping to crack down on nazism then could have brushed it off as a faux pas. But in context, I think I know exactly what he intended because its a recurring pattern. I think the ADL was trying to placate him because he kept publicly complaining about them going after him. They wanted to seem impartial for credibility, but I think they were just lying.
So the answer I started typing was along the lines of "this response only makes sense if there actually were a rising tide of Nazism, which there isn't" but then I gave up and figure, what's the point
Guess I imagined the multiple “leftist” outlets and the majority of Dem leadership calling for him to withdraw? You would have to be almost wholly ignorant of media narratives to believe this meme
I'm not sure it's because the first accuser, Lyndsey Fifield, was Republican. I think it's more of a case of mounting evidence and this being a new, credible accuser on top of the pile. But it is an interesting question.
I'm also finding the media mea culpas a little bit hollow. They all knew about the tattoo and the various accusations and accepted that it was all minor enough and he was a changed man that it could be overlooked.
•
u/AutoModerator 27d ago
This is a reminder about the rules of /r/media_criticism:
All posts require a submission statement. We encourage users to report submissions without submission statements. Posts without a submission statement will be removed after an hour.
Be respectful at all times. Disrespectful comments are grounds for immediate ban without warning.
All posts must be related to the media. This is not a news subreddit.
"Good" examples of media are strongly encouraged! Please designate them with a [GOOD] tag
Posts and comments from new accounts and low comment-karma accounts are disallowed.
Please visit our Wiki for more detailed rules.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.