A rare exception to a broader trend. The megathread from /r/politics has 3 out of 96 that mention "terror" in the headline. That is unreasonably low to me. See more in my comment here - it's not...
A rare exception to a broader trend. The megathread from /r/politics has 3 out of 96 that mention "terror" in the headline. That is unreasonably low to me. See more in my comment here - it's not exact and I do believe there's room for debate.
Genuine question; is this hyperbole? I can't tell, and I feel like this isn't something that would happen on even Fox News, although I don't peruse news sites enough to really back this feeling up...
If they were brown, it would be in the headline.
Genuine question; is this hyperbole? I can't tell, and I feel like this isn't something that would happen on even Fox News, although I don't peruse news sites enough to really back this feeling up with anything. Sure, conservative-oriented sites might be more likely to make a big deal out of race like that, but headlines seems unlikely?
Not hyperbole, and not just conservative-oriented sites. For the record, I'm not blaming BBC or any other outlet specifically here. I saw the headline worded without reference to "terror" in many...
Not hyperbole, and not just conservative-oriented sites. For the record, I'm not blaming BBC or any other outlet specifically here. I saw the headline worded without reference to "terror" in many other places. I'll try to add some context though rather than just guessing based on memory.
Let's start with the megathread from /r/politics yesterday. Out of 96 non-duplicate links, 3 mention "terror" at all. That seems very low to me as a regular, long-term consumer of news and current events. To compare, we could look at the wiki page for Islamist terrorist attacks - note that there's also a wiki page for right-wing terrorist attacks (so wikipedia is consistent with their labeling). In the underlying citations for Islamist terrorist attacks in the US (on the pages for those attacks), terror is used much more than 3 out of 96 would suggest (I clicked through all more recent US-based attacks), but that could be due to the fact that a terrorist attack linked on the wikipedia page for terrorist attacks is more likely to have citations that reference terror. Selection bias basically. I'm just trying to come up with something other than how it seems or how I feel.
One other potential explanation I've thought about is that this particular plan was foiled in advance. So maybe there's an argument that it doesn't fit with the "terrorist attack" terminology as it was only a planned attack.
I think that @Parliament is saying that if the people doing this were not white, then the headline would say "terrorism" and not "militia". I don't think that's hyperbole; I think it's entirely...
I think that @Parliament is saying that if the people doing this were not white, then the headline would say "terrorism" and not "militia". I don't think that's hyperbole; I think it's entirely accurate.
I think that you interpreted it as if they were not white, it would say "brown people plot t abduct Michigan Governor". I don't think that's the case, and if it is, then it's hyperbole.
A reflection on headlines after 9/11 would indicate that the headlines tend not to focus on the colour or race directly. Reviewing other atrocity headlines, there's a disproportionate tendency for people who are white to not get labelled as terrorists.
What even is this year anymore. I'm glad these guys were caught, I think it's tough to argue that Trump tweeting out 'LIBERATE MICHIGAN' didn't encourage them someway, even if all the talking...
Six men were arrested and accused of plotting with a militia group to kidnap Gov. Gretchen Whitmer of Michigan, the authorities said.
What even is this year anymore.
I'm glad these guys were caught, I think it's tough to argue that Trump tweeting out 'LIBERATE MICHIGAN' didn't encourage them someway, even if all the talking heads will surely try to explain it away.
It's the same thing that happened in Gamergate in that they are an interest group for X, actually want Y, and people who do Y in name of X are to be disregarded as troublemakers and not...
It's the same thing that happened in Gamergate in that they are an interest group for X, actually want Y, and people who do Y in name of X are to be disregarded as troublemakers and not representative of the core complaint. There's probably a better name for it.
Here's the official FBI release: Six Arrested On Federal Charge Of Conspiracy To Kidnap The Governor Of Michigan It links to the PDF of the actual criminal complaint, which is 17 pages long and...
I'm not at all suprised that this is in Hartland. Right next to Howell and Brighton. Full of right wing assholes and plenty of antigov militia gun nuts
I'm not at all suprised that this is in Hartland. Right next to Howell and Brighton. Full of right wing assholes and plenty of antigov militia gun nuts
Yeah Livingston County has been home to white supremist groups since at least the 1980s. I remember there was a dust-up about in it the local news at the time, but it died down after a while. My...
Yeah Livingston County has been home to white supremist groups since at least the 1980s. I remember there was a dust-up about in it the local news at the time, but it died down after a while. My guess is it never really ended, just went underground for a while.
Trump slammed Whitmer later Thursday in a series of tweets, falsely claiming she called him a "White Supremacist" in her remarks, complaining that she did not thank him and saying she's doing a "terrible job" at governing.
This is terrorism. If they were brown, it would be in the headline.
A rare exception to a broader trend. The megathread from /r/politics has 3 out of 96 that mention "terror" in the headline. That is unreasonably low to me. See more in my comment here - it's not exact and I do believe there's room for debate.
Genuine question; is this hyperbole? I can't tell, and I feel like this isn't something that would happen on even Fox News, although I don't peruse news sites enough to really back this feeling up with anything. Sure, conservative-oriented sites might be more likely to make a big deal out of race like that, but headlines seems unlikely?
Not hyperbole, and not just conservative-oriented sites. For the record, I'm not blaming BBC or any other outlet specifically here. I saw the headline worded without reference to "terror" in many other places. I'll try to add some context though rather than just guessing based on memory.
Let's start with the megathread from /r/politics yesterday. Out of 96 non-duplicate links, 3 mention "terror" at all. That seems very low to me as a regular, long-term consumer of news and current events. To compare, we could look at the wiki page for Islamist terrorist attacks - note that there's also a wiki page for right-wing terrorist attacks (so wikipedia is consistent with their labeling). In the underlying citations for Islamist terrorist attacks in the US (on the pages for those attacks), terror is used much more than 3 out of 96 would suggest (I clicked through all more recent US-based attacks), but that could be due to the fact that a terrorist attack linked on the wikipedia page for terrorist attacks is more likely to have citations that reference terror. Selection bias basically. I'm just trying to come up with something other than how it seems or how I feel.
One other potential explanation I've thought about is that this particular plan was foiled in advance. So maybe there's an argument that it doesn't fit with the "terrorist attack" terminology as it was only a planned attack.
I think that @Parliament is saying that if the people doing this were not white, then the headline would say "terrorism" and not "militia". I don't think that's hyperbole; I think it's entirely accurate.
I think that you interpreted it as if they were not white, it would say "brown people plot t abduct Michigan Governor". I don't think that's the case, and if it is, then it's hyperbole.
A reflection on headlines after 9/11 would indicate that the headlines tend not to focus on the colour or race directly. Reviewing other atrocity headlines, there's a disproportionate tendency for people who are white to not get labelled as terrorists.
Ohhhhh I think we just misunderstood each other then. This makes sense.
Looks like we just misunderstood each other per the other comment!
On BBC? I'm not so sure.
BBC wasn't the first place I saw this. Damn near every outlet reported it without referring to terrorists or terrorism.
What even is this year anymore.
I'm glad these guys were caught, I think it's tough to argue that Trump tweeting out 'LIBERATE MICHIGAN' didn't encourage them someway, even if all the talking heads will surely try to explain it away.
It's the same thing that happened in Gamergate in that they are an interest group for X, actually want Y, and people who do Y in name of X are to be disregarded as troublemakers and not representative of the core complaint. There's probably a better name for it.
It's time to start calling it what it is: radical right-wing terrorism.
I follow your reference but is this terrorism or just plain sedition?
Here's the official FBI release: Six Arrested On Federal Charge Of Conspiracy To Kidnap The Governor Of Michigan
It links to the PDF of the actual criminal complaint, which is 17 pages long and has a lot more detail.
I'm not at all suprised that this is in Hartland. Right next to Howell and Brighton. Full of right wing assholes and plenty of antigov militia gun nuts
Yeah Livingston County has been home to white supremist groups since at least the 1980s. I remember there was a dust-up about in it the local news at the time, but it died down after a while. My guess is it never really ended, just went underground for a while.
I grew up around there and can tell you first hand that's exactly the case (though if it's "underground", it's very shallow)
President's* response.
Will these be more naïve people prodded along by the FBI à la The Day Shall Come?