(07-19-2022 09:46 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(07-19-2022 09:38 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-19-2022 09:27 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(07-19-2022 09:13 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(07-19-2022 09:01 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  Yes. One of the many passages that got my attention was this:

Quantitative studies cited by Ungar-Sargon indicate that the use of terminology associated with woke politics, such as “racism,” “people of color,” “slavery,” “white supremacy,” and “oppression,” has skyrocketed in the American mainstream media precisely since 2011.

I believe the Red Team here has commented on this. If a shooting can be connected to any of these terms, it get mega-coverage. If not, it dies young.

We are still stalking about the Uvalde shooting. And Sandy Hook. And countless others that had nothing to do with your phrases in quotes.

One can put into that list “assault weapons”, “weapons of war”, and “military style wounds” with little to no effort at extension. as evidenced by typical mentions of Uvalde. And Sandy Hook.

OK... but that's not the point that OO was trying to make (that only "woke" issue shootings get coverage).

"Only"? Where did I say that? "Dying young" is not the same as zero coverage.

When you said the following the implication was that only the shootings associated with wokeness get "significant coverage":

"If a shooting can be connected to any of these terms, it get mega-coverage. If not, it dies young."

I still disagree despite dying young /= zero.

Quote: One example would be the mall shooting recently in which an armed bystander killed the shooter. That has disappeared largely from coverage while Buffalo has not.

When I turned on CNN this morning they were talking about the mall shooting/armed bystander. About 7:00 am. I can't remember the last time I heard talk of the Buffalo shooting.