More against the local news

Last night Channel 4 had another one of its reports by John Mercure pushing for a new law restricting where sex offenders can live. It began with Mercure stating how outraged he was as a father of two, and went to interviews in which he asked residents loaded questions about "perverts" living nearby, soliciting their support for a proposed law. He interviewed one legislator who supported the law, and no one opposed to it. He noted that one agency of state government had claimed the law would be expensive and difficult to enforce, but still has not bothered to tell viewers that the cost of the proposal runs upwards of $60 million, or that several very careful research studies have failed to show that such a proposal would have any beneficial effect. You can agree or disagree with Mercure, but it's offensive to present this kind of strident, one-sided, know-nothing editorial as objective journalism.

On a separate front, please note that Milwaukee was the center of national attention because of the disappearance of two boys, Purvis Virginia Parker and Quadrevion ("Dre") Henning, who finally showed up drowned in a park lagoon with no evidence of foul play. This news station had almost daily reports for more than three weeks (often the lead story despite the absence of any real news), helping to drum up a massive popular response with people distributing fliers with the names and faces of the missing kids, billboards, fundraisers, statements by public officials, etc. For weeks, the station reported over and over as a fact that police were certain that someone in the community had knowledge relating to the disappearance of the boys but had failed to come forward. This claim was tied to a police campaign to oppose the allegedly widespread mentality of "no snitching" -- the police want people to report on each other. The implication was that the two boys were victims of foul play which was known to third parties who were covering up the crime. This was portrayed as a certainty.

Mentioned briefly but without any sort of comment or reaction, the Police Department admitted that they were "just grasping" when they claimed to know that someone in the community had information. In other words: (1) They lied; (2) They lied brazenly; (3) They libeled the entire community; (4) They especially libelled the black community; (5) They promoted their own agenda; (6) They let a massive set of actions grow out of their misinformation; (7) They admittedly had no reason to think their lie would have any practical benefit in finding the boys, whom they almost certainly understood were almost certainly dead.

What's interesting to me is that, as previously blogged here, the Police not long ago made a series of erroneous public statements based on anti-black stereotypes that two other black kids were fleeing an abusive mother who had 13 kids (implied: probably for the welfare). The local news bought into it, reported it as fact without any investigation, and later revealed that they had been lied to. Without any comment, apparent anger or disappointment, any calls for change, any reflection on how they'd been used to libel a community.

It's even more interesting that the lead story in this night's news report had been the issue of the credibility of the police department following the not-guilty verdict received by three Milwaukee police officers accused of taking part in the savage beating of a man of color, Frank Jude. Numerous other officers were at the scene but no one would share any information incriminating their brother officers, leading to a transparent obstruction of justice for Jude, and massive community protests. Despite the fact that the news department was leading with a story on the police-public credibility gap, here was the news that the department had lied about the two missing boys, promoting their own agenda and libeling the community in the process, and the news staff was either too dim-witted or too complicit to make the obvious connection. The head of the police department, and ordinary police officers not involved with the Jude case, were treated as heroically fighting off the effects of a few bad apples, but if this is the case, why do the police appear to be insitutionally, at the highest levels, appear to be spreading misinformation about cases involving the black community over and over again?

Is Channel 4 brain-dead (some evidence for this), or are they intentionally not remarking on the routine racist misinformation spread by the MPD because they understand they are complicit in that scandal by never disclaiming or doublechecking the department's dubious claims?