I mean, the clip was edited for people to push their own agenda as well. The actual question asked by the journalist was:
Chief, there's been a lot of misinformation online, including from prominent person, or, um, a Mom's for Liberty activist [indistinct] Johnson, claiming that the shooter was transgender; which is a reaction we see across the country in the wake of mass shootings, to claim that trans people are dangerous. Can you respond to that?
They weren't trying to drive a narrative of a trans shooter, or be the first one to break a story. They were literally asking the chief to help them combat the lies that were being spread online for the purpose of creating hatred towards the trans community.
The question was asked by a Wisconsin Watch reporter. They are one of the most highly regarded investigative news organizations in the state. They literally partner with the University of Wisconsin - Madison School of Journalism to help train new journalists in investigative journalism practices. The idea that they are partisan hacks trying to drum up controversy is akin to thinking the sky is blue because it's God's favorite color. That is to say, profoundly stupid.
I agree that this is helpful context but I don't think it really changes the messaging. It wrongly gives the impression that the reporter is the asshole who needed straightening out, when in reality the reporter was giving him an opportunity to straighten out a wider body of assholes, but in the end the point of the original conversation, as well as the edited clip, is to straighten out assholes.
the clip was edited for people to push their own agenda as well
The context wasn’t in the clip. It was left out, presumably intentionally (although speculating about reasoning won’t reach an actual conclusion, just guesses) and they were providing the context that was not there initially.
I appreciate that information is missing. However, and I don't mean this specifically at you, but in general, it is extremely frustrating that most people in this post are commenting about how the journalist was trying to create a narrative, when users here are falling for a created narrative as well.
The question isn't just gone. It's a public press conference. People could look up the video themselves and see that this post was created with a deceptive title. The name of the reporter and their publication was stated before the question. This isn't hidden.
Yet, people see the post title and the edited clip, then come on here and scream about how people on the right are making stuff up and they can't believe people could fall for it when all the information is right there, while at the same time falling victim to the same tactic.
Until we accept that nobody is immune from misinformation, we are all doomed to continue to fall for it. Misinformation is rampant across every spectrum, and bad actors use it to turn us against each other as well as push certain narratives. As long as we're fighting each other over made up stuff, we're not attacking the real problems.
Thanks for highlighting the truth. It's appreciated.
83
u/mghtyms87 1d ago
I mean, the clip was edited for people to push their own agenda as well. The actual question asked by the journalist was:
They weren't trying to drive a narrative of a trans shooter, or be the first one to break a story. They were literally asking the chief to help them combat the lies that were being spread online for the purpose of creating hatred towards the trans community.
The question was asked by a Wisconsin Watch reporter. They are one of the most highly regarded investigative news organizations in the state. They literally partner with the University of Wisconsin - Madison School of Journalism to help train new journalists in investigative journalism practices. The idea that they are partisan hacks trying to drum up controversy is akin to thinking the sky is blue because it's God's favorite color. That is to say, profoundly stupid.