?

Log in

No account? Create an account
The incident in Jena, Louisiana - CERisE's Testing for L

> Recent Entries
> Archive
> Friends
> Profile

September 20th, 2007


Previous Entry Share Next Entry
10:57 pm - The incident in Jena, Louisiana
Read this:
ColorOfChange.org's take on the events.

Now read this:
Wiki's take on the events.

A few conjectures:
1. ColorOfChange.org's article is extremely biased. Many of its citations come from a truthout.org article which doesn't cite many of its sources.
2. wiki's article is less biased, if biased at all.

Consider that if ColorOfChange.org's description is closer to the truth, then our society is backward because of racism.

If wiki's take is closer to the truth, then our society is backward because of our tendency to associate motives which aren't there.

In any event, it seems to me that the six committed a crime and ought to be punished for it, regardless of who went unpunished for their crimes.

(7 comments | Leave a comment)

Comments:


[User Picture]
From:beethatbumbles
Date:September 21st, 2007 06:04 am (UTC)
(Link)
Nitpick: People using wikipedia as an "unbiased" source is one of my pet peeves because anyone has the ability to edit it.
[User Picture]
From:centaur
Date:September 21st, 2007 10:18 am (UTC)
(Link)
While I understand your frustration, I think the theory of the free marketplace should apply to wikipedia. Because anyone can edit it, things that are particularly biased often get edited out. On the other hand, books and such have no such regulation on their bias. I think it's important for people to realize there are really no unbiased sources.
[User Picture]
From:relsqui
Date:September 21st, 2007 07:31 pm (UTC)
(Link)
That's a good point--I never thought about it that way. Books generally do get a lot less editing than wiki pages!
[User Picture]
From:beethatbumbles
Date:September 22nd, 2007 02:14 am (UTC)
(Link)
Yeah, but if enough people get together and write the same thing, it ends up that way. So if all my pro-choice friends and I got together and edited the "pro-life" article in wikipedia to say that pro-lifers are misogynistic bums, it would stay that way.
I think wikipedia is a great tool, I just don't think it's articles should be thought of as fact.
[User Picture]
From:testing4l
Date:September 21st, 2007 07:17 pm (UTC)
(Link)
1. I didn't say unbiased. I said less biased. Really though, saying "less biased" is very nearly damning with faint praise compared to that other article.
2. That article is, in my opinion, an excellent case for wiki being pretty darn good at policing themselves. Look at the talk page and the crap redacted from it.
[User Picture]
From:jordan179
Date:September 21st, 2007 12:46 pm (UTC)
(Link)
In any event, it seems to me that the six committed a crime and ought to be punished for it, regardless of who went unpunished for their crimes.

Indeed.

I also think that the law enforcement apparatus in that town and county may need a revamp. Perhaps leaning-on by the Federal government.

But the six who actually committed the crime should not be exonerated on account of "We wuz pissed."
[User Picture]
From:animationgrl
Date:September 25th, 2007 09:49 am (UTC)
(Link)
Been meaning to comment on this since the first day you posted this. Sorry for the lateness.

I don't exactly hate to admit this, but you are right. I mean, I had thought about it before I even made the post on my journal. You beat somebody up, you're going to jail; it's the law. The degree of the punishment, however, is disproportionate to the crime and definitely cause for alarm. The sentence should be less extreme.

My other problem with this is the fact that there were people who got away with their crimes, most of them white - which stands as proof of racism and of there being a favoritism towards whites. If the Jena 6 are going to be punished, then everyone else who committed the crimes that lead up to this sad affair need to get their comeuppance as well.

It's just really sad, though, because none of that is likely going to happen.

> Go to Top
LiveJournal.com