Has the media been biased against or fair to Deborah and Jeremy?

[norest4thewicked]

I don't think that the media has been any less fair to this family than they have to any family where a child disappears under very strange circumstances. On the other hand, I feel that this family has acted far more guilty than the majority of other cases out there, with a few exceptions. The media does what it does. If the story fades, they move on to something more "exciting." Very sad to say, but that is what happens.

 

[cityslick]

BBM:

:seeya: That's my first thought -- the lawyers ... guess they don't want to be sued ...

Just thought of something :innocent: and not to go off topic -- but the reporters that cover the "entertainment type news stories" don't seem to shy away from asking the "hard questions" -- KWIM ?

But when it comes to a "missing person" -- the reporters just don't seem to ask the person who is "suspect" or a "poi" -- or the last person to see the missing person alive -- the "right questions" ...

I hope that made sense ... :waitasec:

MOO ...

Are you referring to reporters that stick mics in front of celebrities and ask them about infidelity and things like that? I don't think those are hard questions, I think they are asked to sell magazines and get entertainment show ratings. Besides, those type of reporters probably don't have the same 'journalistic integrity' that a news reporter would have. A lot of reporters think about their reputation in the business and asking the wrong question could damage that.

At least that's what I think.

 

[dog.gone.cute]

Are you referring to reporters that stick mics in front of celebrities and ask them about infidelity and things like that? I don't think those are hard questions, I think they are asked to sell magazines and get entertainment show ratings. Besides, those type of reporters probably don't have the same 'journalistic integrity' that a news reporter would have. A lot of reporters think about their reputation in the business and asking the wrong question could damage that.

At least that's what I think.

BBM: Yes, that was what I meant -- I am sorry, I should have been more specific ...

Sorry to go off topic, but I stayed up late reading here about Susan Cox's 2 young boys and what the ****** did them ! And I have been trying to keep up with the updates of that TRAGEDY ...

So back to the topic : Yes, IMO, the news reporters that cover those types of "entertainment stories" just seem to have no problem getting so personal and asking questions that IMO, are just way too personal ... and you're right -- they want the "ratings" ...

It's just that it seems like the reporters seem to "tip toe" around the "person of interest" or the "suspect" or the "last person who seen the missing peson alive" -- now, that is IF they get an interview with this person ...

Also, what would be "considered" a "wrong question" -- a question that LE might ask ?

And off the top of my head right now, I can't think of any specific reporter that does ask the "hard ball questions" ... and I do think of one, I will let you know ...

MOO ...:seeya:

 

[madge]

Media has treated Deb with kid gloves.

Liloleme thinks that IF media had not let her hide behind JT this case would have most likely been solved by now.

Lilolme thinks a lot of shady stuff went on in and around that home and that the tree shaking ain't even started yet.

 

[CHERIE.T]

madge said it for me.

imho

 

[norest4thewicked]

Media has treated Deb with kid gloves.

Liloleme thinks that IF media had not let her hide behind JT this case would have most likely been solved by now.

Lilolme thinks a lot of shady stuff went on in and around that home and that the tree shaking ain't even started yet.

Sorry...I'm not familiar. Who is Lilolme?

 

[dog.gone.cute]

Sorry...I'm not familiar. Who is Lilolme?

:waitasec: I think she means "me" -- "herself" ...:waitasec:

:seeya:

 

[CHERIE.T]

Originally Posted by madge View Post

Media has treated Deb with kid gloves.

Liloleme thinks that IF media had not let her hide behind JT this case would have most likely been solved by now.

Lilolme thinks a lot of shady stuff went on in and around that home and that the tree shaking ain't even started yet

Ya, I think lots of shady stuff went on. I'm waiting on the tree shaking too.



bbm-imho

 

[eileenhawkeye]

You can't really compare the "reporters" who scream "Did you cheat on your wife?" to celebrities as they walk outside, to the reporters who interview the parents of missing children. First, the first group of "reporters" are just paparazzi. If the celebrity doesn't like their question---big deal---they can still take pictures of them and make money selling them tomorrow. If a celebrity goes on Jay Leno or Ellen or is interviewed on the red carpet, they aren't going to be asked highly abrasive and personal questions. Their "people" clear what is asked and what isn't before they go on the show...and I imagine that with parents of missing children, it's much the same. The lawyers for the Irwins know exactly what is going to be asked before they clear the Irwins to go on any show. We have seen Nancy Grace rip people who go on her show to shreds...these are usually people whose first TV appearance is on her show, so they no experience with the media, no one to help them out...so they go on her show, with no guidelines at all, and they get eaten alive.

 

[Whisperer]

The two media people (p.i.s) we know, who are close to the case, seem to be bias in favor of the parents.

 

[cityslick]

The two media people (p.i.s) we know, who are close to the case, seem to be bias in favor of the parents.

If you are referring to JS and RR, I strongly disagree. I don't think they've been biased at all. JS has posted that he just doesn't know what happened when asked his opinion, which I think is a rational thought. Reporters are not there to have an opinion or a side, they are there to report. I haven't seen RR biased either, he's simply been posting what he has found out by talking to folks there. I don't think I've ever seen him post what he 'personally' thinks. I don't think it's fair to say that if you are not there with the pitchfork that you are automatically biased toward the parents.

 

[Marshmallow]

I think Lisa's parents have lucked out with thew media. Mostly because they have a lawyer/agent who manages their appearances. I think they've been treated as a commodity and not as the parents of a missing child. Lisa went missing under her Mother's watch and that watch was allegedly, almost proudly, during a regular drinking night. Yet the media is controlled by her lawyer/agent and heck, even on message boards what is said is controlled and certain things not allowed to be discussed. I sadly think the wheels of media swing in favor of the parents, even when the parent's behavior is suspect. .

 

[melissasmom]

If you are referring to JS and RR, I strongly disagree. I don't think they've been biased at all. JS has posted that he just doesn't know what happened when asked his opinion, which I think is a rational thought. Reporters are not there to have an opinion or a side, they are there to report. I haven't seen RR biased either, he's simply been posting what he has found out by talking to folks there. I don't think I've ever seen him post what he 'personally' thinks. I don't think it's fair to say that if you are not there with the pitchfork that you are automatically biased toward the parents.

I agree. I think JS made it clear on here his job is that of a reporter. While I am sure he has his own opinion, he does really well at just trying to report the facts as he can get them. RR also. While I do question his involvement in this case (publicity for himself?)from what I have read, he isn't really saying one way or the other WHAT he believes as far as guilt or innocence.
Oh, and also, just to add, I thought RR was involving himself on this case in the role of private investigator. But then I noticed the other day on his FB that he said he is in this from a "journalistic" aspect. So, take that as you want, I guess.

 

[4Jacy]

Almost everything we have heard about this case comes straight from DB's mouth (God forbid JI should speak) So if there is any negativity it has been brought on by DB herself, plus the face that she wouldn't let the boys be interviewed for so long and also that she and JI will not talk individually with LE.

 

[GoodGurl]

Almost everything we have heard about this case comes straight from DB's mouth (God forbid JI should speak) So if there is any negativity it has been brought on by DB herself, plus the face that she wouldn't let the boys be interviewed for so long and also that she and JI will not talk individually with LE.

I agree, and I've wondered why her good friend SB hasn't backed her up in the media on some things that happened that night. The lights, the drinking, seeing the baby, the dog barking...anything. I can see if she's the shy type she might not want to go on natl tv, but I'm sure there's plenty of print media that would jump at the chance to do an article with her quotes.

 

[RANCH]

Almost everything we have heard about this case comes straight from DB's mouth (God forbid JI should speak) So if there is any negativity it has been brought on by DB herself, plus the face that she wouldn't let the boys be interviewed for so long and also that she and JI will not talk individually with LE.

If a media outlet only reports negative story's about DB/JI when there is positive information available then that media outlet could be considered as biased. Same thing if they only report positive story's. A negative and or positive story by itself wouldn't necessarily show media bias.

 

[In da Middle]

I agree, and I've wondered why her good friend SB hasn't backed her up in the media on some things that happened that night. The lights, the drinking, seeing the baby, the dog barking...anything. I can see if she's the shy type she might not want to go on natl tv, but I'm sure there's plenty of print media that would jump at the chance to do an article with her quotes.

Why would SB even WANT to talk to the media? Would it change anybody's mind? It seems to me that even if she went on stating everything as a positive spin, the people who don't want to believe it wouldn't and start to pick apart her every word. Why would she do that?

 

[GoodGurl]

Why would SB even WANT to talk to the media? Would it change anybody's mind? It seems to me that even if she went on stating everything as a positive spin, the people who don't want to believe it wouldn't and start to pick apart her every word. Why would she do that?

Yeah, I def. know what you mean. I just think that she might lend some credibility to her friend by sharing her story too.

Of course I can see her hesitancy. But she's really the only person who can defend DB at all for that evening. Not just subjective statements, but actually back up times, actions, who was there, who they called, who came over...when the kitten came onto the scene! Any verification of what DB says. People might not believe her any more than they believe DB. But 2 saying the same thing is harder not to believe. IMO.

 

[In da Middle]

Yeah, I def. know what you mean. I just think that she might lend some credibility to her friend by sharing her story too.

Of course I can see her hesitancy. But she's really the only person who can defend DB at all for that evening. Not just subjective statements, but actually back up times, actions, who was there, who they called, who came over...when the kitten came onto the scene! Any verification of what DB says. People might not believe her any more than they believe DB. But 2 saying the same thing is harder not to believe. IMO.

BBM except there are a lot of people that would only be convinced that both of them are lying and that she was just covering for her and they just got together to get their story to match. By keeping silent, she makes a much better witness to me.

 

[cityslick]

BBM except there are a lot of people that would only be convinced that both of them are lying and that she was just covering for her and they just got together to get their story to match. By keeping silent, she makes a much better witness to me.

I agree, the first thing that's going to be said is that she's just covering for her friend. I think some already have that sentiment so I don't see how going in front of a camera is going to help DB's believability. If Shane was there for a much longer period of time, then he would be another voice I guess.

The fact of the matter is not even SB can testify as to events that happened after 11:30pm and even after DB goes in the house, it's based on her observations when she was outside. If she wasn't paying attention, she couldn't tell exactly when lights went out in the house. Keep in mind she was drinking as well (although I don't know if it's stated that she was drunk) so her recollection is probably only going to go so far.