I don't think Lt Charles Gliniewicz failed the nation or tricked the nation etc.
I think MSM failed the nation by once again building a heroic narrative around people and events in order to create a story arc that would instill widespread panic, grief, and other emotions. You know, a story arc that feeds into current mainstream anxieties and is guaranteed to have people glued to their televisions/radios/newsfeeds.
This is also the kind of story that everyone in the media can get a lot of mileage out of, which results in clicks/eyeballs/$$$
There was enough information publicly available for mainstream investigative reporters to have not crafted their coverage the way they did. There were alternative news outlets who reported the facts without the hero/war on cops but they just didn't have the platform to get their coverage out to a wider audience.
I personally think this is a very dangerous direction for the mass media to be heading in, and I think it's partially powered by the competition to have the most sensationalized take on a story and to get that story out ahead of the competition. IMO this tendency is extremely dangerous for democracy. This is why:
"These days we are bombarded with information, much of it incorrect, and long after the political campaigns are over a lot of it will still be buried in the part of our brain where we store our memories. And new research shows that the more intensely we believe something to be true, the more likely it will resurface in the future, even if we have learned it was false."
http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/pe...n-hard-correct/story?id=15538721#.T_9TypGniyo
This time, at least, in the end, the truth came out.
JMO as someone who worked for a major daily and still has many friends/family in the news industry
I think MSM failed the nation by once again building a heroic narrative around people and events in order to create a story arc that would instill widespread panic, grief, and other emotions. You know, a story arc that feeds into current mainstream anxieties and is guaranteed to have people glued to their televisions/radios/newsfeeds.
This is also the kind of story that everyone in the media can get a lot of mileage out of, which results in clicks/eyeballs/$$$
There was enough information publicly available for mainstream investigative reporters to have not crafted their coverage the way they did. There were alternative news outlets who reported the facts without the hero/war on cops but they just didn't have the platform to get their coverage out to a wider audience.
I personally think this is a very dangerous direction for the mass media to be heading in, and I think it's partially powered by the competition to have the most sensationalized take on a story and to get that story out ahead of the competition. IMO this tendency is extremely dangerous for democracy. This is why:
"These days we are bombarded with information, much of it incorrect, and long after the political campaigns are over a lot of it will still be buried in the part of our brain where we store our memories. And new research shows that the more intensely we believe something to be true, the more likely it will resurface in the future, even if we have learned it was false."
http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/pe...n-hard-correct/story?id=15538721#.T_9TypGniyo
This time, at least, in the end, the truth came out.
JMO as someone who worked for a major daily and still has many friends/family in the news industry