California police chief reportedly sends sergeant to reporter's home over story
A California police chief reportedly ordered a sergeant to a reporter's home insisting on changes to a news story he perceived to be inaccurate.The Chief of Police - remember, this is the be-all, end-all in law enforcement in this particular city - sent a police officer TO A REPORTER'S HOME over what the Chief perceived to be errors in the story. Because, you know, sending an armed agent of the law over a typo is in the best interest of both the police force and the city, right?
The Oakland Tribune reports that Berkeley Police Chief Michael Meehan ordered the sergeant to the reporter's home minutes after reading the report online, a move First Amendments said reeked of intimidation and attempted censorship.
The chief's response doesn't really sit right:
"I would say it was an overzealous attempt to make sure that accurate information is put out," Meehan said. "I could have done better."
Hogwash.
You did EXACTLY what you intended to do - you sent a message, loud and clear, to that reporter, to his newspaper, and to every other newspaper that operates in your city: Cross me and you'll get a knock on your door, too. Frankly, it's hard to interpret the motion in any other way - in the vast majority of times, the only time we see a police officer is when something bad has happened. For a police officer to be dispatched to a reporter's house (remember, we know where you live) over a story? Yikes.
That, quite frankly, is the most chilling thing I've read today.
That is all.
1 comment:
See also: Babylon 5, Season 3, Episode 10 (Severed Dreams)
Shortly after the end of this clip ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7r1nxl86RXY ) a bubbly *new* anchor is put in front of the camera and announces that there was a 'take over' attempt by 'terrorist anti-government forces' but the heroic soldier swooped in and saved the day....(or something to that effect)
Now....discounting the actual content of the *news* being presented, doesn't that smack of what we see now? (including but not limited to statements of 'insurrectionist', 'anti-government', 'insurgent', etc, etc, etc)
How many of you out there recall 20 years ago (!) when we first invaded Iraq? *I* remember hearing LOTS of reports on the news of 'resistance fighters'....until the gummint tapped them on the shoulder and 'kindly requested' that they be called 'insurgents' because 'resistance fighter' could make the American people 'identify and sympathize' with an invaded countries people rising up to fight off their attackers. (*COUGH* 2A! *cough*)
Which is why I take such reporting as ABC's recent hit piece on 'militias' (based solely it seems on an SPLC report) not with a grain of salt, but an entire freaking salt lick!
Post a Comment