Ammo For Sale

« « Gun blogging | Home | Off to have a baby » »

What media bias?

WFAA headline:

61-year-old vigilante speaks out

From the article:

Police released the mug shots of four suspects after authorities said they attempted an armed robbery on a 61-year-old man who turned vigilante.

Three of the suspects were put in jail and the fourth was hospitalized with a gunshot wound he received after Ken said he fought back.

A person who defends themselves is not a vigilante.

Update: Well that was fast, they changed it to armed robbery victim.

6 Responses to “What media bias?”

  1. beerslurpy Says:

    They changed it to “armed robbery victim.”

  2. bob Says:

    ‘They changed it to “armed robbery victim.”’

    Looks like the modern version of the “memory hole”.

  3. Drake Says:

    Good for Ken. Sounds like everyman.

  4. Standard Mischief Says:

    I know this is a “brave new online media” thingy, but shouldn’t there be some note of the correction somewhere? I mean, assuming the news source was trying to be ethical or something.

    I suppose this is not the level of “Dewey Defeats Truman” or “White Supremacists Riot in Toledo, Ohio”, but still..

    I guess stuff like this always makes a good blog post, especially if you grab a screen capture.

  5. gunner Says:

    The email link to the reporter still opens a blank email with just the word “vigilante” in the subject line.

  6. Lyle Says:

    Literacy does not seem to be one of the requirements for employment at a news agency. Just like anyone you hate is now to be referred to as a “Fascist”, they can now be called “vigilantes”. So at least we’re increasing our repertoire of misused words, if not our vocabulary. This must be what is meant by “progressive”.

Remember, I do this to entertain me, not you.

Uncle Pays the Bills

Find Local
Gun Shops & Shooting Ranges


bisonAd

Categories

Archives