Tell ABC News fix its headline about the Wall Street Protests

[markpkessinger]

The link below is a form where you can contact ABC News concerning website content. Their headline currently reads, "Occupy Wall Street Protests Turn Violent," which leaves the impression that the protesters initiated the violence. They did not, the police did, and the protesters should not be maligned like that. While the text of the article is reasonably fair, the headline clearly reflects a bias. Please, tell them to change it. In the drop-down subject field, I chose "inaccurate information."

http://abcnews.go.com/Site/page?id=3271346&cat=ABCNews.com%20comments

[ClassWarrior]

1. Would the best link be "Comments and Suggestions About ABCNews.com Content?"

NGU.

[markpkessinger]

3. Yes, that's the link I used n/t

[markpkessinger]

9. I fiixed the link so it goes to the link you suggest. n/t

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

2. Oh, I'll tell 'em!

:grr:

[Fire Walk With Me]

4. Done! Thanks.

[ClassWarrior]

5. It actually reads...

"‘Occupy Wall Street’ Protests Turn Violent; Video Shows Police Macing Women"

Better, but not ideal.

NGU.

[markpkessinger]

7. Yes, but it's still too easy to construe that ...

... as meaning the police were macing protesters who turned violent.

[Fire Walk With Me]

6. Wait, isn't the headline: Occupy Wall Street Protests Turn Violent; Video Shows Police Macing Women

?

Oops. Got me.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2011/09/occupy-wall-street-protests-turn-violent-video-shows-police-macing-women/

[markpkessinger]

8. Yes, that's the full headline ...

...But it is still potentially misleading. It is far too easy to construe that as meaning the police used mace on violent protesters.

[Fire Walk With Me]

12. True...there is spin in there.

[sabrina 1]

13. Protest turns violent, means the police had to react. That is how

most people will read it. And I believe it is deliberate. People will cheer for that video if they think those women were giving the police problems.

[patrice]

16. It's a sloppy confusing abuse of the privileges accorded media that uses PUBLIC resources. .

[sabrina 1]

10. Done, thank you.

This is why it is probably better that the MSM stays away from this movement. It has received good coverage, unbiased, in the Foreign Press and the Independent media.

It does more harm than good to have the MSM involved. Eg, Wolf Blitzer 'covered' it last week. His coverage involved a very sympathetic interview with NYPD Commissioner Ray Kelly. Mostly bemoaning the hard work it was going to be for the NYPD, already painting a negative picture of the protesters before anyone knew what they were all about.

Same thing with Bloomberg, who has been given a chance to talk about 'riots' etc.

I think maybe we are better off using other means of getting the story out until it is no longer possible for them to distort it this way.

The Media I hope will on the agenda of this movement. It badly needs fixing.

[TorchTheWitch]

11. I don't see any bias in the headline

It's entirely neutral concerning who started or who is doing the violence. I think you're reading bias into the headline where there isn't any.

[patrice]

15. It isn't clear. Clarity & to avoid misunderstanding of info about persons is a professional responsi

bility.

[sabrina 1]

17. 'It's entirely neutral'! And it should not have been. It was clear

who initiated the violence. People reading the headline, as you point out, will not be clear on who started it. News reporting should report facts. The police started the violence against peaceful protesters. Not hard to say that clearly. Other news media had no problem stating the facts without attempting to be 'neutral'. Had the protesters started the violence, the headline would not have been 'neutral'. But since they could not outright blame the protesters, they left it unclear and many people will assume wrongly, that they police actions were justified. They were not.

Polls attached to these 'neutral' US Media reports show clearly that people think the police probably were justified.

This is how you manipulate news. You avoid stating the facts when the facts are inconvenient and you become 'neutral'.

[markpkessinger]

19. Spot on, Sabrina! n/t

[patrice]

14. Done - by deploying SHAME.

[tama]

18. Good work, thanks n/t