The Prosecutor Attacks the Media

Among the disturbing aspects of St. Louis Prosecutor Robert McCulloch's announcement last night of no indictment of Darren Wilson for his killing of Michael Brown - aside from that appalling no indictment itself - was McCulloch's lashing out at the media, social and cable, for stirring people up and spreading falsehoods about the shooting of Michael Brown.

If McCulloch had any familiarity with history, he'd know that blaming the media is a time-honored dishonorable tactic of demagogues, politicians, and public officials unhappy with the public's reaction to their policies.  It's the reason totalitarian societies are quick to keep the media on a short leash, and why even the world's leading democracies castigate the media which are not under government control.   Democratic and Republican Presidents both blamed the media and its reporting for the growing public opposition to the Vietnam War, when in fact the opposition was based on an increasing number of Americans not wanting a war with a country which never attacked us. Margaret Thatcher was so unhappy with the BBC's coverage of the Falkland War, that she not only criticized the channel but put it under closer government control.

Social media have indeed added a new kind of headache for the public official who wants the world to see things his or her way, that is, maintain the monopoly of knowledge which the public official is able to wield to make the official look good or get what the official wants.    Government officials can and do appeal to traditional media to delay reporting on certain stories, for the public's so-called good.   But there's no executive to appeal to when it comes to social media.

And that's what makes Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, and Tumblr so crucial to our continuing democracy.   McCulloch can impugn the witnesses to Michael Brown's killing all he wants.  And, indeed, since his speech didn't take place in a court of law, where opposing arguments and cross-examinations could have been offered, he could dominate the stage as he did for half an hour last night.

But he cannot dominate or dictate to the world at the large, and the way people now communicate in this world.  As John Milton once observed, people are rational, and when given presentations of truth and falsity, people are sooner or later able to discern the truth.   Social media now play a critical part in that presentation.   And with their help - which is none other than the help of the people - and traditional media as well, I think there's a good chance that the truth will come out in the killing of Michael Brown, before the books are closed on his terrible death.

Obama Weak in Protecting Citizens and Journalists in Ferguson

Obama's words an hour ago about what has been going on in Ferguson, Missouri were better than nothing, but a little late and, typically, a little weak.

The situation in Ferguson could not be more clearcut:  Under the First Amendment, people have the right to peaceably assemble to protest, which means not being teargassed, and not have police who look like an invading force in Iraq point all kinds of military weapons at you.   Under the First Amendment, reporters have the right - the obligation - to convey what is happening before them to the American people, and not be arrested as happened to two reporters (one of whom works for the Washington Post - African-American, perhaps not coincidentally).   When citizens and journalists are threatened and arrested by local police, it is the duty of the President to send in the National Guard to protect the people and physically restrain the police when necessary.

All of this, of course, in addition to the apparent murder of Michael Brown requiring justice.

It's unfortunately not surprising that Obama has done so little to protect the people in Ferguson.   He said little or nothing when the out of control cop pepper sprayed an innocent student in California during the Occupy Wall Street demonstrations.   He said nothing against Michael Bloomberg's consistent use of New York police to trample on the rights of citizens, journalists, and citizen journalists during Occupy Wall Street.   As I described at length in New New Media, it's a good thing that courageous people recorded some of this police misconduct on their phones.

MSNBC did a great job last night in providing live, ongoing coverage of the events in Ferguson.  Not so much the New York Times, which put the Ferguson story below the fold in today's edition, with Iraq on top (fair enough, maybe), accompanied by stories about the Bloomberg era at Rikers, poverty in America, and college sports (totally ridiculous!).   Perhaps if the arrested reporter had been working for the New York Times, the events in Ferguson would have received better coverage from the newspaper of record.

This is not the first time in American history that the Federal government has been required to step in when the local authorities have been violating the law to the peril of its citizens.   Eisenhower did it in the 1950s, and Kennedy in the 1960s, to protect citizens who were being blocked by local authorities from attending their schools.   In both cases, the National Guard was sent in to literally push the local authorities aside.

As Obama concludes his second term, he might want to think about this.   At this point, regarding the protection of the constitutional rights of American citizens, he not only has been no JFK, he's been no Eisenhower.   But there's still time for Obama to do the right thing.   I urge him to do so - as Representative John Lewis and others in the legislative branch have requested - before further damage is done to the American people.