With The Times

The search for truth and unbiased information has become challenging in an era of mainstream fake news. Everywhere, biased information is spread, and the media is complicit in gaslighting the general public — especially specific marginalized groups. Historically, the media has played an important role in controlling entire masses of people, and this has greatly influenced public opinion about racism. 

As time progresses, racial equity is continuously being shaped by the media in terms of police brutality, job growth, and gentrification in low-income communities. Consequently, a racial hierarchy emerges in which for long periods of time the “white perspective” was valued far more than anything else.

In 1921, for instance, the media largely manipulated the public during the Tulsa Massacre through the Tulsa Tribune, further perpetuating systematic racism. During the Jim Crow era, media outlets released biased articles spreading information about alleged sexual assaults and embellished cases of serious violence or abuse against white citizens.

It is estimated that over 300 people were killed and buried during the Tulsa Massacre, yet most people are unaware of it. After twenty-four long hours of brutal violence, it ceased, and no one has been prosecuted or punished for any of these acts of violence. It is considered the worst act of racial violence in United States history, yet news outlets did not report it widely due to racial bias.

Additionally, before the assassination of Martin Luther King on April 4, 1968, President Lyndon B. Johnson appointed a committee to identify the causes of racial conflicts that seemed out of control. The committee, named the Kerner’s Commission, later issued a report in February 1968 illustrating the firmly established racism in America, depicting “two societies” represented by black and white citizens.

As the report continues, it explains the media’s contribution to this natural divide and how the “white perspective” was too frequent, creating little diversity. According to the report, “Important segments of the media failed to report adequately on the causes and consequences of civil disorders and on the underlying problems of race relations.”

Today, how does the news media display such bias?

Ultimately, the media somewhat determines racial equity, and has done so throughout history. It seems almost frightening that the media wields such power over the public, fabricating or slanting cases to suit the agenda of the publishing industry. In terms of racism, conditions have gotten significantly better in recent years, but law enforcement has proven racism is still widely prevalent. 

Law enforcement agencies have similar control over the justice system, where doctrines such as qualified immunity protect them from any serious liability in civil rights lawsuits. In Wes Lowery’s book “They Can’t Kill Us All,” Lowery depicts police brutality and the tragedy of institutional racism when this reality is significantly challenged.

In chapter one, for instance, Lowery uses descriptive vivid storytelling to captivate viewers, describing his unnecessarily violent arrest following the fatal shooting of Michael Brown. Additionally, in chapter 2 Lowery illustrates the unjustly fatal shooting of Trayvon Martin, a seventeen-year-old innocent boy who was heartlessly murdered by George Zimmerman.

The author links each of the cases to the media, demonstrating tragic cases of police brutality that have profoundly shaped racial relations. The harsh reality of police violence is a daily occurrence throughout the nation, as video and written posts illustrating these injustices are shared on social media daily. As exemplified in the George Floyd case, videos are critical evidence of criminal disorderly conduct commited by officers, but this is just the beginning.

Tracey Brown, head of the civil rights and police brutality group at the Cochran Firm in New York City, says “Police departments don’t release videos until you’re well into a criminal prosecution or a civil suit.” Additionally, Ms. Brown adds, dashcam footage does not help hold officers accountable because little access is provided to disciplinary records, which include crucial information needed for charges.

Along with this, the doctrine of qualified immunity is designed to protect police officers from cases that seriously incriminate or defame them, so as to ensure that they do not have to take any responsibility for the actions they take. This is unjust, and this system appears to have been implemented to protect oppressive officers from accountability.

With these ethics in mind, it’s proven that the justice system is significantly unreliable. In addition, the Supreme Court and the Senate are both currently republican majorities, meaning the decisions made by either group are presumably based on conservative policy preferences.

According to today’s media, the U.S Supreme Court recently reviewed two cases siding with police officers in both incidents, ruling the officers were “entitled to qualified immunity.” According to this judicial doctrine, without proven violation of a contisutional right or clearly established law, the police cannot be held liable for requests of monetary damages in civil right suits.

In this ruling, the Court based their decision widely on this predetermined principle, suggesting that “excessive force” was necessary in both incidents. It is argued in both cases that since the citizens held weapons, officers used excessive force; bodycam video depicting an officer fatally shooting Dominic Rollice, who held a hammer.

In these cases, no officers were prosecuted for firing deadly gunshots at civilians, even though less precautionary measures could have been taken. Media accounts of the Rollice case tend to suppress and rarely report these crucial details. So, as a result, officers can take advantage of this, making them free of any responsibility. 

The real question is, is the media responsible for hiding Rollice’s death from the public, or is the justice system responsible for its poorly constructed system of liability? Where should the public place blame?

It may seem that the solution is so simple, but systems are built on a foundation, so it’s definitely going to take decades for anything to change. Eventually, in the justice system frequent compromises will lead to a decrease in the unjust killings of innocent people. 

Regarding the media solely capturing white perspectives, this is not necessarily the case anymore. Media coverage of local protests and racially motivated movements still shapes racial equity, but journalism today is more objective. The times are changing rapidly, and journalism is slowly becoming more diverse, which creates less racial bias overall.

The New York Times released a diversity and inclusion report in February 2021, in which employees of color expressed their feelings of being “invisible” and often being associated with other employees of the same race. Responding to these concerns, NYT says in their future vision “Making the Times experience better for colleagues of color will make The Times better for everyone.”

Even so, innocent people are still being murdered by law enforcement officials who are free from liability, so where does this leave the media? It’s tough to identify how to inform the public of these issues in modern society, where everything revolves around competition and financial gain. 

In an industry where most news sources either profit from their competitors or mainstream stories, what happens when people disregard police reform? If this happens, police brutality crimes will be covered less and less as they become more common, which is frightening.