Talking to copbrained people has been a practice in futility for me. The notion that police aren't effective community safety is such an abstract idea to them. I get it, cops have been propped up in our society as the arbiter of good and evil, no matter how demonstrably untrue that is, that it's very hard for people that maybe have never interacted with them to see them any different. Your work is a fantastic dive into how our minds have been gaslit to see LE as a societal good, while their unwarranted violence is recorded so thoroughly. Thank you! Can't wait to read the book version.
Can’t remember the name of the series I watched where every episode began with a disclaimer that said something like: This is a true story except for the made-up parts. NYT should change their slogan to something similar. Once again your writing is helping my critical thinking. Thank you. I look forward to your book.
The Times does the equivalent on a lot of subjects. It’s an annoying and, to my mind, transparent attempt to have pieces to point to and say - “We don’t have a ___ bias, see?” Inevitably these pieces are terrible because they aren’t based in fact, but on right wing folklore. It doesn’t do anything to make the Times more appealing to conservatives and it just pisses reality based readers off.
Those “explanations” from that writer are so insidious especially because they don’t sound like inhuman vitriol to liberals (not leftists) who continue to believe their “centrist” position is morally superior. Ugh!
Talking to copbrained people has been a practice in futility for me. The notion that police aren't effective community safety is such an abstract idea to them. I get it, cops have been propped up in our society as the arbiter of good and evil, no matter how demonstrably untrue that is, that it's very hard for people that maybe have never interacted with them to see them any different. Your work is a fantastic dive into how our minds have been gaslit to see LE as a societal good, while their unwarranted violence is recorded so thoroughly. Thank you! Can't wait to read the book version.
I’m thrilled to hear you’re writing a copaganda book!
I'm going to start adding a "FYI, none of this may be true" conclusion to every piece I publish from now on. If the NYT can do it, why can't I?
Thank you for doing this work. I’ve learned so much through folks like you.
Thanks, Alex. Another excellent post.
Truly fascinating and well articulated
Can’t remember the name of the series I watched where every episode began with a disclaimer that said something like: This is a true story except for the made-up parts. NYT should change their slogan to something similar. Once again your writing is helping my critical thinking. Thank you. I look forward to your book.
The Times does the equivalent on a lot of subjects. It’s an annoying and, to my mind, transparent attempt to have pieces to point to and say - “We don’t have a ___ bias, see?” Inevitably these pieces are terrible because they aren’t based in fact, but on right wing folklore. It doesn’t do anything to make the Times more appealing to conservatives and it just pisses reality based readers off.
Those “explanations” from that writer are so insidious especially because they don’t sound like inhuman vitriol to liberals (not leftists) who continue to believe their “centrist” position is morally superior. Ugh!
Looking forward to the book. Keep up the great work.