“Shocking video shows black man being 'beaten, punched and
kicked by six North Carolina police officers'” shouts the headline on the UK’s
Daily Mail website and echoed by many media outlets. It makes me wonder if they
were reporting on an appendectomy whether the headline would read “Woman
drugged and stabbed by masked gang”.
While the media are fighting for credibility like never
before, the explosive bias of headlines like these can’t be balanced by the
occasional reporting of actual facts buried in their narrative. Like moths to a
flame, the assumption that police action is not only wrong but outrageously and
gratuitously violent, seems to be irresistible. So, just in case any reporters
read something other than their own bylines, let me break this down for them.
“Shocking”
Shocking implies something wild, unexpected, and deeply
wrong. Stories have a beginning, and this is where the story turned shocking –
when the man was contacted by police and began actively assaulting them. It was
very likely a surprise to the officers, but not shocking. After all, most cops
have repeatedly experienced attempts by other to hurt or kill them. That part
wasn’t shocking at all.
“Video”
One perspective, almost always edited for effect by newscasts,
showing a small percentage of the action being reported. Unlike television
fictional fight scenes, street encounters are not choreographed, are not staged
to show the tension-building falls and punches, and are not played to take
greatest advantage of camera angles. The scenes, to my career-long
disappointment, are also absent the background theme music and sound effects.
Video can be evidence of something, but it is rarely automatically proof of
anything.
“shows black man”
Why this racist approach to reporting continues in the face
of culturally sensitive political censors is a mystery. The suspect’s behavior
is hardly an asterisk in these reports and should be the focus of the finding
of fact. If race, ethnicity, or gender were equally significant in all
citizen-police encounters then headlines reporting the murders of police
officers would routinely label the officers or their attackers as white, black,
Asian, latino, female, male, gay or transgender. Victim officers are just cops.
The demographics of offenders resisting arrest are rarely noted unless
reporters smell the opportunity to cry racism.
“beaten, punched, and
kicked”
No reader could doubt the connotation of this inflammatory
language. There is little room for the reality of the careful calculation and
restraint in use of force exhibited by these officers. Baton strikes are
designed to be less than lethal efforts to stop an attack by interfering with
nerve and muscle function. Baton strikes are aimed at specific parts of the
body, but can be ineffective or land on an unintended target area during an
actively attacking person. A single strike may not be effective in the most
ideal circumstances when the baton is needed, so multiple strikes or strikes at
more than one area simultaneously by more than one officer in no way
constitutes a “beating” in the common understanding of the word.
Similarly, the use of an officer’s hands and feet to disable
an attacker and bring an end to the resistance is perfectly aligned with lawful
use of force to effect an arrest. Any observer familiar with the range of
compliance options available to police officers to avoid lethal force can see
that from verbal commands to empty hand control to Taser to baton, the officers
heroically avoided killing a man who seemed intent on violently ending their
attempts to take him into custody.
“Six North Carolina
officers”
The number of officers is a fact to be reported, but to
imply that there was an unfair number of officers against a lone offender is to
rewrite the manual on use of force. Whether these officers intentionally
engaged in a swarm maneuver, the concept of having multiple officers to enable
a more peaceful restraint of a violent offender was developed for the very
purpose of reducing injuries to suspects.
While it may be natural to emotionally identify with the
officers with the belief that they are angry and offended, the reality is that
the officers were using skills for which they were trained, equipped, and
authorized to use. The story begins with the suspect’s resistance and violent attacks
on the officers. The officers are aware that if the offender escapes, it isn’t
just a blow to their ego, it pushes this violent man into the public’s risk.
They are also aware that with each officer carrying multiple items which, if
seized by the suspect in his frantic grasps, could be used to kill or disable
an officer or other innocent citizen, the sooner this episode is ended, the
safer it is for everyone, including the suspect.
A fact based headline
So, fellow journalists, can we stick to objective reporting
in headlines? How about “Officers work together to arrest violent offender”,
then a subheading of “man attempts to punch and bite responding officers,
resists Taser”.
Now, roll that video.
All of it.
No comments:
Post a Comment