February 18, 2010
Posted by Cassandra at February 18, 2010 01:53 PM
TrackBack URL for this entry:
Ah yes, one of my better schemes in keeping the Black Man down since Tawana Brawley. No Jussiss, no peace indeed.
Oh, and OJ really was innocent, but Whitey can't let a brother get ahead (sp). I'm very proud of my nefarious trickery in that one.
-- The Man
Posted by: a former european at February 18, 2010 04:28 PM
Interesting commentariat over at Moonbattery.
Posted by: John (Master of Inanity) Donovan at February 18, 2010 05:03 PM
Yeah, I saw that earlier today.
Posted by: Miss Ladybug at February 18, 2010 07:58 PM
Crystal Mangum isn't a "progressive heroine" any more than Ashley Todd is a "conservative heroine".
Posted by: Craig at February 18, 2010 08:08 PM
Do aspiring "journalists" actually go to journalism school to learn journalism any longer? Or do they just fritter and twitter and facebook college away, hoping that the modern myth that "no one reads newspapers any more" means, quite literally "no one?" How else to explain the unfathomable mess that a mere 31 words can make in the hands of one of these modern day Jimmy Olsens.
Durham police arrested Duke lacrosse accuser Crystal Gale Mangum, 33, late Wednesday after she allegedly assaulted her boyfriend, set his clothes on fire in a bathtub and threatened to stab him.***
"Crystal Gale Mangum?" The "Don't you make my brown eyes blue" singer got maried? Oh wait! That's "Crystal GAYLE." You must mean "Crystal GAIL Mangum," the exotic dancer of some small notoriety in certain North Carolina circles. (Not that I'm not sympathetic to your confusion, as your equally sloppy colleagues cannot be bothered to verify the correct spelling of the alleged, either.
And what, pray tell, is a "Duke lacrosse accuser?" Is that one of the sport's offensive postiions? As in: "With 16 seconds left in regulation play, Duke goalie I.M Innocent fired the ball the length of the field to his wide open accuser, red shirt freshman standout C. G. Mangum." He shoots, she scores.
Had our erstwhile Lois Lane or her fellow "Gen Wii" report-o-bots bothered to attend any of the Journalism 101 classes that daddy paid for, they could not possibly forget that the first, emphasize, FIRST, requirement of effective reporting is clarity. A reporter must imagine that the reader has just awoken from an lengthy coma and the story that he is about to read, (your story!) is the first news he's had in years. Reading the paragraph above, however, will not only confuse the poor fellow, but likely drive him back into the cradling arms of Morpheus for good. ("I wonder if a "bath tub" is the same thing in as a "bathtub?" And if so, why was Duke Accuser's boyfriend in the bathtub with his clothes on?")
Fortunately, one day the we'll all be dead, and none of this will matter any longer except, perhaps, to future archologists, who will think us insane. U no wat i men, sprky?
***(This is the first paragraph of the story as quoted on the website to which this post is linked. It appears that later in the day a grown-up may have arrived at the scene of the crime and (one hopes) was horrified enough to at least wave the blue pencil of semi-clarity over the first paragraph before (one hopes) drinking himself into unconsciousness.)
Posted by: Edito Ratlarge at February 18, 2010 08:30 PM
I didn't have time to read the comments earlier today, John. Perhaps if I had, I wouldn't have linked to the post. I just thought the title was funny.
As for professional journalists, I don't imagine this story will get 1/1000th of the ink the original accusation did. Sad story all around.
Posted by: Cassandra at February 18, 2010 10:28 PM
OK. I had to Google Ashley Todd. Had no idea who she was.
Still don't care.
Posted by: Cassandra at February 18, 2010 10:29 PM
That's the same way most progressives feel about Crystal Mangum.
Posted by: Craig at February 19, 2010 06:00 AM
Comparing the two is frankly silly. They're not even in the same league, whether you're talking damage done by the false accusation, the number of hysterical articles by the media, the amount of time the story stayed front and center in the news, or even the resolution (there were a spate of articles when the Duke rape case fell apart that essentially said, "We don't care if this particular case DIDN'T turn out to be symbolic of persistent racism. We're going to pretend it did anyway."
No comparison at all. And the accuser did become a heroine - right up to the moment when it became painfully apparent there was no case. Todd was a mere blip on the radar by comparison.
Posted by: Cassandra at February 19, 2010 06:24 AM
That is the problem with progressives. They feel, they don't think.
Posted by: Cricket at February 19, 2010 09:00 AM
The fact that some people somewhere believed Crystal Mangum's lies for a longer time than they believed Ashley Todd's still doesn't make her a "progressive heroine".
Crystal's case was also kept alive by the prosecuting DA Mike Nifong who was subsequently disbarred for "dishonesty, fraud, deceit and misrepresentation".
Posted by: Craig at February 19, 2010 09:04 AM
(there were a spate of articles when the Duke rape case fell apart that essentially said, "We don't care if this particular case DIDN'T turn out to be symbolic of persistent racism. We're going to pretend it did anyway."
Not just that, but that the breakdown of the case wasn't because there was no rape, but rather that they were let off because of society's acceptance of violence against women.
Posted by: Yu-Ain Gonnano at February 19, 2010 10:15 AM
Cassie - not a complaint, honest. Just an observation. They were more amusing (and somewhat bemusing) than the original article.
Craig - The fact that people know Mangum, and had to Google Todd (including yours truly, I admit) speaks to the traction of the storylines and the purposes to which they were put.
Perhaps a more accurate sensing would come from finding a progressive website of comparable stature and commenters to VC, and seeing how many of them remember Todd over Mangum, thus offering some assessment to effects of social bubbles.
Posted by: John (Master of Inanity) Donovan at February 19, 2010 02:40 PM
After Googling, I do remember the story, but most of the comments from my haunting grounds were of the "This is horrible if true, but why is that 'B' backwords?" type before it was known to be fraud and "Yep, that some high octane crazy, right there" type afterwards.
Posted by: Yu-Ain Gonnano at February 19, 2010 03:18 PM
I saw it when the story came out but didn't bother to write about it (even when we still didn't know it was a hoax). I tend to be suspicious of sensational stories. Most of the time people go batsh** over them and then it turns out (quelle surprise!) that there's more to it than was immediately apparent.
Posted by: Cassandra at February 19, 2010 03:26 PM