L.A. Times Portrayal of “Block Party”: Focus on Police, Not Rioters
The Instapundit posted about that Hollywood block party that got out of hand. What one correspondent of mine found interesting was the way that the L.A. Times focused on the behavior of the police, giving us images like this:
And especially this:
Which certainly seems reminiscent of the famous Tiananmen Square image of the solitary man peacefully facing down the aggressive militarized response of the government:
What would have been a more appropriate image to present and highlight? How about the way that the Daily Mail focused (quite properly) on the behavior of the rioters, with images like this:
Not quite Tiananmen, is it?
If I had hops like the guy jumping on the police car, I’d be in the NBA.
steve (369bc6) — 7/29/2011 @ 7:13 amDisgusting LA Slimes.
AZ Bob (aa856e) — 7/29/2011 @ 7:23 amcolonel alone when
ColonelHaiku (8a1a1f) — 7/29/2011 @ 7:26 amhe hope froggy got beat down
after car hijinx?
and what about guy
ColonelHaiku (8a1a1f) — 7/29/2011 @ 7:29 amgettin’ busy with the door?
he serve not protect
Got good photos of the a-holes faces. Make em pay for the damage!
gp (72be5d) — 7/29/2011 @ 7:30 amWell there have been layoffs at the Los Angeles Times. Guess they just didn’t have the staff to cover this mini riot properly. But the London Daily Mail could do it. So bleeping much for the “local paper”. No wonder their circulation figures are in the old porcelain bowl.
Comanche Voter (0e06a9) — 7/29/2011 @ 8:28 amThose really skinny jeans? Not so flattering if you don’t actually have Giselle Bundchen’s legs.
Beldar (dc47e3) — 7/29/2011 @ 8:31 amThe man was trying to hold the ravers down, Patterico. The man!
MayBee (081489) — 7/29/2011 @ 8:45 amAh, urban culture.
SPQR (26be8b) — 7/29/2011 @ 9:17 amExactly me point in the other thread.
The LAT is where you go for… hopelessly wrong propaganda.
If you wanted to actually know what the hell is going on in your town, you would never bother with the LAT. Someone might want to know exactly what kind of rioting and violence is really a problem. Seems pretty important. Instead, the LAT is spinning a fairy tale.
So they are losing their jobs. Angeleno was very upset that anyone would say they deserve it. I wouldn’t be surprised if he’s part of the journalism industry, actually, because most everyone else doesn’t think these idiots are entitled to lie.
Dustin (b7410e) — 7/29/2011 @ 9:28 am“Stickin’ it to The Man!”
Five decades too late.
Patricia (1832e5) — 7/29/2011 @ 9:41 amWhat the hell is that white guy doing is he trying to get brain damaged?
DohBiden (d54602) — 7/29/2011 @ 9:52 amThe LA Times has been anti-LAPD since the 60s when it turned left. That is one reason why LAPD cannot keep good officers. They go through the Academy, spend a couple of years being harassed by the LA l;eft wing establishment and then move on to other departments in southern California. I forget what the percentage still in LAPD five years after the Academy but it is very low. Less than 50% I know.
When I moved here from Chicago in 1956, I was staggered to meet honest (and polite) cops. That was the day when Parker ran things and Gates was his assistant. Those days are gone forever.
Mike K (8f3f19) — 7/29/2011 @ 10:59 amIf policeman leave the force because they’re “being harassed by the LA l;eft wing establishment” then what use are they in dealing with dangerous criminals?
The LAT is in a bad way but not becuase of something so petty as picture choice. it’s coverage of the brandon McInerny case is alrmingly thin.
David Ehrenstein (2550d9) — 7/29/2011 @ 11:18 amDavid, why can’t it be both?
Pictures are powerful propaganda. They lionize criminals and demonize the relative good guys. It’s a little thing, I guess, but drip drip drip.
And indeed, the greater point is that I read the news to learn something close to the truth. The LAT is a failure in this regard. You can’t know a damn thing if you rely on it.
Also, you do realize these guys were posing for the cameras, right? The LAT is responsible for harming LA.
Dustin (b7410e) — 7/29/2011 @ 11:29 amYou can’t get anywhere near the truth by relying on one paper alone. What one hopes is for a paer that does its best, and the LAT far too often fails.
What i’m talking about has nothing to do with propaganda or ideology — which is the chief concern hereabouts.
David Ehrenstein (2550d9) — 7/29/2011 @ 11:37 amIt’s true, you can’t get anywhere near the truth by listening to a compulsive propaganda spewing liar.
But you can get closer with a subscription to the Wall Street Journal.
That’s why the WSJ makes money and the LAT loses money.
Pretending it’s just a problem with all papers ignores the fact that the LAT has a mission of lying to you. They aren’t just limited by human imperfection or the limitations of their obsolete format. They actually want to lie to you.
Dustin (b7410e) — 7/29/2011 @ 11:41 amthe Slimes can’t have its closing round of lay offs fast enough for my taste…
redc1c4 (fb8750) — 7/29/2011 @ 11:46 amIt’s much like World Net Daily. They actually want to lie to you too. They will do it by pretending they know things they do not know, and pretending they have secret info. Mostly they do it by ignoring info they do know.
The LAT and World Net Daily are incredibly similar.
But the right does a more effective job ostracizing those who lie to it. Just my opinion, but I think some on the left are lefties because it makes them feel righteous, so they actually think it’s justified and good to spin the world for political purposes (much as a fringe conservative does). Most of the right just wants to know what the hell is really going on. They are conservative because they know and understand more than liberals know. They don’t think liberals are evil, just stupid. Sometimes they are wrong about that, of course. I know smart progressives, though I know many more dumb ones.
There is a much larger middle, and they want to both feel righteous and be informed, and thus are susceptible to infotainment like Daily Show or Bill O’Reilly, which is largely crap with an acquaintance to truth. There’s nothing sinister there… just a reflection on society.
The LAT is not like that. They want you to be misinformed so you vote for democrats. They know newsworthy things they actually want to hide.
Dustin (b7410e) — 7/29/2011 @ 11:47 amBut the Wall Street Journal belongs to Rupert Murdoch. Therefore what you’re looking for is a compulsive propaganda spewing liar to call your own.
David Ehrenstein (2550d9) — 7/29/2011 @ 11:48 am🙄 There goes the irony
DohBiden (d54602) — 7/29/2011 @ 11:50 amBTW David is getting teabagged by Obama.
DohBiden (d54602) — 7/29/2011 @ 11:52 amYou just issued dumb propaganda based on demonizing someone. A democrat, btw. Murdoch is a democrat. He just knows how to make money. With a tabloid, he knows you need lots of salacious crap about stupid celebrities. With a cable channel, he knows you need to get attention all the time and make sure people feel informed. With a newspaper, he realizes he is catering to an audience of very intelligent people who will cancel their subscription if the product isn’t informative and frankly pretty direct.
The idea the WSJ is propaganda is really quite hysterical. You, David, are lying. You have lied many times in the past, and I realize zero people here are unaware of it, so it doesn’t concern me.
You want to eliminate honest news by demonizing it, and that’s because you are at heart a fascist little pig. When is the last time you read the WSJ, and what lies did you uncover in it? The left is scouring that paper daily for a lie, and they rarely find anything justifying a correction.
Compared to the BBC or CNN or heh, the LAT, the WSJ is in fact provably more accurate.
Dustin (b7410e) — 7/29/2011 @ 11:56 amObama is all about burdens on businesses.
Rupert is a libertarian who gave money to dems.
DohBiden (d54602) — 7/29/2011 @ 12:00 pmLibertarians don’t host parties and fundraisers for Hillary Clinton.
In fact, Bill Clinton’s actions greatly aided Newscorp’s success. Bill Clinton worked with Rupert Murdoch on reforms that are far more responsible for the existence of, say, Fox News Channel, than anything a Republican leader ever did.
But all Murdoch wants is successful businesses. Fox News directly targeted a gaping niche that so badly needed filled because journalists are so dominated by democrat propaganda.
Dustin (b7410e) — 7/29/2011 @ 12:07 pmNot me. The Negro lost his “Magic” quite awhile back.
David Ehrenstein (2550d9) — 7/29/2011 @ 12:13 pmI report. You decide.
David Ehrenstein (2550d9) — 7/29/2011 @ 12:14 pmNow you’re getting rude, Dustin. I’ve been trying to have a serious discussio here. I don’t expect you to agree with what I say — just to listen to it respectfully. I try to do that with you guys — which is why I post in here from time to time.
David Ehrenstein (2550d9) — 7/29/2011 @ 12:17 pmNo the only serious discussion your having is with the voices in your head.
DohBiden (d54602) — 7/29/2011 @ 12:18 pmPrecisely. And liberals don’t party with the likes of Rupert. As I think I’ve noted here the Clintons made a point of cozying up to Rupert when Monicagate erupted.
David Ehrenstein (2550d9) — 7/29/2011 @ 12:19 pmWhenever a leftist does something awful, the defense is ‘look at that conservative who did it too!’. Doesn’t matter if that person did it too, or if that is relevant, or in this case if that person is even conservative.
It’s just the playbook. lefty did X, no defense available, draw false equivalence. It’s the argument of a stupid person who is leftist not because he thought carefully, but because he feels good about the sweet motivation of saving gaia and feeding the hungry no matter how stupid or even counterproductive the means happen to be for that.
In this case, we know what’s causing LA to be a hellhole. Democrats and the LAT encourage crimes. They get you to pose for a cool photo, or give you money so you can have guns, or free you from prison knowing you’re a rapist.
But hey, some fictitious Republican is evil, so let’s just feel good about ourselves anyway.
Dustin (b7410e) — 7/29/2011 @ 12:23 pmI really don’t get what you’re talking about Dustin. They choose photos of the Police over those of the perps and they’re encouraging crime?
Wouldn’t that be the case if they feaured that photo of the perps jumping on th ecar?
David Ehrenstein (2550d9) — 7/29/2011 @ 12:27 pmWhat proof is there that this is due to the LA Times’s coverage of crime issues?
And is there proof that the LA Times, on average, is more anti-police than Radley Balko?
Why do they encourage crime?
Michael Ejercito (64388b) — 7/29/2011 @ 12:29 pmHOW do they encourage crime?
David Ehrenstein (2550d9) — 7/29/2011 @ 12:30 pmThe next major riot in L.A., we’ll let it be handled by “La Eme”, since they’re going to be in control shortly anyway.
AD-RtR/OS! (dd399a) — 7/29/2011 @ 12:34 pmI’m sure that they will scrupulously adhere to the Constitutional limitations on use-of-force present in both the U.S., and Mexican, constitutions.
Not much too it. Lawyers are using a gay panic defense, hoping that the jurors are the same type of people that blamed Terry Jones for the murders at Mazar-i-Sharif.
Michael Ejercito (64388b) — 7/29/2011 @ 12:35 pmWhat is La Eme?
Michael Ejercito (64388b) — 7/29/2011 @ 12:40 pmAsk them, I guess.
It’s clear how they do it.
Framing sweet photos like that also obviously encourages folks, particularly the kind who infest Hollywood on a quest for fame, to show up and be a part of noble history for standing up against the Man so bravely. Gag.
Why does Obama want drug dealers to be armed to the teeth in Texas and Arizona? I don’t know why. Obama explained his tactics when he was a teacher as an effort to agitate and scare the public into feeling a need for government. I guess that’s why.
Dustin (b7410e) — 7/29/2011 @ 12:40 pmI think the LAT photos are o.k.
I’d rather see pics of the cops doing their job, then pics of a bunch of dopers staggering around.
If I want to see that, I’ll just pull out one of my old scrapbooks.
Dave Surls (28f866) — 7/29/2011 @ 12:44 pmI don’t see anything “sweet” about that photo. I’m with Surls on this.
David Ehrenstein (2550d9) — 7/29/2011 @ 12:50 pmWhat is La Eme?
Someone that our host is very familiar with:
The Mexican Mafia!
“M”
AD-RtR/OS! (dd399a) — 7/29/2011 @ 12:51 pmDavid Ehrenstein obviously you don’t read the Wall Street Journal. I’ve been reading it for 40 years now. They have always been good about keeping their editorial opinions on the op-ed page, and the news in the “newshole” part of the paper. Their news reporters write as though they are to the left of the op ed guys–which is as it should be. Nobody ever accused the op ed people on the WSJ of being flaming liberals.
But that simple divide—keep the news in the newshole, the opinions on the op ed page, is what distinguises a serious newspaper from an unserious one.
The Los Angeles Times long ago ceased to be a serious newspaper. The Grauman’s Chinese rave/riot is a perfect example. The Los Angeles Times has long told us that the LAPD are a bunch of thugs out of control. That’s their story and they’re sticking to it. Okay, I get that. This time around was maybe the 50th time that the subject has been presented. But there was another side to the Grauman’s situation, and a Los Angeleno should not have to read the frickin’ London Daily Mail to see it or read about it.
As for the Murdoch thing, which is favorite bete noire of batshit crazy libs. Murdoch and News Corp have owned the Journal for four or five years now. The head of the op ed page was asked if Murdoch’s ownership has changed anything on the op ed page, or if he’s been pressured to advocate certain positions. The sum total of Murdoch’s “pressure” on the op ed page was to tell the editor that he liked “shorter pieces”. Murdoch pointed to an editorial that had been written that day–by the op ed editor. The editor replied that he “thought the piece was about the right length”–and the subject was dropped. That’s it.
What Murdoch has done with the WSJ is invest money in it. They have more reporters, they’ve got a terrific new weekend edition etc. The paper has gotten better under Murdoch–and it is still a “serious” paper in that it keeps its goldanged editorial opinions on the op ed page where they belong.
The chances of the LA Times ever being a “serious” paper again are slim, zip, nada and none.
Comanche Voter (0e06a9) — 7/29/2011 @ 12:56 pmBut the Wall Street Journal belongs to Rupert Murdoch. Therefore what you’re looking for is a compulsive propaganda spewing liar to call your own.
The WSJ is a very liberal newspaper except for the editorial page.
Gerald A (9d78e8) — 7/29/2011 @ 2:11 pmIf Murdoch bought the Times, would he appoint a conservative/libertarian to oversee the Ed-page, and would they bring back Michael Ramirez?
AD-RtR/OS! (dd399a) — 7/29/2011 @ 2:16 pmOff topic, in a way. Ann Coulter has an excellent post titled “NEW YORK TIMES READER KILLS DOZENS IN NORWAY”. I read it by way of the following link.
http://abyssum.wordpress.com/2011/07/28/new-york-times-reader-kills-76-people-in-norway/
> Felipe
I, too, miss Aaron.
felipe carvajal (2ec14c) — 7/29/2011 @ 2:16 pmYes, Dustin.
Andrew (bb9991) — 7/29/2011 @ 2:18 pmThe WSJ, here in my 51st year on this earth, is the last newspaper I will ever pay a subscription for. And it ain’t for the editorial pages.
I Just re-upped for $409 without even cringing.
I would pay twice that.
#41, do you know if they still run that pastrami stand on Lincoln in between Santa Monica and Venice? I think it was a drug distribution center, but they kept the peace on the home turf and they made one damn fine pastrami on rye.
ropelight (a08880) — 7/29/2011 @ 2:19 pmIf you had to read Krugman, Dowd, Brooks, and Friedman constantly, you’d be pushed over the edge too.
AD-RtR/OS! (dd399a) — 7/29/2011 @ 2:20 pmOh, someone who actually reads it!
Yeah, the ‘objective’ coverage is often tilted. The difference is that they are trying to convey information rather than actually lie to you. It’s still obviously written by journalists who are largely democrats. FNC has a similar issue.
I feel like I have gotten a lot of coverage of information… they aren’t burying or mentioning stuff based on whether it helps democrats, but based on whether it’s informative.
Dustin (b7410e) — 7/29/2011 @ 2:23 pmrope…I don’t go to the Westside, and I’m unfamiliar with that particular establishment.
You know, there was very little crime in the area of the Genco Olive Oil Co. too.
AD-RtR/OS! (dd399a) — 7/29/2011 @ 2:26 pmAD, if you find yourself in Indian country try the joint on the SW corner of Lincoln and Pico. It was once a true love of mine.
ropelight (a08880) — 7/29/2011 @ 2:30 pmYou just liked it because of the proximity to SaMoHi, you perv!
AD-RtR/OS! (dd399a) — 7/29/2011 @ 2:35 pmNo, no, AD, that’s not so. My girlfriend went to Pasadena HS. Ask anyone at the Baja Cantina, 311 West Washington.
ropelight (a08880) — 7/29/2011 @ 2:46 pmSure, you can explain all you want until the cows come home (have they ever seen a cow in Santa Monica?), but we know the truth now.
AD-RtR/OS! (dd399a) — 7/29/2011 @ 2:49 pmAD, how dare you refer to my once significant other as a cow, you cad. I’ll have you know that she’s a tenured professor at UCLA and brings home the big bucks. She’s thin and attractive, she can cook and sew, and she makes her own Christmas Cards.
Not only that, when she dumped me, she gave me a few bucks to cover my motel bill and help ease my transition to mature women.
ropelight (a08880) — 7/29/2011 @ 3:02 pmDavid likes pleasuring the voices in his head.
DohBiden (d54602) — 7/29/2011 @ 3:11 pmAnd the voices in my head say. . .
David Ehrenstein (2550d9) — 7/29/2011 @ 4:03 pmDavid and Dave,
As they say, a picture is worth a thousand words and these photos spoke volumes to me. IMO the photos the LA Times chose for its story are misleading because they portray the event as a few protesters vs. an overwhelming police response. That makes the protesters appear sympathetic and the police seem like bullies.
But if we look at the Daily Mail photos, we realize the police were outnumbered and some protesters weren’t very peaceful. Therefore, contrary to the LA Times’ portrayal, the Daily Mail reader could decide the police response was reasonable and measured.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 7/29/2011 @ 4:06 pmAnd sometimes they add. . .
David Ehrenstein (2550d9) — 7/29/2011 @ 4:11 pmYou’re right about The Daily Mail giving a beter visual representation of the event, DRJ. But in bioth instances they’re just pictures. What’s needed is an investigation of why this happened and how it can be prevented in the future.
David Ehrenstein (2550d9) — 7/29/2011 @ 4:14 pmComment by ropelight — 7/29/2011 @ 3:02 pm
You must have been devastated.
BTW, since I grew up on a real dairy in L.A.Co., I do know what a real cow looks like; and not, I was not talking about your SO.
AD-RtR/OS! (dd399a) — 7/29/2011 @ 4:21 pmBut…
“…and
AD-RtR/OS! (dd399a) — 7/29/2011 @ 4:23 pmnotNo!, I was not talking about your SO.”Got to take this keyboard apart and clean it.
“As they say, a picture is worth a thousand words and these photos spoke volumes to me.”
I dunno, all I see is a bunch of cops standing around.
I think maybe you guys are reading a little too much into it.
Dave Surls (28f866) — 7/29/2011 @ 4:23 pmWhy did it happen?
AD-RtR/OS! (dd399a) — 7/29/2011 @ 4:26 pmA bunch of deadbeats thought they could crash a private, by invitation-only party, and got pissed when they were denied.
The poor babies.
This is the generation of ingrates that Obama focuses on, and what the Progressives believe is the future.
Unfortunately, history teaches us that when you raise a mob, it will eat its parents.
AD, let me guess, somewhere along Central in Chino? Sold out to Portagoofs in the ’70s.
ropelight (a08880) — 7/29/2011 @ 4:26 pmNope, but that is where the owner of the dairy in Bellflower moved to in the early sixties.
AD-RtR/OS! (dd399a) — 7/29/2011 @ 4:33 pmIn the late fourties and early fifties, the heart of dairy production in L.A.Co was the corner of Artesia and Woodruff, in Bellflower, which was the location of Triangle Grain Co., who was the major supplier of feed grains to all of the milking dairies. And right next to them was a truck lot where you would find rigs from the Antelope Valley Alfalfa Co-Op, stacked 12′ high with hay-bales.
It wasn’t that “private” a party. The “deadbeats” were kids attracted by a radio promo about the event, which was a film promo, telling them to come on down — and so they did. The result was a mess that shouldn’t have happened if the promoters hadn’t been so greedy for publicity.
David Ehrenstein (2550d9) — 7/29/2011 @ 4:33 pmIt was a DJ who told the kids to crash the party, not the “promoters”, at least that is what I got from the Daily Mail story.
AD-RtR/OS! (dd399a) — 7/29/2011 @ 4:35 pmBut, what do they know, they just print news.
Dave,
Patterico included one photo from the Daily Mail story but there are more at this link. The photos and article — including the part about cars being set on fire — help me understand why so many police were there.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 7/29/2011 @ 5:17 pmFrom our local KFI news,
A Twitter message sent by a popular DJ about a street concert has been blamed for drawing thousands of electronic music fans to the Chinese Theater on Hollywood Blvd. Wednesday night.
The DJ — known as “Kaskade” — released a statement that said, “It’s unfortunate that a few disrespectful people turned what was supposed to be a celebration of music into a regrettable event.”
Dana (4eca6e) — 7/29/2011 @ 5:35 pmKaskade’s tweet: “ME+BIG SPEAKERS+MUSIC(equals)BLOCK PARTY!!!”
He underestimated the appeal to his more than 92,000 Twitter followers. By 6 p.m., hundreds of people had gathered outside the cinema and were spilling onto the street. Police and fire officials soon closed the boulevard to traffic.
From one little tweet…
Dana (4eca6e) — 7/29/2011 @ 5:54 pmPatterico is right, the LAT pictures don’t tell the whole story and inclusion of a shot like that carried by the Daily Mail would have given readers a much better and more complete understanding of what happened.
The LAT also editorialized on the incident in this morning’s edition. The editorial was not critical of police, but went after Insomniac, the promoters of the film that premiered this week and the raves the film depicts.
angeleno (94f48b) — 7/29/2011 @ 5:55 pmDid Angeleno just agree with patterico?
DohBiden (d54602) — 7/29/2011 @ 5:58 pmI hope someone can explain all of these complications to DE.
AD-RtR/OS! (dd399a) — 7/29/2011 @ 6:06 pmangeleno, there’s a strange disconnect at the LAT: on one hand, their selected photos clearly intend to lead readers to suspect a heavy-handedness by the police and potential victimization of attendees, while at the same time their editorial was certainly less than supportive of chief executive of Insomniac Events, Pasquale Rotella and his Daisy Carnivals being held in L.A.
I wonder if they were just covering the bases?
Dana (4eca6e) — 7/29/2011 @ 6:12 pmDana, I simply don’t know what intentions were at work. It could be as simple as photographers stuck in different locations, on different sides of the police line. The LAT photog seems to be in front of Grauman’s on Hollywood Boulevard, while the Daily Mail photog seems to be south of Hollywood on Orange Drive, next to the Roosevelt.
In any case, LAT readers got a partial and one-sided pictorial view.
The disconnect you mentioned suggests that maybe there was no party line at work.
angeleno (94f48b) — 7/29/2011 @ 6:26 pmYou people find a party line in everything that doesn’t follow your party line. Accident never enters into your worldview. It’s all deliberate. It’s all a nefarious Liberal PLOT!
David Ehrenstein (2550d9) — 7/29/2011 @ 6:40 pmangeleno
Why on a riot is there a “party” line?
Another point is how did the Daily Mail get soo many photos so quickly?
The obvious answer is that there was widespread coverage of the “real” riot that was ignored deliberately by the newspaper of the town in which it happened
Which is disturbing that they felt a need to slant the behavior of criminals
EricPWJohnson (e83e82) — 7/29/2011 @ 6:44 pmYeah David look in the mirror you p*ssy
DohBiden (d54602) — 7/29/2011 @ 6:52 pmDavid,
I agree there can be “accidents” but isn’t a journalist’s job to cover events from both/many sides? How hard would it have been for the photographer to turn around and point his/her camera the other direction?
My guess is the photographer had a variety of photos and it was an LA Times’ editor who decided which photos to use and what perspective to emphasize. And, frankly, I have a problem deciding it’s an “accident” when the photos selected are so one-sided.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 7/29/2011 @ 6:55 pmI also agree with Eric.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 7/29/2011 @ 6:57 pmDRJ
When I moved to Houston in 94 do you remember the ongoing conversation in the “Post” and “Chronicle” about some a controversy concerning the use of racial descriptions in suspects reported in crime articles?
They were – if I remember right – loath to use “hispanic” and African American” and just use the generic “male” when reporting police briefings and eyewitnessess.
EricPWJohnson (e83e82) — 7/29/2011 @ 7:05 pm…and yet if you read the editorial – by the LAT Editorial Board – it presents a very different image than the one portrayed by the selected photos.
Dana (4eca6e) — 7/29/2011 @ 7:09 pmDaily Mail south of Hollywood on Orange…
AD-RtR/OS! (dd399a) — 7/29/2011 @ 7:13 pmThen why did I see, on the internet, a pix from the Mail showing a shot looking right into the courtyard of The Chinese?
He’s actually often a very fair guy.
Dustin (b7410e) — 7/29/2011 @ 7:15 pmWow Angeleno wow.
DohBiden (d54602) — 7/29/2011 @ 7:20 pmColonel hoping that the electric blue shade cast on some of cop’s trousers are only result of roof-rack lights and not some gay fashion statement.
ColonelHaiku (6fca10) — 7/29/2011 @ 7:22 pmWhat was their reasoning?
Michael Ejercito (64388b) — 7/29/2011 @ 8:24 pmthat poor hippie was obviously not on this planet at that moment and was cruelly taken advantage of by the partygoers to go out towards the police lines to get more beer. shame on them.
deepelemblues (ea26b9) — 7/29/2011 @ 8:28 pmDana – Here is a list of the members of the LA Times’ editorial board. While most have experience as editors, only a couple are currently shown as editors and the rest are listed as editorial writers. It doesn’t sound like any of them would have make the decision about which photos to use in an article. Also, the NBC ad on the LA Times’ front page incident suggests the editorial board doesn’t have any input on what goes on the front page.
Eric – I can’t say because I didn’t typically read the Houston newspapers in the 90’s. Back then, the major Texas newspaper I regularly read was the Fort Worth Star-Telegram.
DRJ (a83b8b) — 7/29/2011 @ 8:36 pmin the 90s in houston my favorite thing was to visit the Transco tower waterwall at sunset before going out
homesick now
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 7/29/2011 @ 8:47 pmFrankly, we don’t know which editors make such decisions. However, we do know that it expresses and represents the *LAT’s* opinion, as a collective.
What exactly is an editorial? The simple answer is: an unsigned article expressing the newspaper’s opinion on a matter of public interest. It’s the one place in the newspaper where The Times tells you what it thinks as an institution.
Dana (4eca6e) — 7/29/2011 @ 8:52 pmit’s coverage of the brandon McInerny case is alrmingly thin.
Man. I had jury duty for Chatsworth the week they were seating that jury. I am so happy I never got called in.
As for the LAT editorial, ever since the girl died at the EDC, supporting it editorially is probably not the easiest position to take.
MayBee (081489) — 7/29/2011 @ 8:52 pmComment by DRJ — 7/29/2011 @ 8:36 pm
When I was in TX, I only read the Star-Telegram.
AD-RtR/OS! (dd399a) — 7/29/2011 @ 9:00 pmThe Startle-gram!
Patterico (f724ca) — 7/29/2011 @ 9:05 pm#93
I believe it was an LAT investigative story some time back that disclosed unsavory connections between Coliseum Commission staff and the rave producer and led to resignations.
angeleno (94f48b) — 7/29/2011 @ 9:09 pm_____________________________________________
Bias in the way photos of lawbreaking and troublemakers are selected? Can’t all of this be summed up by the simple fact that the LA Times, when reporting a crime, will purposefully leave out the description of the race or ethnicity of a suspect.
That’s why I let out a big laugh when the MSM insists it’s the public’s right to know and, in turn, the media’s responsibility to report the who, what, when, where, how and why.
Mark (411533) — 7/29/2011 @ 9:11 pmWhats intersting from the photo’s angle is that the LAT Times has pool photogs and also uses contractors and freelancers who probably gave them 100’s of photo’s wanting that elusive contract
Which makes this an even more brazen and deliberate act to discredit the police and more importantly lie to the citizens of LA
sick
EricPWJohnson (e83e82) — 7/29/2011 @ 9:20 pmThat waterfall is one of my wife’s favorite places. We always go there for a picnic after ballet in Houston. There’s a sweet Greek takeout restaurant nearby. Very special place to me. Houston tourists should always stay in the Galleria area.
I never got used to calling it Williams Tower, as it was Transco Tower throughout my childhood.
Dustin (b7410e) — 7/29/2011 @ 9:23 pmAngeleno- was it the LAT that exposed him?
Yeah, in general, in words it is much less easy to defend EDC. They’ve even moved to Vegas now.
But pictures are a different story, especially if it doesn’t look like it has anything to do with EDC.
MayBee (081489) — 7/29/2011 @ 9:24 pmit’s an indescribably wonderful place to grow up with – as a tourist place it’s hard to sell
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 7/29/2011 @ 10:12 pmAh, youth …, to have the dexterity and the agility to leap like a monkey up onto the trunk pf a police car again. (sigh)
Summit, N.J. (75c9eb) — 7/29/2011 @ 10:22 pmdexterity and agility are basically the same thing unless you’re talking about a particularly hand-centric activity
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 7/29/2011 @ 10:50 pmwhat’s with the purple lights on the cop car in the first picture?
that’s so…
I blame it all on the nights on Hollywood Blvd
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 7/29/2011 @ 11:35 pm#104 – red + blue = purple
Summit, N.J. (75c9eb) — 7/29/2011 @ 11:52 pmI like my virgin better
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 7/29/2011 @ 11:57 pmit was like Glee meets Bee Gees meets Steven Bochco
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 7/29/2011 @ 11:59 pmIt was like Sparctacvs went to Los Angeles and multipled.
DohBiden (d54602) — 7/30/2011 @ 7:06 pmhahahaha Very good.
I’ve never really liked Hollywood. I saw a movie at the Chinese theater, but it was lame compared to Alamo Drafthouse (Creme Brulee French Toast and a bucket of Fat Tire with my Harry Potter!).
The McDonalds right by this scene has armed guards. It’s like you’re in Rio or Uganda. In line, the other folks really were like a pack of cloned Spartacus trolls.
Dustin (b7410e) — 7/30/2011 @ 7:11 pmI aim to please.
DohBiden (d54602) — 7/30/2011 @ 7:12 pm“It was like Sparctacvs went to Los Angeles and multipled.”
Scary.
Sparty must be kinda like the Queen Alien in the Aliens movies…only not as pretty.
Dave Surls (28f866) — 7/30/2011 @ 7:19 pmWhy do Brazilian Socialists[which means Spartacvs went to Brazil to multiply his spawn] hate white people?
Their American counterparts do too.
DohBiden (d54602) — 7/30/2011 @ 7:39 pmbut there’s frozen custard Mr. Dustin it’s kinda pricey but still it’s really really tasty it was the first time I ever had it
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 7/30/2011 @ 7:44 pmLow fat frozen yogurt with strawberries and kiwi and blueberries is good too.
JD (318f81) — 7/30/2011 @ 7:59 pmI’m a nonfrozen flan with plenty of syrup.fan, l, also bunuelos from the “Juice Palace” in Little Havana
ian cormac (81c5c2) — 7/30/2011 @ 8:14 pmhere Mr. ian this is very very tasty flan you order online
I could almost go get some low fat frozen yogurt right now but I’m too lazy
happyfeet (3c92a1) — 7/30/2011 @ 8:39 pmRe Grauman’s Chinese, one of my earliest memories is my grandmother taking me there to see “The King and I” shortly after the film opened. To my child’s eyes, the plushness and extravagance were amazing. It still seems impressive, but some of the abandoned theaters in downtown L.A. are even more extravagant.
These days the Chinese is connected to a mall that opened in 2001, one that also houses the Kodak Theater. The whole place is now thick with tourists year-round.
angeleno (94f48b) — 7/30/2011 @ 8:45 pmTo be sure, 99% of the people I saw in Hollywood blvd were definitely out of state tourists.
Dustin (b7410e) — 7/30/2011 @ 8:52 pmThat’s some tasty flan, never been crazy about yogurt,
ian cormac (81c5c2) — 7/30/2011 @ 9:25 pmApparently this is the fault of the Tea Party.
\Sarcasm off
DohBiden (d54602) — 7/30/2011 @ 9:30 pmYeah, there was something in the tea.
Milhouse (ea66e3) — 7/30/2011 @ 11:15 pmDave Surls — if you bothered to look at the entire photo montage by the LAT, you would see photo after photo of police chasing or standing in formation against – – – who? The protestors, bar one or two filthy love children, are cropped. The effect is fascist police state. It’s repugnant and dishonest.
Tina Trent (7f2406) — 7/31/2011 @ 10:44 amAnother jackarse that believes rioting is a persons god given right.
DohBiden (d54602) — 7/31/2011 @ 10:45 amAll I see is a newspaper article and photos showing the cops doing their job, in this case breaking up a mob of punk kids who are creating a disturbance.
I must be missing the fascist police state stuff somehow.
“The Los Angeles Police Department had to be called in when some fans became unruly, throwing rocks and bottles and eventually damaging three police cruisers. So far, three people have been arrested and authorities say more are expected when they are identified through video.”–LAT
Sounds like a pretty accurate report to me.
Dave Surls (28f866) — 7/31/2011 @ 6:50 pmBut the police are fascists.
/Tina
DohBiden (d54602) — 8/1/2011 @ 4:37 amPerhaps, if the rioters gave half of the energy the gave to the riot towards their jobs, family or helping others this world maybe a better place.
Gunnar (324a68) — 8/16/2011 @ 5:08 am