|
To the Writers and Editors at the Berkshire Eagle:
The Affinity groups of color, in collaboration with the community at Simon’s Rock, demand that you issue a full retraction of your article—“Police: Alleged Attack on Simon’s Rock Campus not Racially Motivated”. The title of this article perpetuates narratives that survivors of incidents should not be believed. We do not believe that the content of your article, in which you essentially claim that the investigation is ongoing and that there are no definite conclusions, matches the title of your article which implies that the incident is definitely not a hate crime. This title willfully misinforms and is a gross malpractice in journalism. When people see the headline of this article, they may not read the rest of the article. They may assume the title as conclusive and complete proof that this was not a hate crime. We would also like to highlight the manners by which this article, in its verbiage, could create a sense of safety and comfort in the local community that may not be justified. Members of the community should not be encouraged to disregard any concern for the safety of themselves and those around them. The first quote from the article demonstrates how journalistically irresponsible the article is in conveying factual information to the public. First, you cite Chief William Walsh’s claim that, “Investigators have not discovered anything that would lead them to conclude that this was a racially motivated incident”, which insinuates that the police have concluded that there is not a basis for the incidents at Simon’s Rock to be considered a hate crime. This quote also indicates that information could still be acquired, but this possibility was not mentioned. The writer follows the quote with citing Berkshire State Police Detective Unit who says, “We're talking to people, chasing down leads” which implies that the investigation has not progressed to the point where a conclusion on whether or not this is a hate crime could be, which is the antithesis of the title. For these reasons, we demand that this article be retracted in full by the Berkshire Eagle.
0 Comments
On September 20th, people everywhere walked out of their homes, their workplaces, and their schools in a globalized climate strike. Why? Because we have now entered into a climate crisis.
 Photo Creds: Getty Images
At the end of the 2019 season, it appeared Houston Texans star linebacker Jadeveon Clowney was going to break the bank wherever he ended up in free agency. That is, until the Texans placed the franchise tag on him, which allowed Houston to keep his rights for one more year on a fully guaranteed contract. After a heated few weeks in which the Texans and Clowney’s agent argued over whether to tag him as an outside linebacker or defensive end, as being tagged as a defensive end guaranteed him more money, Clowney stated he wanted a new contract. Now, when an NFL player has been hit with the franchise tag, there is a window, that ends on July 15, which allows teams and players to negotiate a long-term deal. Otherwise, the player is forced to stay on the franchise tag for the year and cannot negotiate a new contract until they enter free agency. CNN gets you hooked, there’s no doubt about it. The televised introduction to the debate is something out of a sporting event— montage of headline-worthy chants set to make your blood boil. Watching each candidate step onto the stage is gladiatorial, what with the superficial formalities, almost misleading to what always follows: a political bloodbath, wrought with treachery, deception and each candidate nauseating self-promotion.
Last Wednesday: Former FBI director Robert Mueller testified before both the House Judiciary and Intelligence committees. Sticking to his report filed while special councilor, Mueller rarely spoke his personal opinion, making it difficult for either Republicans or Democrats to sway public opinion in their favor.
 (via Doug Mills) Night two of the Democratic Primary debates had more political heavy-weights than night one, but the little guys made sure to stand out. They all debated the same issues, ranging from taxes to healthcare to immigration, and the sparks flew all over in the second round.
 (via Drew Angerer) While campaigning, fundraising, and rallying of their supporters has had candidates on the campaign trail for months, the race for the 2020 Presidential election started last night for many Americans, with the first Democratic Primary debate of the election. It showcased ten of the twenty-four Democratic candidates in the running for their party’s nomination, and it truly allowed those who had not been on the national radar to make a statement for themselves. The debate was chock-full of policy ideas, sidestepping, and as always, members of the debate not understanding the rules (which I’m sure made one popcorn eating Georgian happy). But enough of my babbling, let’s get to the debate!
On Tuesday, the fifth of February, the Berkshire chapter of the Sunshine Movement held a casual viewing of a Green New Deal discussion. Composed of various chapters, the Sunrise Movement spans the entire length of the nation and has devoted itself to “stop climate change and create millions of good paying jobs across the nation.” Sunrise implements the increasingly common practice of spreading awareness through social media and various forms of community outreach. By distributing power equally among the organizations members, the Sunrise Movement markets itself as completely democratic.
This week Garrison Funk and special guest Max Bernstein discuss the NFL championship games, Super Bowl, Antonio Brown, Carson Wentz, and more! Join us each week for new content revolving around the NFL and Simon’s Rock sports. CW: foul language
|
Proudly powered by Weebly