Does this kid deserve a sympathetic NY Times profile?

Just write the word you want to write.

 

Why do you bother posting when you have nothing?

 

No. It's not that. But, I don't appreciate being told all about this kid's aspirations when there's no evidence of them. If the author wanted to "show" and not "tell" me, he failed.

I'm not sure what the point of this story is. We didn't learn anything about his community, or how kids are drawn into gang culture. We didn't learn about his family, influences, or heroes.

And, it's certainly not a well rounded look at him.


And, the truth is, I think the Times would have been uncomfortable giving us a fuller look at him.

Everyone quoted has something nice to say about him. So, how did it all go wrong. And, if he was, "he was surrounded by family and friends who tried to protect him," why aren't we introduced to any of these people?

Here's the full extant of what we learned about his parents: His mother -- and I love this part -- "had" worked as a security officer at the Salvation Army and she cooked him dinner on his last night alive because his father, who did not live with them but came to visit, stood him up.

That's it. That's all we know besides their names (which were combined to combined to come up with Shaaliver).

Why don't we learn anything about his friends? Who were they? We can't get a couple of names of his buddies, and take a look at their criminal records?

How even, in the light of the recent court ruling, does the author ignore the issue of stop-and-frisk, building security, and to what degree the community cooperates with the police to try and reduce crime?

 

And, this attitude is exactly why the Times would be uncomfortable taking a more critical look at this young man's life.

 

Do you lock your car doors when driving in black or Hispanic neighborhoods? Do you have anything with Confederate flags as part of the design?

 

No, that's Riptide. He's worried about race riots.

http://www.sportsjournalists.com/forum/posts/3654860/

 

You're doing exactly what you accuse the Times of doing: Coming into the story with preconceived notions of what happened or who this kid really is.

If you have some sort of evidence that the things said about him aren't true, I'd love to see it. As it stands now, you're the one assuming it was a whitewash job because there's no way minorities who commit crimes can have a human side.

You're also applying your ideals and your values, or outside interpretation thereof, to a situation that is not particularly similar to yours. That is exactly what any reporter worth his/her salt should NOT do. And, there's a reason not just this but EVERY crime story has quotes like the ones you have a problem with. Good luck finding someone to say, "Boy, that dead guy was a real piece of shit and I'm glad he's gone."

Lastly, the kid lived where he lived. We know gangs are a problem in certain communities. There's no guarantee this incident would bring to light any information we don't know. That's all the reason to wait and explore the issue more first. I wouldn't rush into that any faster than I'd rush into trying to expose everything about Wall Street when a white banker gets arrested.

 

Your fantasy life is miles from reality.

 

Have fun at your voter suppresion parties. I'll leave the fantasies to your conspiracy theories involving Ryan Braun.

 

If more of us shared Captain Obvious' views, this kid would surely have grown up to be a productive member of society.

White people in general, and Republicans in particular, should hang their heads in shame for failing this child.