Here's yet another example of poor labelling in the editorial process:—Is a person who acts violently against lawful government authority, particularly in the form of direct violence against those tasked with upholding the law, really appropriately called a "civil rights" activist?
A civil rights activist throws a stone at the police, after the activists tried to march towards the official residence of deposed chief justice Iftikhar Chaudhry, during a rally in Islamabad December 17, 2007. Police in Islamabad fired teargas to disperse about 250 lawyers and activists on Monday as they tried to reach the house of Chaudhry, where he has been detained since Musharraf imposed the emergency on Nov.3. REUTERS/Faisal Mahmood (PAKISTAN)
If I were manning the Reuters editorial desk on this photo, I would've definitely referred to this guy as what he really is: An anti-government thug.
Tags: faisal mahmood REUTERS #YourProtestStinks
Comments:
#2 Brian C. Ledbetter 17-Dec-2007
Waldo,
Thanks for the comment! I suppose you're right, to a certain extent, but wasn't the "solution" to the problems inherent during those times ultimately found in [i]legislative[/i] (i.e., legitimate governmental) action, particularly the Civil Rights Acts?
After all, not [i]all[/i] "civil rights" activists of the 1960's were firebombing the police, were they? As I recall, a far larger number were actually working [i]through the government[/i] to accomplish their goals?
It's an interesting theoretical discussion, I reckon. :)
Regards,
Brian
Thanks for the comment! I suppose you're right, to a certain extent, but wasn't the "solution" to the problems inherent during those times ultimately found in [i]legislative[/i] (i.e., legitimate governmental) action, particularly the Civil Rights Acts?
After all, not [i]all[/i] "civil rights" activists of the 1960's were firebombing the police, were they? As I recall, a far larger number were actually working [i]through the government[/i] to accomplish their goals?
It's an interesting theoretical discussion, I reckon. :)
Regards,
Brian
#3 Brian C. Ledbetter 17-Dec-2007
(And my apologies in advance if that last comment seemed scatterbrained—I'm sitting in EMC training right now, and am trying to respond while still picking up on what the instructor's saying, as well as without disrupting the rest of the class...)
:)
:)
Those students at Kent State who fought back -- were they not civil rights activists? Black 1960s civil rights activists who didn't take their police beatings lying down -- were they something other than civil rights activists?
The answer to each is, of course, a clear "yes."