The first debatable assumption in Rothman’s argument is that the media made the wrong decision in siding with the protestors. To illustrate his claim, Rothman makes the passionate case that the media should remain impartial, when he states, “The Press has not played a neutral, dispassionate role in its intensive of the upheaval” (18). The author fails to note that rarely do newspapers and news websites operate without some form of partiality. Many people read certain newspapers for the journalist’s commentary; because the views of the author are opinions the reader can agree with. To convince his audience that the media sided with the protestors, Rothman uses good examples. One example Rothman uses to highlight the media’s bias in regard to Ferguson was the headline by The Daily Beast, “What you gonna do? Kill Us?”(19). This headline produced by the national media and the commentary of the
The first debatable assumption in Rothman’s argument is that the media made the wrong decision in siding with the protestors. To illustrate his claim, Rothman makes the passionate case that the media should remain impartial, when he states, “The Press has not played a neutral, dispassionate role in its intensive of the upheaval” (18). The author fails to note that rarely do newspapers and news websites operate without some form of partiality. Many people read certain newspapers for the journalist’s commentary; because the views of the author are opinions the reader can agree with. To convince his audience that the media sided with the protestors, Rothman uses good examples. One example Rothman uses to highlight the media’s bias in regard to Ferguson was the headline by The Daily Beast, “What you gonna do? Kill Us?”(19). This headline produced by the national media and the commentary of the