The following is a list of all entries from the News category.
Today was a VERY long day and I didn’t have the ability to get online for most of it. There are a few things I would like to touch on before heading off to bed…
1st – Jessie Davis –
kELLEY made a comment in one of the posts:
“HOWEVER, WHAT IS UP WITH A 5 MILLION DOLLAR BOND? EVEN OJ ONLY HAD 1 MIL?”
Bail Hearing – As soon as possible following the indictment, the defendent should receive a formal bail hearing. A tentative bail is set by the judge on the arrest warrant; this gives the defendent an opportunity to contest the bail that is set while he or she awaits trial. To determine bail for a particular suspect, the judge takes into account
- Past criminal record
- Gravity of current charge(s)
- Flight risk
- Financial Situation
If the defendent poses little flight risk and the charges are not serious, the judge might release him or her ROR, (Released on Own Recognizance). This means that the defendent is not required to pay bail; the court feels that it is likely that he or she will return to stand trial. In the gravest cases, the judge might refuse bail, thereby forcing the defendent to await trial in jail
Every case is different – in this case, it seems as if the judge felt this number as appropriate.
2nd- R: London Terror
London was on alert after two bombs were found. I haven’t had a chance to read up fully on the situation, but there is a LOT of good coverage on the topic out there that I plan on reading tomorrow:
This just goes to remind us that it truly is a different world…
3rd – RE: iPhone –
In case you missed it, the iPhone came out today…. no, I did not get one.
4th, and final, RE- Comment by B on Jessie Davis
“B” had an outstanding comment to Mindy on the Jessie Davis story, as well as kept me in line with a point I was making – this is the email I sent to “B”
I just wanted to say you had an outstanding comments post at the site
today (I was away almost all day and I didn’t see it until now).
Also, thanks for questioning me on what Mindy said – I was referring
to the “cop” aspect of her comment, not that race was the cause.
Thanks for the feedback and input, I truly appreciate it.
Thanks for the posts, B, as well as keeping me honest!
Jessie Davis and Cutts murder – Interracial sex cause for the attention? I call Bullshit on Rachelstavern.com
Last evening I found a very interesting post over at RachelsTavern.com providing an alternative view on what the Jessie Davis/Bobby Cutts murder story – all the media attention is directly related to Interracial sex. What?!?
Before we even look at why she claims this to be the true cause for the attention, let us take a look at Rachel’s background. From her about section:
“Rachel is a sociology professor who lives and blogs in the New York City metro area. Her research and teaching focus on race, African American Studies, gender, sexuality, and popular culture.”
I bring this up so we understand where Rachel is coming from when she makes her statements. That said, let’s take a look at why she says this is about interracial sex.
Rachel wanted to see what people were thinking, and this is where she make her very first substantial comment case:
“I went around to a few blogs, and I visited AOL Blackvoices and a couple white supremacist message boards to see what they were saying, and quite frankly it was horrible….I can’t tell you how many racist and misogynistic comments I read; and not surprisingly the white supremacists were giddy over this case.”
So wait, were you looking for a general view of what society was thinking about this murder investigation or were you looking for the most extreme opinions of what the fringe of society was thinking? I mean, did you truly expect to see white supremacists says anything less than happy about this?
How many expected mother websites did you visit to see their reactions? How many forums focused on Grandmothers did you visit? How many law enforcement forums did you visit? Were they all saying the victim was “white trash”? Better yet, did you look at any Media blogs or forums, and if so, how many of them were talking about it as an interracial sex issue?
The piece of evidence she points out is the Christopher Vaughn murder story (which I spoke about a few days back). While the case was equally graphic and disturbing, it hardly had any coverage in the nation media. And this where Rachel makes her claim:
“I agree that white women victims get much more attention than Black, Asian, Latino, and American Indian women, and I agree that race is a big factor in the media attention the case has gotten, but I would be more specific than Terrence. It’s about interracial sex.”
Again, wait, what?
She then goes one to say:
“Interracial crimes make big sensational news stories, but crimes that involve interracial sexuality arouse the deepest passions of American bigotry. The OJ Simpson case, the Duke Rape, the Kobe Bryant rape case, and now this one–they all have tremendous sexual overtones.”
So, the OJ Simpson was given the attention because of interracial sex? Not the fact that a former Football superstar was involved? Not the fact that the crime was so severe? Not because the actual trial became a circus?
The Duke rape case was about interracial sex? You mean the attention wasn’t due to the fact that the case involved a major, and well respected, institution of higher learning or because of a sports team? You mean that it wasn’t because a number of people allegedly involved in the crime? You mean that it wasn’t because of the politics of the prosecutor?
Also, the Kobe Bryant case didn’t get the attention because he is a superstar or because he tried to hid the event? You mean it wasn’t because of the infidelity he committed?
Nope, according to Rachel – these all got the attention because of the interracial sex.
This is where things get really interesting. Rachel points to her own website, and it’s traffic, as proof that society is obsessed with race and sex. You know what, that very well may be the case. We me be obsessed with it, we may be obsessed with race and sex but that does not mean we are obsessed with both topics concurrently.
She then goes to show some of the searches ran on her site:
- black men impregnating white women stories
- savages on blondes
- Biracial family pictures black and white
- BLACK ATHLETE MARRYING WHITE WOMEN
- Black men breeding white girls
- black negro slave woman naked pictures
- black women with white men in adult movies
- differences between white and black women’s breasts
- blacks in bed sexing
- george lucas in love black women
- how do you feel about interracial relationship
So, as you already established you are researcher and teacher who focuses on race, African American Studies, gender, sexuality, and popular culture. You run a website that focuses on these very same topics. What kind of searches did you expect to have? Did you expect people looking for information on the rain in Texas or the wildfires out west? No, you are going to get searches that relate to the topic on your site!
The search request that are more sexual, that is to say “blacks in bed sexing” are, most likely, people who came to your site thinking it was a porn site and wanted to find things that related to their fetish.
Here is why the case received so much attention – the son. The impact of the comments he made to his grandmother “Mommy was crying. Mommy broke the table. Mommy’s in rug.”
This is the comment that was said over and over and over. The news pounded this into our heads from the very beginning and was closely followed by the fact that the woman was pregnant and was due any day. The ex-boyfriend wasn’t a suspect in the beginning and wasn’t even mentioned until several days later.
What I think we have here is some who is too close to a topic – someone who can no longer see the forest from the trees – and is drawing a conclusion based on her biased opinion.
For the record, my very first reaction was “it’s Lacey Peterson all over again”. I *NEVER* thought about this topic being a racial issue until I read Rachel’s view.
Over the last few days there have been reports of Iran venturing into Iraq, but the story was not really picked up by the media. One can guess that this is due to a lack a hard proof. As I went out looking for an update today to the situation, to see if there was any other information available, I found out that there is a great amount of unrest in recent days due to Iranian fuel rationing.
It seems that Iranian leadership didn’t give its citizens a lot of warning for the fuel rationing:
“Iranians were given only two hours’ notice of the move that limits private drivers to 100 litres of fuel a month.”
That’s roughly 26 gallons folks. As a result, people started to protest. Cars were burned and gas stations were set on fire. People even turned their aggression a supermarket and a financial institution. There is a lot of good coverage of this story on the web, if you are interested:
The most interesting comment I found regarding the unrest and response to the rationing was this:
“Some MPs denied that the rioting on Tuesday and Wednesday had anything to do with the government’s rationing measures. “The attacks on the petrol pumps were organized well in advance by ‘agents provocateurs’ working for the US government, who incited some deranged individuals to set petrol stations alight,” Morteza Tamaddon told journalists.”
What is your first reaction to this comment? At first, it seems silly but at this point, it would not surprise me if something like this were to happen (quite frankly, not that it would be a bad thing either)
“Unofficial and unconfirmed are 4, that’s right, 4 different incursions or invasions into another country in the ME.”
One has to wonder is the gas rationing is due to the Iranian government expecting some type of military action with the U.S.
Not only did the accused killer allegedly kill his lover and unborn daughter, as well as have multiple children with different women out of wedlock, it looks like there are allegations that he was a child abuser – this from his 9 year old daughter.
You have to wonder what prison will be like, if this person is convicted…
Just before I closed up shop for the evening, I noticed that Apple iPhone reviews started to pop-up all over the web. The WSJ has provided their take, the New York Times has a review as well as a semi-cute video, USA Today has to provide their input as well and Newsweek gives us input on their “test drive”. The consensus thus far? The long awaited iPhone isn’t perfect, but it sure does live up to the hype.
Aside from the “IT” (better known as the Segway), I believe this is one of the most hyped devices in recent memory and Apple is making sure everyone who has a trail version of the phone is happy. For example, Steve Jobs was personally calling the reporters/media folks who were reviewing the phone. Yes, I understand that part of his job is to market but that is dedication.
Consistently the reviewers are saying the engineering and design of the phone are simply beautiful. The device is easy to use and has a very subtle elegance to it. Not only does it look sexy, apparently it is easy to use as well. Just pick up and go.
Apple has taken an interesting approach with the activation of the phone. One does not have to deal with the pushy, and sometimes intimidating, cell phone sales people. You can purchase the phone at an AT&T location or an Apple store, take the device home, and activate it in the comfort of your living room all though the iTunes store. This does raise a question, however. What happens if an individual is transferring a phone number from another provider? Can that be accomplished during this process as well?
The complaints that seem to be surfacing in the reviews are consistent with what has been floating around the web for the past few months. For example, the battery life of the device can be drastically shortened depending on how much surfing/video watching you do. Also, the iPhone currently does not support Flash or Java, which means a large number of videos and content will be unavailable to web surfers.
The loudest complaint, interestingly enough, is the choice of service provider – AT & T. According to the NYT review:
“AT&T’s signal ranked either last or second to last in 19 out of 20 major cities… Then there’s the Internet problem. When you’re in a Wi-Fi hot spot, going online is fast and satisfying. But otherwise, you have to use AT&T’s ancient EDGE cellular network, which is excruciatingly slow. The New York Times’s home page takes 55 seconds to appear; Amazon.com, 100 seconds; Yahoo. two minutes.”
Apple seems to have known this was going to be an issue, so the iPhone looks for the fastest network to access in order to provide you with the best experience. If no Wi-Fi is available, the device will default to the EDGE network. To me, this is the biggest flaw with the phone – not the design or user interface but who Apple decided to partner with.
I passionately hate AT&T/Cingular/SBC. Their service, both cellular and local, has always been crap. I had trouble getting service in two major markets for crying out loud… And that is why I am not getting the iPhone.
Yes, I want the device. As a matter of fact, I was holding off on purchasing a new phone for almost a year because I wanted an iPhone. However, my hopes have been dashed for now. Maybe, as the device continues to mature, I will no longer have the ability to resist the urge but, for now, I have to pass.
Business2.com has a wrap-up as well.
Appleiphonereview.com has a “waiting in line” survival guide. =)
Interesting take – Thestreet.com’s Kevin Wassong says that the iPhone needs a 20 min video tutorial. Is the device not as easy to use as thought?