I couldn’t stop myself. It’s too often that “something written in Impact font over a picture” is just accepted as fact. It’s no wonder that propaganda “works so well.” And this one isn’t even that bad. It’s substantially true, even.
Memes aren’t journalism, and it’s important to do the work of fact checking, especially when the meme is rage-bait and/or something you’re already primed to agree with.
tl;dr: Definitely accurate in message, less accurate in details.
My comment above was meant to address my motivation for doing the work in the first place. There was a “picture with Impact font text” on it. That alone demands vetting. The fact that that vetting later showed that this image/text is substantially correct doesn’t obviate the need for validating the information.
The errors are not major ones: Vinyard vs “Vineyard”. Off-duty cop vs “plainclothes[ed] cop”. Offering evidence to uniformed police vs “re[n]dering aid”/“saving lives”. That last mistake - which is one that early reporting also made - tends to amplify the rage-bait aspect of the story. This is not to say that people shouldn’t be incensed by the events that played out here. It is to say that the actual events that played out are what people should be incensed by.
I agree facts matter and appreciate you vetting it and all that jazz. I tend to outright dismiss “picture with impact font text(s)” because of what you said.
I just thought for a sec you were saying that the pic was not really truthful, in general (if not specifically), so was confused for a minute. Keep up the good work comrade.
These are some of my favorite contributions to social networks. Thank you for taking the time.
I couldn’t stop myself. It’s too often that “something written in Impact font over a picture” is just accepted as fact. It’s no wonder that propaganda “works so well.” And this one isn’t even that bad. It’s substantially true, even.
Memes aren’t journalism, and it’s important to do the work of fact checking, especially when the meme is rage-bait and/or something you’re already primed to agree with.
Yeah but didn’t you just write a long ass explanation of how the posted “meme” is correct? Or can I not read.
For this specific case:
My comment above was meant to address my motivation for doing the work in the first place. There was a “picture with Impact font text” on it. That alone demands vetting. The fact that that vetting later showed that this image/text is substantially correct doesn’t obviate the need for validating the information.
The errors are not major ones: Vinyard vs “Vineyard”. Off-duty cop vs “plainclothes[ed] cop”. Offering evidence to uniformed police vs “re[n]dering aid”/“saving lives”. That last mistake - which is one that early reporting also made - tends to amplify the rage-bait aspect of the story. This is not to say that people shouldn’t be incensed by the events that played out here. It is to say that the actual events that played out are what people should be incensed by.
Facts matter.
I agree facts matter and appreciate you vetting it and all that jazz. I tend to outright dismiss “picture with impact font text(s)” because of what you said.
I just thought for a sec you were saying that the pic was not really truthful, in general (if not specifically), so was confused for a minute. Keep up the good work comrade.