Boston Media/AP Lapse in Knowledge?

[sparx]

I was reading this news story about a self-defense case in Salem, MA:

http://www.thebostonchannel.com/news/9448380/detail.html?rss=bos&psp=news

and noticed that the AP reporter seemingly can't get the story straight. The reporter states at the beginning of the article...

SALEM, Mass. -- A jury deliberated just two hours Thursday before finding an Iraq war veteran acted in self-defense when he fired a shotgun into a group of club-goers outside his Lawrence home, injuring two people.

But then at the end of the article (of course) the reporter states...

He said he was in fear of his family's safety when he grabbed a rifle and fired a shot into what he said was a clear area.

The shell struck a curb and shattered into fragments, striking Kevin Castillo, 21, and Lissette Cumba, 15, both of Lowell.

The story goes from firing a shotgun into a crowd of people to firing a rifle into a clear area, but the bullet (to that reporter shells and bullets are the same thing) strikes a curb and fragments.

I just can't understand why sloppy reporting such as this is supported by major media. You would think that a person covering gun-related news would try to educate themselves a little, or at least enough to know the difference between a shotgun and a rifle, let alone the difference in firing into a crowd of people and firing into a clear area!

 

[CB900F]

Sparx;

When you understand that accuracy in reporting runs a poor third to market share and therefore revenue, you'll understand why it's not only tolerated, but totally inconsequential to media management.

900F

 

[Devonai]

I heard the outcome of this case on the radio yesterday and I cheered out loud. CNN Radio News never called the weapon anything other than a shotgun, BTW.

However, I am astonished at this outcome. The Marine discharged a firearm in the direction of humans. He did not intend to harm anyone, only to scare them away after the crowd attacked his home with bricks and bottles.

If I was his lawyer, I would have told him to say that he did intend to hit somebody. If he's met the standard for the justifiable use of deadly force, then he's going to be acquitted of any criminal charges. If he says it was an accident, he looks reckless and irresponsible. In any case, there is no way he would have been let off if someone had died.

The story said that the jury did not consider the Marine's service in Iraq as a factor in the acquittal. Yeah, I'm sure they didn't.

 

[jacobtowne]

Most journalists are as ignorant of firearms technology as most politicians.
JT

 

[RobW]

Most "Journalists" are ignorant of EVERYTHING but their prejudice and bias.

 

[Car Knocker]

Duplicate thread.

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=208095

Merge???

 

[marinr]

If AP actually had a lapse it would be a lapse of ignorance (that being their normal state).

 

[jamz]

Year, reporters only get 1/2 of one side of any given story at any given time. Having been interviewed and having freinds and family interviewed by various papers, I'd say that at absolute best, 70-80 percent of the facts are correct, if and when included.

that's why I take news stories with a grain of salt and don't get all worked up over them because I assume they are at least halfway made up or wrong.