Thursday, September 20, 2007

Free the Jena 6

Today is the day of action in Jena, LA. I've seen a bit of coverage on today's cable news (well, it was more coverage of Al Sharpton than the kids), but largely, I think that Pam is right about this story being ignored -- I haven't seen any discussion of it outside of Facebook. I can't pretend to have any idea why the story is being ignored -- it involves a shocking level of racism by even Southern standards -- but I think it would be appropriate to spend a little less time obsessing over Britney's latest meltdown and a little more trying to make sure the Jena 6 get fair treatment under the law.

Update: here's an interesting look at the story.

4 comments:

sara said...

not sure what happened, thought I'd already posted this...



Thanks for posting the link to Wikipedia. Although I'm very interested in this situation (and I should add - appalled) I haven't had time to research it, so all my information has come from the short little blurbs I've read and seen on tv. Those accounts left a lot of holes that the wiki article filled in for me, but it left me with new questions.



Two of which are:



Why is the public defender doing such a horrible job? Is he afraid? Being pressured? Being threatened?



Why did no black jurors show up? Is that "normal"?

david said...

A-freaking-men.

Keera Ann Fox said...

I've already been reading about this over at Jenny Jinx's blog. She has the back story.



Why there are no black jurors is the crux of the Jena situation: Old-fashioned racism. That's also why there are no whites on trial. It all started when a black student asked if it was OK to sit under the "white" tree, the shade tree traditionally reserved for whites only. In 2006. He asked the question in _2006_.



I'm still dumbfounded by that.



Alice, why would you expect Facebook to be different from any other media in today's world? Everybody knows that the rich and famous are far more important than the injustices in our society. (You're on Facebook???)

DSK said...

What amazes me is how, in much of what "mainstream" media coverage there is, there is such a lazy, simplistic and inaccurate story being portrayed. It just jumps from nooses to this one fight.



But just follow the money. Some groups can get international big shots to spend thousands of dollars buying name-calling full page ads in the New York Times. I'm assuming you won't see the same pattern of cash flow with organizations like the SPLC. So guess what gets all the coverage?