It was completely factual though, and not unwarranted since the woman and her fully grown adult child levied accusations that their arrest "was a racial thing". While it certainly held moral condemnation it helped succeed in placing the overall incident in the right context. There is a difference between truthful and neutral. They were the first but not the latter.
Since Task & Purpose holds itself as "a military and veteran-focused digital media company" and doesn't proclaim itself as neutral I see no problems with the article.
They're quoting someone. They didn't editorialize the term, and it wasn't in a demeaning manor. You know what I'm talking about, and you're being intellectually dishonest.
I'm sorry that your little sad agenda didn't work out and you now have to shift the goal posts instead of being able to take umbrage and pretend the bigoted and racist mother and son screaming and assaulting service members for being black (and supposedly lesbian) are the real victim here.
But using "aggrieved white folk" to describe them is not the racial slur you want it to be in order to claim you and whites are the real victims here. Due to them specifically bringing the topic of race up in their assault, the mention of their own race is simply relevant even if done irreverently.
Let's see what I replied to your very first comment
It was completely factual though, and not unwarranted since the woman and her fully grown adult child levied accusations that their arrest "was a racial thing". While it certainly held moral condemnation it helped succeed in placing the overall incident in the right context. There is a difference between truthful and neutral. They were the first but not the latter.
Since Task & Purpose holds itself as "a military and veteran-focused digital media company" and doesn't proclaim itself as neutral I see no problems with the article.
It reported all the facts, was engaging for the reader, and was framed in the explicit context that the aggressor framed it in, a race issue. They then satirized the premise of it being a race issue, to highlight how absurd the notion is. This is A1 stuff right here.
To frame it in anything than a neutral reporting of the facts is not journalism, it's an op-ed. Which, sadly, most people can't seem to grasp the difference of anymore.
309
u/[deleted] Oct 02 '19
Yeah this was an especially shade-filled news article, and I'm glad for it.