this post was submitted on 08 Mar 2024
88 points (98.9% liked)

politics

19165 readers
3663 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Michael Hallett, a professor of criminology at the University of North Florida who studied the effects of “Cops,” said he viewed the NYPD’s forays into social media as a natural response to a digital media ecosystem that rewards speed and sensationalism.

The proliferation of body-camera footage and, increasingly, drones, have made it easy for police to create their own reality series, free of delays imposed by the TV gear and network schedules, he said.

“They now have a proactive and sophisticated messaging system that is designed and intended to deliver messages on behalf of the police agenda,” Hallett added. “In the negotiation for control of the message, that gives them the upper hand.”

top 4 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] charonn0@startrek.website 16 points 9 months ago

“We want to go on social media and push back on the misinformation that’s out there,” Tarik Sheppard, the NYPD’s top spokesperson, said in an interview. “Because if we don’t, it could cause damage to the reputation of our cops and the work that we’re doing.”

Having a "top spokesperson" in the first place is part of what's being criticized, Tarik.

[–] autotldr@lemmings.world 0 points 9 months ago (1 children)

This is the best summary I could come up with:


As a key turns in a jail cell lock, a New York City police deputy appears on screen to announce the arrest of a teenage suspect — not the person seen in the video moments earlier — in a shooting on a Bronx subway platform.

In a post shared on X last week, Chief of Patrol John Chell lashed out at a state judge by name, saying she had released a man he deemed a “predator” who had been accused of stealing a cellphone and carrying drugs.

“It’s a naked form of intimidation against the judiciary, which is dangerous and scary,” said Steven Zeidman, director of the criminal defense clinic at the City University of New York School of Law.

In recent weeks, official NYPD accounts have gone after journalists by name, threatened to “flood” the jails with disruptive protesters, and highlighted instances of low-level transit crime — a push that coincided with a decision by Gov.

An analysis by the Brennan Center for Justice, a think tank at the New York University School of Law, found that very few departments maintain public-facing guidance spelling out how police are making use of the platforms.

The proliferation of body-camera footage and, increasingly, drones, have made it easy for police to create their own reality series, free of delays imposed by the TV gear and network schedules, he said.


The original article contains 1,101 words, the summary contains 227 words. Saved 79%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

[–] Hominine@lemmy.world 5 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Bad bot. Chief of Patrol John Chell got the name of that judge wrong, as is identified in the next sentence or two.

[–] Zerlyna@lemmy.world 4 points 9 months ago

Yup. We have enough fake news to battle, bad bot makes it worse.