A daily newspaper in Halifax today says an “alleged” cross burning occurred this past weekend in Hants County. “Alleged”? WTF? Every other major news services says this actually happened. But this one paper asserts that maybe it didn’t. Makes you wonder who is better, the cross burners or those that deny it happened? —Out Them All
This article appears in Feb 18-24, 2010.
Man, the whole fucking situation is just totally fucked.
it’s only real, if it didn’t happen, the new george w. bush theme song. make it look phony,because it is real. make it look real, because it is a fake. wow, how fucked up n.s. is getting. time to get out my weapons and ammo, 2012 is acomin’. fucking people are really getting weird as the end times come i guess. get ready to meet your maker and all that bullshit. well, you wanna come to my area with this type of shit, and you will most assuredly meet your fucking maker, you assholes. and if, i say if, they should happen to find out the one/s that did this. well, give them a taste of their own medicine, but put them on said cross first. fuck, i’d buy tickets to see that shit.
They probably had their rag ready to print before they could watch the (TV) news and write their own story, so they didn’t have confirmation. That would mean sending an actual reporter to the story, otherwise.
In terms of legalities, news media need to say alleged until the people responsible are actually convicted. Watch the news stories again, and you’ll find either “alleged”, or some variant as such.
I think alleged is used more when talking about a persons possible dealings with some event, not the event it self Dr.F. You wouldn’t say the store allegedly got robed.
Yesterday on CBC Radio (Mainstreet), they weren’t releasing the name of the town, the names or race of the victims, or the nature of the racist slurs.
They interviewed a police office who basically said they were trying to keep it under wraps for now until more information came to light, and they could ensure the victims’ safety.
Not 30 seconds later, it was the top story on the CBC Radio news, and they interviewed the family – using their names, the name of their town, and quotes of what the perpetrators yelled while burning a cross on their lawn.
“Allegedly” it’s safe to assume the cops wouldn’t be listening to the part that happened *after* their inteview…
Oh yeah, and this is the most disgusting display of behaviour I have heard of in a really long time…
Yes, that would be the case Balls, but the issue is that if the events aren’t confirmed, they still have to say allegedly. If there have been formal charges, with associated evidence, they’d be able to say that the events took place.
Until then, it’s conjecture. Depending on the circumstances, the media source could have civil action against it.
Agreed, but they don’t need charges to confirm an event.