Posted on 04/18/2012 3:26:23 AM PDT by SoFloFreeper
Here we go again. Zimmerman is charged with murder, and pundits are proclaiming this the biggest trial ever. Haven't we heard that before?
It's safe to say that history is written by historians, not by people trying to sell newspapers, so when reporters and pundits describe the upcoming trial of Florida neighborhood watchman George Zimmerman facing second-degree murder charges for the shooting of unarmed black teenager Trayvon Martin as the "trial of the century," take it with a grain of salt. That particular phrase is widely overused and, while reporters had a strong case when applying it to, say, the landmark 1925 Scopes "Monkey Trial," the salacious 1907 trial of playboy Harry Thaw for the murder of architect Stanford White reportedly the first time the phrase appeared in newsprint was ultimately less memorable. Here's a list of 11 more recent cases that have been tagged with the dubious "trial of the century" label:
(Excerpt) Read more at theweek.com ...
In many ways the impending Zimmerman trial is bigger than most or all of the other 10 posted in this article.
But anyway, what exactly is the writer’s point, that there’s no such thing as a “trial of the century”?
I think that’s a rather difficult point to make. If you judge such things by publicity and/or impact on legal precedent and/or political ramifications, each century MUST have its list of “big trials”... mustn’t it?
And this particular century is only 11 years old, making it fairly easy to include the Zimmerman trial on a list of “trial of the century” candidates for the 21st century.
But maybe I’m missing the author’s point. Can someone help me out?
The Huffington Post losers and others who want this to be what it what its not, a simple case of self defense.
If I see that picture of a small boy ith a Holister shirt on a 6-3 gang thug anymore I going to be sick. The trial will be NBC, ABC and other Media outlets settleing out of court to George Zimmerman.
Where are the skittles and Iced tea? Or was that just part of the story?
I wonder if this recent case of the THREE DAY OLD BABY, snatched (allegedly, of course) by two blacks, and the mother shot SEVEN times trying to rescue her baby, will be reported by the media as exhaustively as the Trayvon case has been. - OR, if Jesse and Al will travel to Texas to rabble rouse about this case.
No, that kidnapping/murder case will fade away because the child was recovered, (no harm, no foul, right?) and the victims are of the “expendable” class.
I think this day in age with computers and social media, trials are more likely to gain attention. I don’t remember streaming the OJ trial. It was offered on radio and tv.
But back then, there were limited media outlets - and OJ was on most of them much of the time. It gained attention by being shoved in the public’s face nearly 24/7. I remember calling a radio station complaining that the vapid opening statements of the OJ trial were bumping Rush ... and also remember my company playing the verdict live over the PA system so nobody would miss it.
The difference now is that we have far more outlets to choose from, and to customize, so trials previously ignored may virally rise to prominence and trials previously pushed may be ignored as the audience gets bored and goes elsewhere.
I wondered where Quanell X was this morning condemning this crime....
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.