Riot v Riot per AP

[SassyLady]

Double standard will be one of the defining phrases of this generation along with woke and cancel culture.

Associated Press Explains The Difference Between A Riot And A Riot

Nearly everyone who watched the January 6th Capitol riot unfold, along with the aftermath of the ongoing FBI investigations, probably noticed a shift in the way the majority of the mainstream press talked about these events. Virtually all of the major newspapers and cable news networks had leaped to use the word “riot” to describe the attack on the Capitol building. It didn’t take long after that for an escalation in the war of words. We quickly heard plenty of talking heads, reporters and op-ed columnists struggling to outdo each other, with words and phrases such as assault, siege, domestic terrorism and even “insurrection” tossed into the mix. Some people, particularly on the right, were quick to point out that members of the press seemed to have suddenly found their tongues after nearly a year of talking about “peaceful protests” in other cities that were clearly on fire after Antifa and BLM “rallies.”
SEE ALSO: “Kill him with his own gun”: D.C. cops describe confronting the Capitol mob
Yesterday, the Associated Press decided to step into these muddied waters and clarify things for everyone. It’s an article that feels as if it could have started with a riddle. When is a riot not a riot? They begin by noting that the use of the term “riot” was nearly (though not entirely) universal, though they manage to demonstrate a bit of restraint when it comes to some of the more incendiary terms. But in a nod to the fact that so many news outlets had previously failed to use the word “riot” to describe the Antifa/BLM riots, the AP offers a bit of an explanation. See if you can guess how that line was drawn. (Emphasis added)

The use of “riot” as a descriptor is almost universally accepted, even though the word has become fraught with racial connotations and despite the relatively gradual way the story unfolded.

Uh oh. Here we go. Reporters apparently need to be careful when using the word riot if there’s any chance that non-White people might be involved. The AP “explainer” doesn’t stop there.

The Associated Press told staff members that protest was too mild a word. Phrases like “mob,” “riot” and “insurrection” were appropriate, noted John Daniszewski, vice president and editor at large for standards.
“Don’t call them protesters,” CBS’ Gayle King said during coverage the next morning.
The near unanimity came despite riot sometimes being a loaded term, and a subject of debate for how it was applied last summer to unrest following George Floyd’s death and Black Lives Matter protests. Some feel it is too quickly applied to situations involving Black Americans.

This is one of those cases where a news outlet bothers to address accusations of bias and unequal coverage but essentially ends up proving the point of their accusers. The AP came out and flatly stated that the word “riot” has been “too quickly applied to situations involving Black Americans.” It would be nice if someone who is in charge of the Associated Press style guide could take a moment out of their busy schedule and let us know precisely when the word “riot” took on “racial connotations” and became a “loaded term.”
Showing a complete lack of self-awareness, the AP article freely quotes Merriam-Webster when seeking to nail down some of the more controversial words and phrases. Since that’s the standard they set, I decided to reel in the conversation and return to the first word that entered the discussion. What does that iconic dictionary company have to say about the word riot?

1a : a violent public disorder specifically : a tumultuous disturbance of the public peace by three or more persons assembled together and acting with a common intent.
b : public violence, tumult, or disorder.
2 : a random or disorderly profusion; the woods were a riot of color.

You know, maybe it’s just me, but I’ve read that several times now and I don’t see a single reference to the race of the “three or more persons” jointly acting with a common intent to create a violent, public disorder. For that matter, there’s no reference to gender, religion. sexual orientation or anything else of the sort. Just “persons.” So if the Associated Press is demonstrably happy to cite Merriam-Webster as an authority in this matter, when did the word riot take on any racial overtones? Feel free to insert some sort of “gotcha” meme here.
I write for a living so I completely agree with the AP’s argument that “words matter.” It’s true. I don’t always reach the gold standard myself on that count, but I do my best. For my part, as regular readers already know, I was calling the January 6th incident a riot from the moment the first window was broken. I’m also fine with the use of “attack” or “assault” on the Capitol building. “Insurrection” is a bit too much of a leap for me because of the inherent implications, but if others want to use it, I’m not going to throw stones. “Domestic terrorism?” Sure. That works too.
But since the Associated Press doesn’t have the stomach for it, I will close by pointing out what should be painfully obvious by now. What should the press call it when a mob in Portland or Seattle or New York or Philadelphia suddenly breaks off from a demonstration and begins throwing Molotov cocktails at police cruisers, burning down precinct stations and federal courthouses, physically assaulting law enforcement officers, breaking windows, and looting businesses? It certainly sounds like a “violent public disorder” by “three or more people,” doesn’t it? So it’s a riot.
When you include a concerted effort to “abolish” our system of courts and law enforcement by destroying the buildings they occupy, one might even go so far as to call it an “insurrection,” at least based on the rules the AP is setting forth. Those were, at a minimum, riots, if not incidents of insurrection in all of those cities. And an honest press would admit that truth without any interest in the color of the various participants’ skin. So use the terms you’ve already defined and approved. They’re just words, right? So use them. Because words matter.

[Kathianne]

The redefine was always going to come back and bite them in the ass

[Abbey Marie]

BLM riots from a Philadelphia friend’s window last May:


A28A48C1-503C-47AD-9582-27F87AA3C24E.jpeg

[jimnyc]

Same as the word "thug", of which apply to either white or black or purple or yellow. If you're a thug you're a thug. Some at all of the events of this year. And a criminal is a criminal is a criminal. They want to re-write things at times to make the right look worse or the left look less worse.

Then Gayle King wants to confuse things and says don't call them protesters. They were ALL originally actually that. And 95% of them remained just that. The others protested, but then moved into criminal territory as well and some thugs in there too. She would rather take that away and just label them all.

The definition of riot as they show:

What does that iconic dictionary company have to say about the word riot?
1a : a violent public disorder specifically : a tumultuous disturbance of the public peace by three or more persons assembled together and acting with a common intent.
b : public violence, tumult, or disorder.
2 : a random or disorderly profusion; the woods were a riot of color.

And ALL of those events I speak of were ALL riots. And believe it or not, law enforcement in total has it down to 633 riots this year. 30 deaths attributed to them collectively. $2 billion approximately in damages.

The events throughout the year, many turned into violence mostly in the evening/nighttime. They protest during the day and riots broke out at night, and then some. They WERE riots and NOT peaceful at night. There WERE many thugs in attendance. Every last bit of what took place was criminal activity. Every piece of violence, every thing lit on fire, every last thing destroyed and every last thing stolen. NO excuses for theft, not even for bread. Yea, as they pointed out, running out with a Rolex, Gold chain or all kinds of crap from Target, CVS & Walmart wasn't food. And even if... And the police that were assaulted or killed. By THUGS and CRIMINALS. And they killed other people too.

Neither one in any way will exclude the other or excuse the other. I'm only setting them side by side so that any words to describe them by the MSM or politicians, you can see the whole picture more clearly.

After everything spelled out - they still don't give a shit about all the riots this year & who was involved nor the amount of money it will take to repair everything - and how many people they just put out of business altogether. Don't care. They couldn't care less about any police killed - and pushed for defunding police during their funerals of the dead. Took away their tools to make their jobs harder. Made them enemy #1 on the streets. --

And while the events at the Capitol building were atrocious & an assault on all of our freedoms and our history & future, stunning events that can never happen again. And yet it puts nothing in perspective for the left. They still defend the rioting of 2020 and still defend all of the violence, and it only made them push ten times harder in censoring things and lying and exaggerating. This is an opportunity for them in various ways and they will never ever pass an attempt to take advantage of a tragedy.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

The redefine was always going to come back and bite them in the ass

Except it never really--bites--- THEM.
They consistently get by with their bias, hypocrisy and outright lying.
Consistently get by with their propaganda and their lying by deliberate omission.

They have engineered a kind of immunity for themselves.
Only those that oppose them are to get bitten...
And there is the rub.

There is the snake ready to strike.
Always ready to strike--- their opposition.
That has been going on for decades now and only getting stronger year by year.
The double standard set in stone and the thing that has lead up to this current state of idiocy and dem quest to remake this nation.
The dem quest for dictatorial power.

I personally fault Trump for this because he did not start arresting many of them his first year in office.
Could be because the the--swamp -- is too vast , too powerful and too entrenched.
But to tear down a house one must start with the first brick!
They kept him so busy defending himself he never got around to tearing down the corrupt house they built.
And that house is ruled by the dem party and their allies.
Now we get to see and suffer because he failed to tackle the most important thing his job required- to maintain the security of this nation and our freedoms.
My estimate is that at least the top twenty of the dem party should have been arrested and tried in a court of law.
And hundreds of department heads in the federal government and its offices should have been ferreted out.

Now we will suffer the consequences of the hydra that has been allowed to grow so many heads.
It being primarily of dem seed and dem masters..
Truth, reality and a very tragic state that reeks of the rotten decay and corruption that infests government and its home base rests firmly in the totally corrupt and anti-american dem party.---Tyr

[jimnyc]

Btw, knowing the difference between the many riots throughout 2020 and the rioting that broke out at the Capitol - was quickly defined for us the day after the Capitol events by Pete of course!!

Fighting for civil rights and fighting for debunked conspiracy theories are not the same.

So you see, those 633 riots and all that destruction & Rolex's and Fur coats & those Mercedes cars all driven off that one lot? They were in it for their civil rights, so that was different back then. If you saw a black person anywhere in the US, and you "perceived" them to be stealing something or assaulting someone, keep in mind that they were doing so this year for their civil rights.

Or was it the other way around?

Many truly believed that fraud took place in the 2020 election, likely because it did. Not to the levels that many believed or not. Either way people were truly truly concerned about the recent election and the future of America. Joe Biden and his failing cognitive skills, Kamala Harris wanting to free criminals and push socialism & number 3 Pelosi is ripping things up in congress for the world to see, mocking.

Many saw this as an assault on America and our civil rights, and worse. So they went in to make a change on things. They failed of course, but they only tried for their civil rights. How's that fly, Pete?

Of course it's bullshit and I punched myself while writing that for simply thinking the stupidity.

[fj1200]

To be fair; there are protests and then there are riots. Those are two different things. A protest on 1/6 turned into a riot at some point by some actors. BLM protests all last year turned into riots at some point by some actors.

[Kathianne]

To be fair; there are protests and then there are riots. Those are two different things. A protest on 1/6 turned into a riot at some point by some actors. BLM protests all last year turned into riots at some point by some actors.

True. There is the difference though that the left called them "peaceful protests " until that idiot CNN reporter used that phrase with tens of cars and buildings on flame in the background. Then the phrase became "MOSTLY peaceful protests. "

Another difference with last week was who arranged the protest and the words used to send off towards the capitol.

There's plenty of fodder on both sides.