Pubdate: Fri, 12 Oct 2007 Source: DrugSense Weekly (DSW) Section: Feature Article Website: http://www.drugsense.org Author: Stephen Young Note: Stephen Young is an editor with DrugSense Weekly. IS JUSTICE JUST A MATTER OF PERSPECTIVE? Editing this newsletter each week offers an opportunity not only to see how the drug war works, but to see how news works. Despite claims of objectivity, the news media is informed (sometimes dictated) by particular perspectives, just as judgements about drug prohibition are impacted by personal observations of the drug war in action. In recent weeks, two different reporters at two different newspapers in two different states wrote essentially the same story in an almost completely contradictory way. Both stories were about police generating revenue by seizing the assets of alleged drug suspects. But one story started like this: "Even if you're a law-abiding citizen who's never been convicted of a crime, local police are allowed to confiscate your property and money and keep up to 80 percent of it for themselves, with the legal stipulation that this windfall be spent only on programs likely to result in additional confiscations where the police can keep up to 80 percent of the booty for themselves." This is the opening of the second story: " If a criminal conviction, the potential loss of freedom and a ruined reputation aren't enough to get drug dealers to say no to the lucrative trade, how about homelessness?" The first story was written by Jennifer Abel and published in Connecticut's Hartford Advocate ( see http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v07/n1134/a01.html ). This thoughtful piece contains direct quotes from a variety of experts on the subject, and like most great reporting, asks uncomfortable questions about the status quo. The second story, by Mary Schenk, was published in the News-Gazette out of Champaign, IL ( see http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v07/n1159/a01.html ). Every source quoted in the piece works for an agency which benefits from forfeiture. To describe the anecdotes in Schenk's story as self-serving is an astonishing understatement. Calling the piece a press release instead of a news story doesn't convey the sycophantism at work; it's actually more of a love letter (or at least a crush note). The author would likely protest that she was just conveying the opinions and statements of the subjects. Which is not completely untrue, but journalists are taught that there are at least two sides to every story. For too long the drug war has been a one-sided story in which only the prohibitionists had a voice - those individuals subject to the laws were more like mute props merely tossed in to add realism to certain scenes. Now, there are more reporters who are willing to interview sources who challenge the drug war, as Abel's excellent piece shows. Articles that allow uncritical cheerleading for the drug war simply aren't telling the whole story - which is why MAP exists. The Media Awareness Project of DrugSense has likely helped to accelerate this process of getting more perspectives out in the open - so why not show your support and offer a donation today at http://www.drugsense.org/donate.htm You may help others understand how one side of the story just isn't enough. - --- MAP posted-by: Richard Lake