Opinion

The Media’s Disturbing Intimidation Game

   DailyWire.com
A law enforcement officer goes down while opening a gate for fired Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin as fellow officers escorted Chaurin from the rear of the Family Justice Center after a motion hearing Friday in Minneapolis.
David Joles/Star Tribune via Getty Images

As jurors headed into deliberations to decide whether former Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin was guilty of murdering George Floyd last year, multiple media outlets began reporting specific information about where each juror lived and worked.

I will not link to or quote from these outlets, because I think what they’re doing is disgusting and dangerous.

The Star Tribune, CBS, CNN, and The New York Times all published detailed information about the jurors deliberating Chauvin’s fate. They didn’t publish the names and addresses of the jurors, but they published enough details about their race, age, occupation, and extracurricular activities to not only let the jurors know that these partisan media outlets know who they are, but also to allow for potential sleuths to determine their identities.

It’s unethical and dangerous. If one of these jurors ends up being doxed based on the information provided by these outlets, they should be liable for the consequences.

The Times was actually the first outlet to provide information about the jury in an article on April 1. It described the race and occupation of several jurors and quoted from the questionnaires they filled out prior to being selected for the case. Their reporting at that time noted that the jurors were anonymous and that their faces couldn’t be shown on the cameras that were allowed into the courtroom to document the trial.

But that didn’t stop media outlets from doing everything they could to identify the people who would later decide that Chauvin was guilty of second-degree murder, third-degree murder, and manslaughter.

It should be noted that some outlets, like NBC News, did mention the racial breakdown of the jury but did not include the same amount of information as other outlets that would jeopardize the jurors’ safety.

The Tribune was the worst offender, including a lengthy paragraph of information about each juror, some of which included family history and status. The outlet included where one juror likes to hang out as part of its report.

What journalistic purpose did this serve other than to intimidate? The jury wasn’t fully sequestered – they could use their phones during recesses – meaning they could have learned that these media outlets had this much information about them. Given the media’s full-throated defense of the riots that resulted from Floyd’s death last summer and their insistence that Chauvin is guilty of murder, how could a jury member on the fence about his or her decision feel safe if they made the decision that Chauvin was not guilty?

Further, the publishing of this information could likely be used by Chauvin’s defense to appeal any negative decision. Judge Peter Cahill, who is presiding over the trial, already suggested Chauvin’s defense could use Rep. Maxine Waters’ (D-CA) calls for “confrontation” to appeal the verdict. As The Daily Wire’s Ryan Saavedra reported:

“And it is so pervasive that it is I just don’t know how this jury it can really be said to be that they are free from the taint of this,” the lawyer representing Derek Chauvin said. “And now that we have U.S. representatives, threatening acts of violence in relation to the specific case, it’s mind boggling to me, judge.”

“Well, I’ll give you that Congresswoman Waters may have given you something on appeal that may result in this whole trail being overturned,” Cahill responded.

This is just the latest example of the media attempting to intimidate people into agreeing with the left’s preferred narrative. As The Daily Wire’s Amanda Prestigiacomo reported on Monday, ABC4 News in Utah doxed and harassed a paramedic simply for donating $10 last year to the defense of Kyle Rittenhouse, who was charged with homicide and attempted homicide for shooting two rioters in Kenosha, Wisconsin last year and injuring a third. Rittenhouse’s defense attorneys are arguing their client acted in self-defense, and video footage from the incidents appear to back up this claim.

Yet this media outlet tried to ambush a man for a small-dollar donation to someone the media has declared a villain. It harkens back to a little-known program released ahead of the 2020 election that allowed people to see which neighbors donated to then-President Donald Trump’s re-election campaign. And let’s not forget the moment in 2018 when CNN went to the house of a Florida grandmother to confront her about a Facebook group she ran that was apparently targeted by Russian operatives during the 2016 election.

We all know trust in media is at historic lows. If they weren’t trying to be seen as the enemy of the people, what would they be doing differently?

The views expressed in this piece are the author’s own and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

Got a tip worth investigating?

Your information could be the missing piece to an important story. Submit your tip today and make a difference.

Submit Tip
The Daily Wire   >  Read   >  The Media’s Disturbing Intimidation Game