Mediaboss Marketing

Broad criminal justice reform is needed to change policing in the United States, and it should originate at the local level, Duke scholars said Thursday.

Three Duke experts spoke to media Thursday about a variety of policy and reform issues as well as about what can be learned about policing at the nations founding.

Here are excerpts:

ON POLICING, DEADLY FORCE AND REFORM

Brandon Garrett, law professor

Police in America have incredibly broad discretion to use deadly force. About 1,000 people are killed each year by police, making police violence a leading cause of death for black men in particular. This is a public health and civil rights crisis. Its also a legal and cultural crisis.

The law is not particularly constraining of police. The Supreme Court has said that officers can basically react to potentially deadly situations based on what seems reasonable in the moment.

That shoot-from-the-hip approach has led to black suspects far more likely to be killed by police. George Floyd posed no risk to anyone when he was killed in the neck hold in Minneapolis. Tamir Rice had a toy gun when he was killed in Cleveland. We can go on and on.

We need to think more broadly about what is public safety. What do we need police for? And when is it appropriate to have armed people intervene in our society?

Our (Duke Center for Science and Justice) does work on use-of-force policy and this is a deep legal and institutional and culture problem. A joint statement by our center, with others, including collaborators on ALI Principles sent this out in a Changing the Law to Change Policing statement yesterday.

ON WHAT DEFUND THE POLICE MEANS RIGHT NOW

Darrell Miller, law professor

The question about defund the police is about what the slogan means. Unfortunately, I think its got so much meaning it really doesnt work effectively as a slogan. Defund the police, at its most useful and constructive, is a request to totally re-think how we do policing in America. Who does it, with what kind of tools, where, under what circumstances. Its about re-deploying resources to other non-policing functions that are also social services like job training, substance abuse programs, domestic violence prevention work.

Because its a slogan and easily misunderstood, its easily misunderstood to mean abolish the police. I really think that will be detrimental to Black Lives Matter and to black lives in general.

I think that will empower and embolden vigilantes, people who will engage in armed self-help in the way that led to the deaths of Trayvon Martin 10 years ago and Ahmaud Arbery earlier this year.

The issue about abolishing the police or dis-establishing the police has the potential to abolish the one police function thats politically accountable. If someone designates himself as an armed neighborhood watchman and stops me, I dont have any control over that person. I cant make them wear a body camera. I cant make them engage in de-escalation techniques. I dont even know who to file a report with.

With a police force that is taxpayer-supported, that is politically accountable, I have some control as a voter and a taxpayer over what kind of force is being used in my community.

ON HOW OUR NATIONS FOUNDERS ENVISIONED POLICING

Laura Edwards, history professor

At the time of the nations founding, policing as a term was used broadly to refer to governing.

It was about resolving a wide range of problems and injustices, and everybody had responsibility for policing in this broad sense. And everyone could draw on police powers as well, and that was particularly important for people who were unequal, who were on the margins of society, who could then call on government and their authority to back them in various complex problems in their lives. We tend to forget all that today.

We think of policing now only as police forces of uniformed officers. But that didnt exist in the 18th and early 19th century. And we think policing only refers to crime, but that was not what policing was about then. It was about this broader sense.

It was written into our constitutional order. States delegated authority to local governments so people could participate actively in the policing of their communities.

People have the constitutional authority to hold modern-day police forces accountable. But they also have more power than that. They have the right to actually hold and define how government uses police powers, and to what end.

This is important because police powers are actually about more than crime and criminals. Theyre about resolving conflicts. Theyre also about addressing the problems of people in trouble. Theyre about rectifying deep-seeded injustices.

The past tells us that policing isnt an either/or issue. Its not that you do it or dont to it. Its actually about how we do it and that really is about our constitutional order.

ON HOLDING POLICE ACCOUNTABLE

Garrett

Its very, very hard to hold police officers liable, even in fatal shootings captured on video. Because police benefit from another layer of benefit of the doubt, reasonableness, what could they do in the circumstances? They have to make split-second decisions. Thats sort of the tenor of a lot of the reasoning of federal judges.

Also important, though, is internal accountability within police departments. Police discipline. Police policies matter even though theyre just on paper because if police officers do something to violate their policies, something should happen.

ON THE LIKELIHOOD OF REFORM FIRST AT THE LOCAL LEVEL

Miller

I think were seeing it already. To the extent that some of the demands of activists in the streets over the last few days are actually percolating to thought leaders, to political leaders. Some of the proposals for police reform are already being drafted as draft legislation in Congress. Abolishing qualified immunity for police officers, conditioning funding for local police on keeping accurate records on use of force or discriminatory policing.

To the extent that there are truly groups that truly believe that police are not needed, they are also active. I am doubtful that as a nationwide matter we will see the widespread disestablishment of police. But if local communities, in Minneapolis or Seattle, want to take some or all of the defund the police rhetoric and implement it as policy, they have the ability to do so. I just hope they choose wisely when they end up making these demands into policy.

ON RECOMMENDATIONS FOR REFORMING POLICE

Garrett

I think we do need to rethink what we need police for. What the structures are for policing agencies. Why do we so often arrest people? Why do we so often place people in jail, which we didnt even just a few decades ago? During COVID, urgent new questions have been asked about why people end up in jail for petty crimes, largely due to the inability to afford cash bail.

Policing agencies are needed in many places for public safety, obviously. But there are lot of very small police agencies that cant possibly follow best practices or have good training. We need to consolidate police departments.

We need to revise criminal codes and consider decriminalizing (some) offenses. We dont need to be arresting people, let alone holding them in neck holds, for using a counterfeit $20 bill.

ON HOW POLICING WAS SEEN POSITIVELY EARLY IN US HISTORY

Edwards

At our founding, policing had very broad and positive connotations. We now associate all these negative connotations to it in the sense that we associate it with police forces that are separate from people and are enforcing laws and trying to root out crime. Its become a very negative kind of thing.

People imagine policing in the past to be simply about militias. But militias were actually organized to address specific threats, and were very temporary, and then disappeared after the threats were gone.

Ordinary people, marginalized people could also use police powers to address what they saw as the major issues and problems in society. I think were missing that part of it. Historically, police powers belonged to everyone.

ON ONE POSITIVE CHANGE YOUD LIKE TO SEE RIGHT NOW

Garrett

Id like to see comprehensive, state-level police reform and criminal justice reform legislation in states like North Carolina.

We need comprehensive reform. We need to be looking to our local elected leaders to make deep change.

Edwards

Id like to see us think about the protesters and also their demands as what is a part of our original constitutional order, and return to that, and what we see now with the way police forces are acting, and what theyve become, is actually aberrant, what is actually a move away from the original constitutional compact.

Miller

The fact that were at a moment, I think, where people really do recognize that this is a problem, that this is a problem that needs to be addressed, that America is not living up to the best version of itself, and that some kind of real, substantial, data-driven changes are available and can be implemented soon I hope people will recognize the magnitude of this moment.

The experts:

Laura EdwardsLaura Edwardsis a professor of history at Duke University. Her areas of expertise include womens history and legal history, including history of the law in the 19thcentury South and the legal history ofpolicing.She is the author of several books, including A Legal History of the Civil War and Reconstruction: A Nation of Rights.ledwards@duke.edu

Brandon GarrettBrandon Garrettis a law professor at Duke University and a leading scholar of criminal justice outcomes, evidence and constitutional rights. Garretts research and teaching interests include forensic science, eyewitness identification, corporate crime, constitutional rights and habeas corpus and criminal justice policy. He is the author of five books.bgarrett@law.duke.edu

Darrell MillerDarrell Milleris a law professor at Duke University who specializes incivil rights, constitutional law, civil procedure and state and local government law. He also co-directs theCenter for Firearms Lawat Duke. Miller is the co-author ofThe Positive Second Amendment: Rights, Regulation, and the Future of Heller(2018).dmiller@law.duke.edu

Read the original here:
Reimagining the Criminal Justice System | Duke Today - Duke Today

FOX Business Stuart Varney weighs in on Seattles autonomous zone.

FOX BusinessStuart Varney, in his latest My Take, argues the autonomous zone in Seattle, Washington, poses a problemfor Democrat leaders.

An insurrection in Seattle. Inelite, polite society, the occupied downtown is called an autonomous zone, Varney said. Its really a no-go area for police. The rule of law, overthrown. Yes, an insurrection. The mayor, Jenny Durkan, says its ok for the people to challenge authority. Its patriotism she says. Patriotic to reject and throw out the rule of law? Thats a stretch!

VARNEY: IT'S TIME FOR SOME SERIOUS QUESTIONING OF LIBERAL POLITICS

Pedestrians walk past a mural painted on plywood covering a window Monday, June 8, 2020, in Seattle, near the site of a demonstration the night before at a Seattle police precinct where protests continued over the death of George Floyd, a black man w

Varney said the center of an American city has been turned over to anarchists and liberals dont know how to handle it.

They are embarrassed. This insurrection is their creation, but they've lost control, Varney said. In Seattle, the police left their precinct, removed files and equipment and turned the building over to the mob. Who is going to take it back and how?

He said one reason behind this is mayors turning a blind eye to violence and looting.

VARNEY: AMERICAN UNITY REPLACED BY A NATION ON EDGE

The police get the blame. Looters go free. Nobody cares about burned out small businesses, Varney said. America's big cities have become victims of their own liberal leadership.

President Trump has said he wont let Seattle be occupied by anarchists.

If they don't straighten that situation out, we're going to straighten it out, Trump told Fox News' Harris Faulkner during an interview on Thursday.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE ON FOX BUSINESS

Two people embrace Monday, June 8, 2020, in Seattle, near the site of a demonstration the night before at a Seattle police precinct where protests continued over the death of George Floyd, a black man who was in police custody in Minneapolis. (AP Pho

Imagine, a president threatens to take back control from anarchists and its considered inflammatory! Varney said.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE ON FOX BUSINESS

Varney believes the revoltin Seattle is an issue for Democrats.

America does not look kindly on burning, looted cities and has very little time for anarchist takeovers. And this is happening in Democrat-run areas, he said. They really should learn the lesson of 1968. Back then, cities were burning. The media hated the Republican candidate in that year's presidential election. Richard Nixon stood for law and order and won!

GET FOX BUSINESS ON THE GO BY CLICKING HERE

See original here:
Varney: There's an insurrection in Seattle - Fox Business

January 2020 dawned with the news of the Australian bushfire crisis, and it would appear that the world has been in free fall ever since, as nationwide protests, riots, natural calamities and an unprecedented global pandemic assumed headlines. With the future suspended in limbo, there is no denying the importance of staying informed about whats coming next. However, experts believe that the constant parade of gloom-and-doom news pieces can be detrimental to mental health. Holding your breath while reading the headlines, difficulty in eating or sleeping after reading the news, increased signs of fatigue while doing lesser than normal, feeling desensitised to the headlines or experiencing a sense of numbness in response to the ever-escalating calamitiesif any of this sounds familiar to you, it might be time to step away from the news.

The sentiment is echoed by psychologist and published researcher, Tanya Percy Vasunia. She says, At this particular moment in history, it is unsurprising that the news is making people anxious. COVID-19, cyclones, economic recession, the plight of the migrant workersand these are just a few of the headlines. Buzzwords like new normal and we are in this together continue to circulate, without giving us much clarity on what this new normal looks like and how we are in this together when clearly some people are more at risk health-wise and others are facing financial ruin. The truth is that we have all faced anxiety at some point of time in our lives, but never before has this collective feeling of uncertainty plagued millennials and generation Z. Ironically, we look to the news for answers, only to find that there are no answers. Anxiety works on the principle of possibility, and from where we stand currently, anything seems possible and that is terrifying.

She believes that continued exposure to negative information can shift anxious feelings into a full-blown anxiety disorder. While a mental health professional should be consulted at this point, stigma can often prevent this. She elaborates, A few days ago, a client of mine during a session spoke about how the world seems to be drowning. When we explored this further, he spoke about how every time he saw the news, there was one new problem, one new obstacle and he felt that he, and the world, just couldnt catch a break. We discussed how its hard to separate yourself from all the uncertainty and explored a few ways of holding onto the things that were certain, like his ability to donate money to help those in need, his ability to care for his family and so on.

Vasunia believes that the constant stream of negative information is unhelpful for the upkeep of mental health. She elaborates, This year has been difficult on many levels and unfortunately, the sensationalisation of negative news by the media increases the sense of doom that people are experiencing. It triggers anxiety, reinforces anxious thoughts and further impacts ones mood.

The Mumbai-based psychologist cautions about the telltale signs that the consumption of daily news is contributing to anxiety. Some common symptoms include the inability to switch off news apps and television, followed by unhelpful rumination about whats coming next. You may find yourself nervous every time you get a news alert on a device. After watching the news, you might find yourself feeling helpless and have trouble sleeping or relaxing. It is also common to find yourself feeling agitated and unhappy with loved ones after watching the news, she says.

While the benefits of giving yourself a breather are manifold, theres no denying the common stigma of being judged for not knowing whats happening with the world. Vasunia explains, We are under the misguided notion that knowledge equates to power. However, in the current socio-economic climate, new information is unlikely to provide any earth-shattering revelation. And if there is an earth-shattering turn of events, there are enough people who will call, text, FaceTime, drop a message on WhatsApp or call you on Zoom to let you know. The most powerful knowledge comes from having a better understanding of your mental headspace. If the news is getting to you and you take a step back, whats the worst that can happen? The time off will give the chance for more learning, the understanding of how to relax, the ability to channel unhelpful thoughts into positive actions and most importantly, you will have a renewed capacity to tackle whatever the year has left to send our way.

If you find yourself experiencing disillusionment or anxiety in the face of everyday news, Vasunia details certain measures for monitoring your exposure to news. If this year has brought anything to light, it is that physical and mental health are crucial factors when dealing with any kind of a crisis, she says. In times like these, self-care is of paramount importance, whether it is indulging your senses with music and meditation apps or reaching out to your support network. If you know of someone experiencing escalating levels of news-related anxiety, enable them to reach out and ask for help from mental health professionals.

Set aside a limited time every day to look over the news, preferably before a time-consuming activity, such as a workout. This will allow you to focus on something else after reading or watching the news. Furthermore, exercise has proven instrumental in improving mood and mental health.

Dont be afraid to look for the good and actively focus on it. While there are many things going wrong, there are things going well too. By balancing the kind of information you receive, you can maintain a healthy balance which will prevent you from feeling triggered or going into a downward spiral.

Notifications take away your ability to choose when you want to look at the news. When the world feels like it is spinning out of control, why allow another element that you cannot control to be present? Taking back control will assist in the overall reduction of news-related anxiety and low moods. This includes secondary sources of news, such as WhatsApp groups, Facebook status updates and Instagram Stories, among others.

For instance, Mondays can be devoid of Facebook and Instagram, Tuesdays can have no WhatsApp, Wednesdays can be no news apps and Thursdays can be without televised news. Creating a similar schedule for yourself makes for a simple yet effective way to avoid being bombarded by information from multiple platforms at the same time.

It is also essential to ensure that you arent just talking about the news to your family and friends. During the pandemic, there hasnt been much to do and it is natural to discuss the goings-on of the world. However, try to ensure that this isnt the only conversation you are having. Make it a point to talk about other things, such as books you are reading, television shows you are watching, new recipes youre trying out and so on. This is a good way of moving away from news-related anxiety while still learning new pieces of information.

5 truths you need to know about social media, and how to counter digital anxiety

One writers guide to digital detox (and possibly Nirvana)

Feeling anxious? Heres how to manage it

Read the original:
How to know when its time to step away from the news cycle - VOGUE India

LONDON The Premier League will take an estimated 1 billion (S$1.76 billion) hit because of the coronavirus pandemic, with empty stadiums and lingering safety fears awaiting its clubs as they prepare to restart the season.

The English top flight has been suspended since March 13 and while it will resume next Wednesday, three months of no live football is expected to weigh heavily on its revenue for the 2019-2020 financial year.

According to an annual review of the game by Deloitte Sports Business Group that was published yesterday, around 500 million of the lost revenue will be the result of rebates to broadcasters, a reduction in ticket sales due to games being played behind closed doors and reduced commercial contracts.

Another 500 million will be deferred to the following financial year.

With a reported total revenue of 5.2 billion in the 2018-19 term, the Premier League is the world's richest football competition by far and it continues to attract interest from overseas buyers.

Despite a projected rapid recovery in finances, the pandemic could force Premier League clubs to reassess cost controls and focus on long-term stability, according to Dan Jones, partner and head of the sports business group at Deloitte.

"The decisions taken now will determine if the 2019-20 season is seen in future as the end of a golden age or the start of a better, stronger new era," he said.

Separately, all the Premier League clubs yesterday approved a range of match-day protocols for the resumption, starting with the Manchester City v Arsenal and Aston Villa v Sheffield United games.

The latest shareholders' meeting discussed the details of medical and operational rules, including how many backroom staff will be allowed to attend away games.

Clubs will also have a minute's silence for those who have died in the pandemic while kits will also sport a heart-shaped badge in honour of the work done by the National Health Service and front-line staff.

English Premier League 5.2 billion (S$9.1 billion)

Spanish La Liga 3.4 billion (S$5.4 billion)

German Bundesliga 3.3 billion (S$5.2 billion)

Italian Serie A 2.5 billion (S$4 billion)

French Ligue 1 1.9 billion (S$3 billion)

All the remaining 92 games will be played behind closed doors and a strict limit of 300 people - including broadcast staff, media personnel, commentators, doping officials and scouts - will be allowed in stadiums on match days.

Stadiums will be split into red, amber and green zones with the red zone to include 20 players, 12 coaching and medical staff and a further five "essential staff" per team.

Other measures involve the deep cleaning of corner flags, goal posts, substitution boards and match balls, while safe distancing must be observed when appropriate.

These are among the requirements imposed by the British government so that professional sports, including top-tier football, can safely resume.

BLOOMBERG, REUTERS

Link:
Premier League revenue will suffer $1.8b virus shock - The Straits Times

Facebook has begun labeling media outlets that are wholly or partially under the editorial control of their government, following an announcement of the policy in 2019. It will start labeling ads from these outlets later this year, as well as banning state-controlled media from advertising inside the US.

The company is labeling these pages because they combine the influence of a media organization with the strategic backing of a state, and we believe people should know if the news they read is coming from a publication that may be under the influence of a government.

Facebook labels state-controlled media outlets based on a variety of factors, including information about their ownership and funding, the level of transparency around their sources, and the existence of accountability systems like a corrections policy. Outlets can appeal with evidence that they operate independently, including laws that protect editorial freedom and a credible assessment from an outside source. Otherwise, Facebook will add a notice to the outlets pages worldwide, and labels will appear on News Feed posts in the US.

You can already see labels on the pages and posts of some outlets that have been blamed for spreading propaganda in the US, including Sputnik and RT. Theyre both now defined as state-controlled media, along with other outlets like China Daily. Facebook isnt the first to do something like this; YouTube experimented with labeling state-funded news channels in 2018, although enforcement has been inconsistent.

Facebook says state-controlled outlets rarely advertise in the US. But its blocking those ads out of an abundance of caution to provide an extra layer of protection against various types of foreign influence in the public debate ahead of the November 2020 election in the US. This supplements Facebooks existing removal of inauthentic pages that spread propaganda or disinformation.

This labeling feature is part of a larger effort to protect the 2020 elections integrity. However, Facebook has still faced criticism for choosing not to fact-check politicians including President Donald Trump on its platform.

Read the original:
Facebook starts labeling state-controlled media pages - The Verge