Posted by: citizenmaggie Sun, Oct 01 2006 The Newstimes gets it wrong again! Welcome to their personal "Spin Zone". There were not 200 protestors. Even with the ones that came from N.Y., N.J., and the legal students.
[...]
I cannot for the life of me understand how the news is consistently reported in such a one sided manner. So slanted to the left it is ridiculous. Let's just hope when the paper sells, the new owners present things in a fair and balanced way. For instance, why weren't the poll results published that showed over 80% of the people supported the ICE picking up these people? I'm writing to the editor of the paper to ask why - they need to remember, the subscribers of the NewsTimes are NOT the illegals.
Reality #1:
Hmm, looks like about 200 to me. In fact, I say that figure might be a bit low.
(Click on image to enlarge)
Reality #2: An unscientific poll should never be considered a source of information in any article and should never be considered reliable simply because there are many ways one could skew the poll in their favor.
The best example of this is when there is a presidential debate. After the debate is over, messages go out on various blogs asking their readers to participate in the poll l and vote for their candidate. In the case of the News-Times poll, members of the Connecticut Citizens for Immigration Control (CCIC) and U.S. Citizens for Immigration Law Enforcement (USCILE) participate in the online comments and any online polling that is immigration-related.
Anti-immigrant groups like these (which actually are the same group, they just have a different way of approaching the subject, the CCIC started in Danbury) use the message boards like the one on the News-Times to spread their message and communicate with each other. You see, it’s their belief that if they flood the boards with anti-immigrant messages, they can give the impressions that a majority of the readers share their viewpoint (which is not true). I’m a frequent reader of the News-Times online but I do not have an account to post messages and I can assure you that a clear majority of the online viewers do not have a online account either.
The News-Times is popular among the anti-immigrant organizations across the country because the situation in Danbury has been in the news starting with the actions of Mayor Boughton when he tried to get local police to enforce federal laws and when he cracked down on volleyball games (I kid you not). For the News-Times to take a poll like that even remotely seriously, they would have to check the IP addresses of all who voted and find out which people are actually from the area. Now, this isn’t the hardest thing to do but is it really worth it when if you really want to do a poll, the News-Times could ask someone at Western Connecticut State University to do a real scientific poll?
Again, the News-Times is a very popular online newspaper among many anti-immigrant organizations across the country and those groups alert their readers whenever an immigration article posted and encourage them to participate in all immigration-related online polls. Because of these factors, one should always take an online poll with a fine grain of salt.
Now Maggie, I hope you took notes from today's lesson. There will be a quiz later...
04.25.22 (RADIO): WSHU Latino group call on Connecticut lawmakers to open a Danbury charter school
06.03.22 (OP-ED): KUSHNER: "Career Academy ‘a great deal for Danbury"
On September 26, 2007, ten plaintiffs filed suit in response to an arrest of aday laborers at a public park in Danbury, Connecticut. Plaintiffs amended their complaint on November 26, 2007.
The amended complaint states that plaintiffs sought to remedy the continued discriminatory and unauthorized enforcement of federal immigration laws against the Latino residents of the City of Danbury by Danbury's mayor and its police department.
Plaintiffs allege that the arrests violated their Fourth Amendment rights and the Connecticut Constitution because defendants conducted the arrests without valid warrants, in the absence of exigent circumstances, and without probable cause to believe that plaintiffs were engaged in unlawful activity. In addition, plaintiffs allege that defendants improperly stopped, detained, investigated, searched and arrested plaintiffs. Plaintiffs also allege that defendants violated their Fourteenth Amendment rights when they intentionally targeted plaintiffs, and arrested and detained them on the basis of their race, ethnicity and perceived national origin. Plaintiffs raise First Amendment, Due Process and tort claims.
Plaintiffs request declaratory relief, damages and attorneys fees.
Someone just won the Homer award...
On September 26, 2007, ten plaintiffs filed suit in response to an arrest of aday laborers at a public park in Danbury, Connecticut. Plaintiffs amended their complaint on November 26, 2007.
