The Story Told by The New York Times

In looking at the first five articles in The New York Times, one can draw conclusions about the story being told.  This posting will look at each article separately.

The first article points out that the police officers were clearly doing something wrong, as the officers "did not realize that they were being video taped" (AP 1).  From the beginning, the reader sees that something bad has happened, though the details are relatively unclear.  It also becomes clear that media will play an active role in the investigation, as the first paragraph addresses the existence of a video tape.  But there also is a lack of congruency surrounding the situation, as manifested by the varying responses.  Gates believes that only three officers will be examined, but Ms. Gibbons says it will be all fifteen. Different parties hold different beliefs on the appropriate course of action-- a reality that will be present throughout. An interesting aspect of this article is the lack of quotes from people who were actually involved in the incident.  Perhaps these individuals were told not to respond or simply chose not to, but this makes it hard to understand what is really going on.  Through this, one must question who said witnesses are, and how valid their responses really are.  Lastly, race does not come up until the very end of this article.  While it is blatantly at the center of the incident, this article fails to account for this fact. Perhaps the AP wanted to speak about the incident without delving into the details quite yet.

The second article begins by telling the reader that the Mayor hesitated for a month before coming to a decision.  This implies both a racial tension and an uncertainty regarding the appropriate course of action.  There is also an obvious concern for public appearances, as Bradley wants to restore safety and gain back the people's trust.  It is interesting that the Mayor ties this issue into Los Angeles and its welfare as a whole.  His decision to do so demonstrates a mistrust in Gates and an overall questioning of his character.  He seems to be trying to paint Gates as the villain in this situation.  Here the reader also sees the first implications of just how deep this issue really is.  It goes beyond merely looking at police brutality or race.  But this particular article still seems to skirt over the issue of race.  And there is also a continued lack of congruency over what happened and what needs to be done to fix it.  Next, people of merit and value in the situation are beginning to speak out.  This includes both the mayor and Gates among others, a fact that demonstrates a desire to bring justice to the incident.    Finally, Ripston likens this incident to the Reagan issues.  This speaks to desperate and bold attempts to do anything to defame Gates.

The third article makes the incident even more complicated because Rodney King becomes a criminal and a victim.  It becomes incredibly difficult to understand his character, and in turn, comprehend the complete magnitude of the situation.  His enigmatic identity furthers the unclear incident of this whole nature.  It is also essential that a date has been set for the trial, as this means important progress has been made.  Through outlining King's prior indiscretions, it seems that this article attempts to criminalize him and sway the reader's opinions.  This tactic is also embedded in earlier and later articles and applies to both sides of the case.

The fourth article demonstrates the the increased racial tensions surrounding the issue. The fact that Powell asks for the statements to be dismissed speaks to just how racially charged they must have been.  The articles seem to be finally addressing just how central race is in this incident.  We also see a questioning of the officer's character, something that previously did not really happen.  If they are going to bring King's previous indiscretions into the conversation, are they not also required to include previous commentary as well?  Here the article addresses both sides of the issue and attempts to bring an equilibrium into the equation.  Specific issues become pinpointed also, as it becomes a question of whether the force was necessary or excessive.  This article includes Rodney King and the effects on him as a means of portraying just how brutal the contact potentially was.  Lastly, it seems that the judge wants an answer quickly, as justice clearly needs to be brought to the situation.

In article five, the author depicts just how vastly this incident undermines the LAPD and the police system as a whole.  Violence and excessive force seem to be prevalent in the system, a reality that blatantly needs to be addressed.  The issue then becomes about crime as a whole, not just the justice system in Los Angeles.  This fact is addressed by the concept that a complete change is necessary in order to fix an inherently flawed system.  The implications of the beatings become apparent as people across the nation take notice and become involved.  It is also clear that there will be an incredible struggle to reach a correct and lawful decision in court.  The reader begins to question why the system is so flawed if Chief Gates is aware that brutality has occurred relatively frequently.  Broader questions are coming to the center of the issue as the details are further delved into.