Indiana does not have a statue against driving "high". Indiana does, however, have statues against driving while intoxicated and/or driving while impaired.
So, rather than "confuse" their audience with legal jargon, WPTA merely changed some words around. This, to make their news story more "relate-able" to their ignorant Indiana audience by adding "street" jargon, everyday words, conversational writing. What's the harm, it's only silly legal words?
What's the harm? First, WPTA, technically, is lying to their audience. The woman was not charged with driving while high. Second, WPTA further damages their already shaky credibility with their audience by assuming they are ignorant and foolish and need to be spoon-fed information so as not to confuse them. And further, if WPTA will cut corners like this, what's to prevent them from playing fast and loose with other "facts" that they don't think their audience will grasp or embrace.
The Maven recalls it was WPTA who published this gem a few years ago, noting with near astonishment that the jury verdict was unanimous. Apparently it was news to them......that a verdict in a criminal case required a unanimous verdict. Who knew?
The News Sentinel gets the story correct, and does not insult their readers.
Here's the link:
http://www.news-sentinel.com/news/local/crime/Woman-charged-for-hitting--injuring-pedestrian-in-December-at-Walmart
You can't expect them to write past their intelligence level...
ReplyDeleteAnd that's why when I want more TRUTH than fiction, I go to the N/S.
ReplyDeleteI only subscribe to the J-g because they have GARFIELD in the comics...PLUS, I enjoy seeing how left-of-center they are when it comes to reporting.
(always good to start your day with laughter, right?)
Stay safe.