1/
THREAD:
The @startribune did a story today about George Floyd and alleged “rewriting” of history by, among others, @lizcollin. Let’s look at the two reporters who wrote it, Andy Mannix (@andrewmannix) and Liz Sawyer (@ByLizSawyer), and how fair that story is.
THREAD:
The @startribune did a story today about George Floyd and alleged “rewriting” of history by, among others, @lizcollin. Let’s look at the two reporters who wrote it, Andy Mannix (@andrewmannix) and Liz Sawyer (@ByLizSawyer), and how fair that story is.
2/
I was lead counsel for MN State Trooper Ryan Londregan. Mannix/Sawyer covered that case. Both were unfair. Trooper Londregan shot a convicted felon as he reached for his gun and was driving away with Londregan’s partner half inside the vehicle. Look at what Sawyer reported:
I was lead counsel for MN State Trooper Ryan Londregan. Mannix/Sawyer covered that case. Both were unfair. Trooper Londregan shot a convicted felon as he reached for his gun and was driving away with Londregan’s partner half inside the vehicle. Look at what Sawyer reported:
/3
That highlighted portion is, and was, 100% false.
And I told Sawyer it was false before that headline appeared.
That highlighted portion is, and was, 100% false.
And I told Sawyer it was false before that headline appeared.
/4
Mannix was no better.
Here is a screen record of a long email I wrote to Mannix about his reporting on the Londregan case:
Mannix was no better.
Here is a screen record of a long email I wrote to Mannix about his reporting on the Londregan case:
/5
After some back-and-forth where I told him he was unfair, here is a screen shot at how he said I was “bullying” him and my response:
After some back-and-forth where I told him he was unfair, here is a screen shot at how he said I was “bullying” him and my response:
/6
Last thing on Londregan: When Mary Moriarty dismissed the murder, manslaughter, and felony first-degree assault charges against Trooper Londregan, who did she call to give the exclusive story?
Yep. Andy Mannix.
Last thing on Londregan: When Mary Moriarty dismissed the murder, manslaughter, and felony first-degree assault charges against Trooper Londregan, who did she call to give the exclusive story?
Yep. Andy Mannix.
/7
Back to today’s story. Today’s Mannix/Sawyer article discusses Liz’s “The Fall of Minneapolis” and then includes a section regarding her husband, Bob Kroll, entitled “The Kroll connection.” Why is that relevant? Why does the local media continually bring up Liz Collin’s husband when discussing her reporting?
Repeatedly mentioning a female journalist’s husband, especially when reporting on her professional work, reduces her identity to her relationship status rather than her own merit. This kind of framing is rarely applied to male journalists and reinforces outdated gender roles that suggest a woman’s success or perspective is tied to a man. It’s a subtle but damaging form of sexism. It also undermines Liz Collin’s EARNED credibility and independence as a professional.
Back to today’s story. Today’s Mannix/Sawyer article discusses Liz’s “The Fall of Minneapolis” and then includes a section regarding her husband, Bob Kroll, entitled “The Kroll connection.” Why is that relevant? Why does the local media continually bring up Liz Collin’s husband when discussing her reporting?
Repeatedly mentioning a female journalist’s husband, especially when reporting on her professional work, reduces her identity to her relationship status rather than her own merit. This kind of framing is rarely applied to male journalists and reinforces outdated gender roles that suggest a woman’s success or perspective is tied to a man. It’s a subtle but damaging form of sexism. It also undermines Liz Collin’s EARNED credibility and independence as a professional.
/8
If we’re talking about Liz Collin’s husband, then reciprocity is only fair.
Hey Andy, it looks like your wife works for the StarTribune too—then how, on earth, can you report on another journalist, right? And should it matter that Peggy Flanagan follows your wife on her private Instagram account? Does that mean you can’t report on Minnesota politics?
If we’re talking about Liz Collin’s husband, then reciprocity is only fair.
Hey Andy, it looks like your wife works for the StarTribune too—then how, on earth, can you report on another journalist, right? And should it matter that Peggy Flanagan follows your wife on her private Instagram account? Does that mean you can’t report on Minnesota politics?
/9
Hey Liz Sawyer, should it matter that your husband posts a lot of negative articles about Republicans, and an insult directed at Trump, on his Facebook account? Does that mean that you can’t report on politics?
Hey Liz Sawyer, should it matter that your husband posts a lot of negative articles about Republicans, and an insult directed at Trump, on his Facebook account? Does that mean that you can’t report on politics?
/10
Mannix has even admitted that "we" (presumably the StarTribune) "were ridiculing” Alpha News—some even-handed, fair journalist, right?!?
Mannix has even admitted that "we" (presumably the StarTribune) "were ridiculing” Alpha News—some even-handed, fair journalist, right?!?
/11
Now let’s next look at how Mannix/Sawyer characterize Katie Blackwell’s lawsuit against Liz Collin and Alpha News. Mannix/Sawyer note that the lawsuit was dismissed but said that “[t]he judge noted that viewers of the trial ‘might reasonably conclude that Collin’s and Alpha News’s characterizations of some of Blackwell’s statements were misleading or taken out of context.’” Let’s look at what Mannix/Sawyer failed to report about the Court Order—the entire Order is linked here:
alphanews.org/wp-content/upl…
Now let’s next look at how Mannix/Sawyer characterize Katie Blackwell’s lawsuit against Liz Collin and Alpha News. Mannix/Sawyer note that the lawsuit was dismissed but said that “[t]he judge noted that viewers of the trial ‘might reasonably conclude that Collin’s and Alpha News’s characterizations of some of Blackwell’s statements were misleading or taken out of context.’” Let’s look at what Mannix/Sawyer failed to report about the Court Order—the entire Order is linked here:
alphanews.org/wp-content/upl…
/12
The Order states the impression left by Blackwell that “the depicted technique [a knee-on-neck restraint] was never trained by MPD” is “undermined by evidence in the record,” such as “MPD training materials from 2018-2019—the period of Blackwell’s tenure—[which] included images of officers applying knees to the neck or upper back” and “34 officers swore they were trained or saw knee-to-neck training.” (Order at page 32.)
The Order states the impression left by Blackwell that “the depicted technique [a knee-on-neck restraint] was never trained by MPD” is “undermined by evidence in the record,” such as “MPD training materials from 2018-2019—the period of Blackwell’s tenure—[which] included images of officers applying knees to the neck or upper back” and “34 officers swore they were trained or saw knee-to-neck training.” (Order at page 32.)
/13
“Furthermore, MPD’s own Policy Manual (§ 5-311), in effect at the time, defined a neck restraint as including compression ‘with an arm or leg.’ This conflicts with Blackwell’s suggestion that MPD neck restraints were trained using only arms.” (Order at page 32.)
NOT REPORTED.
“Furthermore, MPD’s own Policy Manual (§ 5-311), in effect at the time, defined a neck restraint as including compression ‘with an arm or leg.’ This conflicts with Blackwell’s suggestion that MPD neck restraints were trained using only arms.” (Order at page 32.)
NOT REPORTED.
/14
“Because the documentary evidence contradicts the unequivocal nature of her statements, the implication that [Blackwell’s] testimony was inconsistent with MPD’s policy and training is supportable and not defamatory.” (Order at page 33.)
NOT REPORTED.
“Because the documentary evidence contradicts the unequivocal nature of her statements, the implication that [Blackwell’s] testimony was inconsistent with MPD’s policy and training is supportable and not defamatory.” (Order at page 33.)
NOT REPORTED.
/15
“…MPD policy and training materials were at odds with key aspects of their testimony.” (Order at page 33.
NOT REPORTED.
“…MPD policy and training materials were at odds with key aspects of their testimony.” (Order at page 33.
NOT REPORTED.
/16
“The assertion that ‘it doesn’t seem like’ these witnesses were telling the truth generally aligns with the record’s substance. MPD’s neck restraint policy included use of the leg … Training slides showed applications using the leg … Officers testified that such techniques were permitted and were regularly taught and demonstrated … .” (Order at page 33.)
NOT REPORTED.
“The assertion that ‘it doesn’t seem like’ these witnesses were telling the truth generally aligns with the record’s substance. MPD’s neck restraint policy included use of the leg … Training slides showed applications using the leg … Officers testified that such techniques were permitted and were regularly taught and demonstrated … .” (Order at page 33.)
NOT REPORTED.
/17
“MPD policies authorized neck restraints using a leg … Training slides depicted the application of a knee to the upper back and neck area … Officers understood such techniques to be policy-consistent and part of their training … Under these facts, it is possible to interpret Blackwell’s testimony as incomplete or misleading by omission. Therefore, the challenged statement is substantially true … .” (Order at page 34.)
NOT REPORTED.
“MPD policies authorized neck restraints using a leg … Training slides depicted the application of a knee to the upper back and neck area … Officers understood such techniques to be policy-consistent and part of their training … Under these facts, it is possible to interpret Blackwell’s testimony as incomplete or misleading by omission. Therefore, the challenged statement is substantially true … .” (Order at page 34.)
NOT REPORTED.
/18
“Accordingly, each of the three statements challenged by Blackwell are not actionable because (1) they accurately reflect the gist of the available record; (2) they are supported by MPD policies, training materials, and sworn officer declarations … .” (Order at page 35.)
NOT REPORTED.
“Accordingly, each of the three statements challenged by Blackwell are not actionable because (1) they accurately reflect the gist of the available record; (2) they are supported by MPD policies, training materials, and sworn officer declarations … .” (Order at page 35.)
NOT REPORTED.
/19
“Yet MPD’s own policy manual and other officers indicate that similar techniques were part of MPD’s training materials and policies. Even if Blackwell attempted to distinguish MRT … the overall record supports the film’s implication that her testimony was at odds with MPD’s institutional policy manual and the training some MPD officers claim they received.” (Order at page 50.)
NOT REPORTED.
“Yet MPD’s own policy manual and other officers indicate that similar techniques were part of MPD’s training materials and policies. Even if Blackwell attempted to distinguish MRT … the overall record supports the film’s implication that her testimony was at odds with MPD’s institutional policy manual and the training some MPD officers claim they received.” (Order at page 50.)
NOT REPORTED.
/20
“In her testimony, Blackwell stated unequivocally that [it] was ‘not something we train.’ She did not acknowledge that MPD’s written policy permitted such a technique or that its training materials had historically included it. Whether or not this omission was intentional, the sting of Statement 5—that she and others misled the public—is not materially false.” (Order at page 50.)
NOT REPORTED.
“In her testimony, Blackwell stated unequivocally that [it] was ‘not something we train.’ She did not acknowledge that MPD’s written policy permitted such a technique or that its training materials had historically included it. Whether or not this omission was intentional, the sting of Statement 5—that she and others misled the public—is not materially false.” (Order at page 50.)
NOT REPORTED.
/21
The documentary’s “core message—that [Blackwell’s] statements conflicted with MPD’s policy manual—is substantially true.” (Order at page 52.)
NOT REPORTED.
The documentary’s “core message—that [Blackwell’s] statements conflicted with MPD’s policy manual—is substantially true.” (Order at page 52.)
NOT REPORTED.
/22
“Blackwell stated that [the] restraint was ‘not something we train.’ But training slides do depict similar techniques, and multiple officers swore they were trained in knee-on-neck control.” (Order at page 54.)
NOT REPORTED.
“Blackwell stated that [the] restraint was ‘not something we train.’ But training slides do depict similar techniques, and multiple officers swore they were trained in knee-on-neck control.” (Order at page 54.)
NOT REPORTED.
/23
Remarkably, one can even compare a fair StarTribune journalist’s reporting of the SAME CASE with Mannix/Sawyer. On the left is Mannix/Sawyer’s “reporting” today, and on the right is Jeff Day’s reporting on the SAME CASE:
Remarkably, one can even compare a fair StarTribune journalist’s reporting of the SAME CASE with Mannix/Sawyer. On the left is Mannix/Sawyer’s “reporting” today, and on the right is Jeff Day’s reporting on the SAME CASE:
/24
The @StarTribune turned off comments to the Mannix/Sawyer article. Why? If we are so proud of the First Amendment, then why not let the public see exactly what they think of this “journalism”?
The @StarTribune turned off comments to the Mannix/Sawyer article. Why? If we are so proud of the First Amendment, then why not let the public see exactly what they think of this “journalism”?
/25
I could go on and on, but you get the point. The reality is that Andy Mannix and Liz Sawyer are not journalists.
Like me, they are advocates.
I could go on and on, but you get the point. The reality is that Andy Mannix and Liz Sawyer are not journalists.
Like me, they are advocates.
/26
The difference between us is that I admit it.
Owning it? Yeah, @andymannix and @bylizsawyer, that’s kind of my thing. You should both try to give it a whirl between your repeated excuses and pretending to be fair.
The difference between us is that I admit it.
Owning it? Yeah, @andymannix and @bylizsawyer, that’s kind of my thing. You should both try to give it a whirl between your repeated excuses and pretending to be fair.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
