Lived in LA since 1975. The LAPD did grow arrogant, distant and a bit rude in dealing with people–all people. I don’t know any cops BTW, and read the Times every day, but we still admire the LAPD. Its a damn tough job with fewer officers than it needs. We know OK?
I can see that the LAT gives them no breaks and frankly, no fair reporting. The Rodney King case was a sad example: they never gave a fair shake to the officers: legal periodicals covered the Simi Valley trial and the facts; even the American Lawyer came out with an article noting that perhaps the cops had been run out of town on a rail. From what I read outside the LAT, the officers got hosed. But the Times pandered to the community’s most outraged and least informed mouths, choosing to pander not provide the facts.
The Times still has the same slant: police in trouble get big print: police officer saves man from buring car might merit an inch or two. But take heart guys! You know “Dad does good job of raising Kids” get no press as against “deadbeat Dad” extravaganzas.
The weird thing it that the Times hurts LA. The “minorities hardest hit” slant convinces the rest of us that the government, ACLU or a foundation will handle it. And by convincing me that no one at the Times is interested in my problems. The “anti-police” slant convinces me that the Times is always overboard on it, so I have to internally discount what the Times says somewhat. (PS: ever hear the Times complain about suspended city or state employees getting paid while on administrative leave? No? No kidding)
LAPD should take heart: we all know the Times is slanted. We as dads, taxpayers, people that don’t have time to join noisy demonstrations, that feel our taxes being drained off to god knows what–we feel it too.
