General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsGreat read re Alex Jones trial - Slate - "Reality Check"
Reality Check
Alex Jones trial isnt legally significant. But its still culturally terrifying.
By Dahlia Lithwick
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2017/04/the_alex_jones_trial_won_t_set_any_legal_precedents.html
The Alex Jones custody case unspooling last week and this week in Austin, Texas, is many things. It is a spectacle, a human tragedy, and an hourly reminder that America is mostly goddamn horrifying. What it is notwith all due respect to BuzzFeeds Charlie Warzel, who has been covering the living heck out of the proceedingsis the 21st Century equivalent of the Scopes Monkey Trial. There is nothing interesting on trial here. Competing views of parenting arent on trial, nor is any important legal principle, and no interesting legal precedent will result. The only lodestar of any child custody case is the best interest of the children, and in this case, too, the battle is not between media narrative and celebrity culture or the boundaries between a public self and a private self: Its a contest between which of two seemingly very flawed parents will be less terrible for their children, and which custodial arrangement will screw them up the least.
Jones v. Jones isnt going to be the trial of the century or even the trial of the week, legally speaking. Its just going to be an excruciating display of what divorce lawyers see every day: parades of experts and paid professionals telling stories about missed visitation and forgotten teacher meetings. There may be an amuse bouche of shirtlessness and chili and ironic pleas for media restraint, but what this jury is seeing, day in and day out, is what it looks like when two wealthy former partners are prepared to spare no expense to destroy the other, with allegations about sex, booze, and money as tabs 1-1,000 in the trial binder.
That doesnt mean this whole enterprise isnt a must-see cultural meditation on vitally important issues of the day. Todd Gitlin probes one such question here: Doesnt Jones claim that he is a mere performance artist (he both embraces and rejects that characterization on the witness stand) perfectly mirror Donald Trumps incessant claims, often after the fact, that his most explosive statements were jokes or sarcasm? Gitlin ascribes the ability of both Trump and Jones to dismiss whatever they say as part of our no accountability culture. This culture ensures that anyone who can claim legions of passionate listeners and fans is granted the imprimatur of having something important to say.
Trump is a huge fan of Infowars; he has been known to peddle some of Jones nuttiest theories, and has called Jones and his show amazing. It shouldnt be surprising to see Jones straddling Trumps say-it-deny-it-excuse-it strategy, even as he stands to lose custody of his own three children. Trump has taught America a master class in the consequences of no-consequence speech actsoh and the lesson is that sometimes you end up president.
snip - much more at the link. Long...worthwhile...and really scary.
Gothmog
(145,157 posts)My daughter has been having fun following this case but the judge banned live tweeting from the courtroom