Who's Really Paying For The Wings' New Arena, And Who Should Be

     This is a fight I saw coming the day the Illitches announced their intention to build a new stadium for the Detroit Red Wings. And in my mind, it's a fight that needs to be fought.

     But I gotta admit, this one hurts a bit.

     Not just for the fact that I really don't want to see the Wings leave Joe Louis Arena for a smaller, no doubt more expensive stadium, or that for all it's faults, the Joe's got it's charm, but the fact that in making this argument, I have to give the FJM treatment to a dude that I have a lot of respect for, who knows hockey better than any sports talker in this town, and that I've often wondered how the hell he's not on one of the several sports stations in the D while guys like Dan Leach and Drew Lane are still somehow employed.

    I'm referring to this piece by former WDFN host Sean Baligian in response to the article excerpted by Deadspin about the new Red Wings arena, for which the public is on the hook for about 58% of the $450 million cost. The crux of Baligian's argument is that there is a 'sense of entitlement' among sports fans. How dare we, as fans, expect Illitch to pick up the tab for a building from which his company, and only his company, will profit.

     #1. So many interesting tidbits in the piece, I will start here, as the Deadspin piece reported an alleged pricetag of around 650 Million for the new Red Wing arena.  Of that, an estimated 284.5 million dollars will come from "public investment". Cool, Glad we got that straight. So, does that mean that The Illitch family is pumping in the rest of the 365.5 million dollars? What a horrible man, He simply doesnt care about the problems is Detroit.

     About that... the cost of the arena itself is $450 million, and taxes will account for $261.5 million of that, which means Ilitch is kicking in $188.4 million of his company's money. Simple math, as you like to say. That other $200 million is for development around the new arena, on property Illitch actually paid market value for, as opposed to the 39 lots or so on which the arena will sit, which the city sold to him for... $1.

     What a horrible, uncaring man putting up that much of his OWN money for something that will CLEARLY pump money back into the local economy, as we have seen for years at Joe Louis Arena and Comerica Park. "Built off the backs of taxpayers" indeed.

     I don't think this is as 'clear' as you make it out to be. Studies have been done that disprove the whole "subsidizing sports stadiums is good for the economy" theory. While there is certainly benefit to having these franchises in town, the cost to the public to subsidize simply outweighs any benefit, and serves mostly to inflate the value of the franchises. 

     #4 Please pay attention to this point, this is the most important one. Do people realize that the Tigers have LOST money quite often in various yearly reports according to Forbes? Yep, a net operating loss, including a report based on the 2012 Season released about a year ago. The Red Wings? Well, again, it is estimated that they lost 14 to 15 million dollars in 2004, the season before the salary cap became reality in the NHL. Why? Well, This horrible man wants to win, and spends a lot of money in an effort to help his team win. Doing this, he knows that fans will show up, spend money, and the entire area can prosper. You know, Like he wants to do so, as a BUSINESSMAN.

     Now this is clearly a misleading argument altogether. For one, the salary cap has been in effect almost a decade now, leaving that part of your argument null and void. And to assume each of these franchises operate in a vacuum is disingenuous and dishonest. No one doubts that Illitch wants his teams to be competitive, and spends the money to make it so. But it is highly doubtful that the entirety of Ilitch Holdings, which owns Olympia Entertainment, both teams, a fairly lucrative pizza business you might have heard of, and dozens of businesses in the surrounding areas, is losing money on a year-to-year basis.

     The interesting tidbit here is: While the author is using melo-dramatic lines like "Built off the backs of taxpayers" in an effort to work the entitled out there into a rabid lather, I guess he kinda neglected to ask WHO has to eat the losses that come up? Did Illitch ask the community to pony up when it was HIM that worked under varying operating losses? Oh yes, I forgot, because he is a rich businessman, he is just supposed to accept the losses, pour in all of HIS money, and everybody else profits.

     If by that, you mean "no one else profits," then sure. Per the Freep, the agreement under which the city made about $7 million annually in revenue off the team's home games, receiving a percentage of ticket and concessions sales, ceases to exist when the move is complete. In addition, the Illitches would keep all proceeds from any sale of naming rights. All well and good, were the public not paying 60% of the cost for the whole thing.

     I mean, Think about it: Are the "backs of the taxpayers" losing money when people are coming downtown 81 times a year, plus playoffs, at Comerica? Are those poor, tired backs losing money and paying OUT for 41 games and playoffs at the Joe or the new arena? Hell no. The have been able to reap, and will continue to reap, any profit, with ZERO loss mind you, from these ventures.

     Except that once again, no, the "poor tired backs" are reaping not one red cent from this. Hell, Illitch wouldn't even agree to a community benefits agreement which would require him to hire a certain percentage of actual Detroiters to complete this project. So how can you really say that the public reaps all that much benefit from it's investment? And of course, there is the fact that part of the taxes that are funding this project are being diverted from the state's school aid fund. 

     What I fail to understand here is, how in the hell are fans "entitled" by demanding that the guy who will take in literally all revenue from the actual arena itself (I'm not talking about businesses in and around the arena, though the Illitch organization will likely have a financial interest in many of those as well) pay for the damn thing himself? If we're going to be charged upwards of $50 for nosebleed seats for a regular-season game in the current stadium, not to mention get absolutely gouged for concessions ($18 for a $5 Hot-N'-Ready?) how is it unreasonable to not want additional money taken from us to finance said gouging?

     Wake up, Man

     Indeed.

The Pistons, Burke, Lame Ducks, And Rearranging The Deck Chairs...

     When the prodigal son returned home a few weeks back, he proved in short order what we all knew to be true since June, and something that most fans came to realize a few years ago.

     The first is that Joe Dumars made a fatal error in picking Kentavious Caldwell-Pope over Trey Burke in this year's NBA Draft. And the second is that it's long past time for Joe D. to be given his walking papers in Auburn Hills. And now that Mo Cheeks' 50-game tenure as head coach has come to an end, it's a move that needs to happen now, for the future of this franchise.

     So many decisions seem so obvious in hindsight. Passing up Carmelo Anthony and Dwyane Wade to take the Human Victory Cigar, Darko Millicic, in the 2003 draft, seems like such a boneheaded move now, but at the time, it seemed the right one. This is one that looked bad at the time and looks even worse now.

     And when it comes to Dumars, those aren't as rare as they once were. He traded away the one player from the championship team that nobody wanted gone, and got a total headcase in return; then he signed Ben Gordon to a ridiculous deal, and because he wouldn't amnesty Gordon, the Bobcats may very well end up with our first-round draft pick next year unless we finish in the bottom 8.

     What's even worse is how the beat writers in this town defend him at all costs, beyond all logic or reason. One need look no further than the News' Vincent Goodwill for proof of that. GoodShill™ (Jeff Moss) has not only been singing Pope's praises all year, but it's clear he has an axe to grind with Burke. Between threatening to block anyone on Twitter who dares suggest that maybe Joe D. should have done his due diligence and made the obvious pick, reveling in the rare bad performance he's turned in for Utah, and insisting that the only reason that anyone wanted Burke here is because he played for Michigan, it's obvious that he's either desperate to toe the party line because he's firmly in Dumars' pocket Rob Parker-style, or Burke wronged him personally in some way. And note that when the news of Cheeks' firing broke, Goodwill was nowhere to be found until late Sunday night, when literally everyone else on Earth had already confirmed it. Though I must admit, it's beyond hilarious listening to him and 97.1's resident mindless slappy Dan Leach defending him on the station's postgame shows by repeatedly bringing up his 6 straight conference championships, despite not having a winning season in the last six years.

     And none of his arguments hold any water whatsoever. It wasn't just U-M slappies that wanted Burke here; the vast majority of State fans, including yours truly and noted Michigan-hater Mike Valenti, wanted Burke in Auburn Hills. And it's not as though we're that blind of a fanbase; everyone knew the second Joe D. made the "popular" pick of Mateen Cleaves in the 2000 draft, that the odds were against him thriving in the pros. Yet, the ever-disingenuous Dumars told us on draft night that "If it was that much of an issue for me, then I would have just made the popular selection and walked out here and everybody would have said, 'OK, you drafted Trey Burke.' But that's not what you do." But that's exactly what you did, for a player whose game didn't translate out of college nearly as well as Burke's already has.

     The worst of it, when it comes to this season, is that it's clear that Joe D has no regard for the future. Never mind the fact that, as we've established, if the Pistons end up lower than the 8th draft pick, they won't have a first rounder at all. Tom Gores has made it clear that the Pistons are to make the playoffs this year, or Dumars is out of a job. This sets the team up for long-term failure, whether he realizes it or not. Dumars is acting right now to save his own hide, passing up the better long-term player in Burke for the short-term fix in KCP; signing Josh Smith to a deal that will be impossible to unload in the near future; and sacrificing a first-rounder in a draft that looks to be as stacked as 2003's. It makes one wonder: why in the hell didn't Gores clean house completely when Mo Cheeks was shown the door? What good is done by keeping a lame-duck (and let's be clear, there is no way Joe D. should be brought back after this year, and he likely won't) who doesn't have the long-term interests of this team at heart?

     As for Cheeks' firing, it seems a move of desperation, and a sign of just how inflated the expectations are for this team. Sure, his rotations have sent many a Pistons fan into conniptions. The offense has been inconsistent to say the least. And the defense has just not been good. But is it really all on him? You go and sign Josh Smith, whose natural position is power forward, and force him into small forward, which you kind of have to because Andre Drummond and Greg Monroe. You trade for Brandon Jennings, who takes way too many shots for as inefficient of a shooter as he is; tries too hard to create his own shot too often; and when he does pass, he passes to the wrong guys. And you expect Cheeks to force several square pegs into round holes, and give him a little over half a season to do it? That's entirely unrealistic to ask of anyone.

     Now, I've always hated the idea of tanking a season to improve a team's draft situation. But when the choice is between having a first-round pick and not, is playing just well enough to make it as an 8-seed in the playoffs and getting bounced in the first round worth it? Or does it make more sense to just ship off the players that simply aren't long-term fits here, and at least get picks in return (something Joe D. won't want to do if Gores is still in "win now" mode)? Even if he does try and make a move at the trade deadline, Dumars has absolutely no leverage whatsoever right now, and every other GM in the league knows it. It's beyond obvious at this point that Joe is no longer calling the shots at 6 Championship Drive, and the axing of Cheeks proves it. A new GM would at least not have the axe hanging over his head right from the beginning, and have a chance to try and undo some of the previous regime's mistakes, and maybe even pull off a deadline deal of some sort.

     At this point, interim coach John Loyer doesn't exactly inspire a lot of confidence, even though he won his first game tonight, which I don't believe for a minute Cheeks couldn't have done. And having been designated as such for the remainder of the season, maybe Gores has come to terms with the fact that "win now and win later" simply isn't going to happen. I mean, he can't really think Loyer is the guy to get this team to the playoffs, right? Right? If he legitimately believes that Loyer is the guy to lead this team to the promised land over, say, Lionel Hollins or George Karl, he might have done the impossible and made the William Clay Ford Sr. regime in Allen Park look rational by comparison. And I don't want to believe that any more than you do.

     As such, I can only hope that Gores has realized the folly of trying to rebuild on the fly and remaining competitive in the short-term.

     It's the only explanation my sanity will allow for.

Jim Caldwell: When Settling Somehow Isn't Really Settling...

     Before Jim Caldwell had even been announced as the Detroit Lions' new head coach, the spin cycle had already begun.

     No sooner had Ken Whisenhunt stood up Martin Mayhew and Tom Lewand, than the local paid shills who cover this team were already singing the praises of Caldwell. And less than 24 hours after Whisenhunt turned them down, Caldwell was hired, a rush job if ever there was. It was fairly obvious from the beginning that Whisenhunt was their man, though depending on who you believe, Bill O'Brien could have been their man before that, if the Lions would have had the testicular fortitude to can the Schwartz the day they were officially eliminated from the playoffs, instead of keeping him around for one last loss for no good reason. And when their man rejected them to follow the money (not to mention the control of the roster, but we'll touch on that later), Mayhew and Lewand went into panic mode. They were so desperate to save face, that they found the most desperate candidate they could and hired him on the spot. And despite the blatantly obvious fact that he wasn't their first or second choice, Lewand insisted at the introductory presser that no, this was also "Plan A" all along, even though he addressed Whisenhunt before even mentioning Caldwell. How stupid does this man think we are? Remember: No other team had any serious interest in Caldwell, and the Ravens were ready to shit-can him if no other team hired him!

     And who could blame them? Baltimore finished 29th in total yards and 25th in scoring in Caldwell's first full season as offensive coordinator, which would indicate that the previous year's Super Bowl run couldn't exactly be attributed to him. And keep in mind, he'd never been an offensive coordinator before that; he'd spent several years as an abysmal college head coach at Wake Forest, and a QB coach up until Tony Dungy essentially picked him as his replacement in Indy. And after one particularly awful Peyton-less season, he was given the boot without getting the chance to right the ship with Andrew Luck the next year. You can debate all you want about whether he should have been given another chance, but the Colts must have seen something in him they didn't like. Such as, say, horrid in-game management skills and calling indefensible timeouts.

     Yet, this is the guy who has been hired to fill what every national pundit has called the best available coaching position in the NFL. And yet, the lead candidate didn't want the best coaching position in the NFL. Which leads one to believe that maybe this isn't the best coaching position in the NFL. There's been word that not only was money a factor in Whisenhunt's decision (to the tune of $1M more a season), but that in Tennessee he'd be afforded far more flexibility to shape the roster the way he saw fit. And allegedly he was uncomfortable with Matthew Stafford being such a large part of the decision-making process. Given his experience as something of a QB "guru," the fact that he wasn't willing to or convinced he could fix Stafford should be a bit concerning to Lions fans, especially Stafford's previous statements indicating that he doesn't think he needs fixing, or QB gurus, or anything of the sort.

     And predictably, the national media loves this hire, mostly because of Dungy and Manning coming out in support of him. Did anyone seriously think that either of these guys would throw Caldwell under the bus even if they did think he was a lackluster coach? Of course not! And honestly, Caldwell's effect on Manning, which has been loudly trumpeted by his apologists, has always been somewhat overblown. If any coach should be given credit for Manning becoming what he is today, it should be Tom Moore, the Colts' OC for over a decade starting Peyton's rookie year. Lions' fans might remember Moore as the reason Scott Mitchell looked like a competent quarterback and the architect behind the Lions' offense that led the league in 1995.

     At the same time, there's an encouraging sign or two. Caldwell supposedly showed up, broke down game film with Stafford, and went over how he was going to help him improve his passing game. You've got to like that, at the very least. No matter what his defenders might suggest, Matt Stafford has declined considerably in his time with this team, and there's an argument to be made that this is directly related to a coaching staff that didn't know what to do with him. Caldwell, at least, is coming in with a game plan, and that's a solid start. 

      Does that in itself make him the right man for the head coaching job? I'm still not convinced that's the case. This whole decision still reeks of massive overreaction all around; hiring a guy who is the polar opposite of Jim Schwartz in every single way, and in as hasty of a manner as they possibly could.

     One thing's for certain: This is almost assuredly the current brain trust's last chance to get it right. This might be the last opportunity to not squander the career of possibly the best wide receiver to ever play the game, not to mention a core that seemingly possesses the talent to be a real playoff contender. Given all of this, not to mention their ridiculous attempts on controlling every word that comes from Allen Park, and the fact that this is, in fact, the Detroit Lions, there's absolutely no reason left to give them the benefit of the doubt. 

     Martin Mayhew and Tom Lewand had better be absolutely positive that Jim Caldwell is the right man to turn this sorry franchise around.

     Their own fate depends on it.

The Baseball Hall Of Fame, And The BBWAA's Irrelevance On Full Display...

     Honestly, I'm surprised they managed to elect a whole three players this year.

     A pity, really, as there were far more deserving inductees than ballot spots to vote them in.

     But the Old Cranks Society met the bare minimum of expectations this year, electing Greg Maddux, Tom Glavine, and Frank Thomas to the Baseball Hall of Fame. All three new to the ballot for 2014, all three more than deserving of the honor. But, as it is seemingly every year anymore, it's not about who got in, but who didn't. Or rather, why they didn't.

     Initially, I had intended to write about the ongoing debate on whether or not Jack Morris deserves to be in the Hall of Fame, particularly over the middle infield double-play team that contributed every bit as much, if not more, to the Detroit Tigers' last World Series victory than the "winningest pitcher of the 80's," as if such a thing holds any real relevance. I admit, I was looking forward to ripping 97.1 The Ticket's Pat "um, ah, ya know... and stuff" Caputo a new one for lashing out at sabermetrics as the reason Morris isn't a Hall of Famer, conveniently ignoring the traditional stats that back that argument up. (The Detroit News' Kurt Mensching sums up both the traditional and stathead arguments against Morris pretty well here.)

     But then, this happened.

     Now, it's not very often that I agree with Dan Le Batard on anything. But his take on the steroid controversy is far more well-reasoned then most of the fossils that make up the Baseball Writers Association of America. And I must admit, I gained quite a bit of respect for him with this stunt, in which he turned his vote over to Deadspin in exchange for a charitable contribution. And the ballot their readers came up with for him is a far better one than most of the writers who came up with their own, and even Le Batard was impressed with the respect with which the Deadspin voters treated the process, even in making a mockery of it. And for that we should all be thankful, because it only serves to illustrate just how incompetent the body normally unilaterally tasked with making that decision really is.

     Case in point: Ken Gurnick, the Dodgers' paid shill MLB.com beat reporter, who turned in a ballot having voted for Jack Morris... and only Jack Morris. "As for those who played during the era of PED use, I won't vote for any of them." Which makes sense; let's just ignore an entire 20-year period of baseball history in order to put yourself on a moral high horse, while denying entry to players like Maddux, Glavine, and Craig Biggio, who have never even been accused or suspected of steroid use! Worse yet, Gurnick ignores the fact that Maddux and Morris were both in the major leagues at the same time for a nine-year period, and that Morris didn't actually retire until 1994. Throw in the fact that PED's have been an issue since at least the mid-80's, possibly earlier, and Gurnick's already tortured argument falls apart entirely. The worst part is, he admits to having no reason to believe Maddux used, nor any legitimate reason to deny him a vote! Luckily, he's already on record as stating he will abstain from voting in the future, but given his willingness to make the story about himself here, I question his ability to objectively report on baseball from here on out.

     Then there's the fucklogic of one Murray "Don't call my blog a blog!" Chass, who embodies everything I despise about print journalism, and is right up there at the top of the list of reasons the newspaper industry is dying a slow, painful death. Chass thankfully retired from The New York Times in 2008, and has since spent his time writing blogs, denying that he is writing blogs, and screaming at anyone who will listen about how much he hates blogs. In his post about his Hall of Fame ballot, he cites Jeff Bagwell, the aforementioned Biggio, and Mike Piazza among his list of steroid users who won't be getting his vote. Again, never mind that there is no proof that any of them used, they are cheaters in his mind. Naturally, people with actual brains in their heads ripped Chass a new one, and rightfully so.

     How does Chass respond? Why, with a ridiculous rant about how the filthy bloggers don't have anything other than anonymous hearsay to go on, and then... using anonymous hearsay to prove his point. Seriously, all you have is backne, and the word of one reporter who won't back up his accusations? You're going to have to do better than that. And if you get to denounce guys who write for entirely credible news sources simply because their work is web-based, then I get to denounce you as an ancient relic of a bygone era, not to mention a tremendous hypocrite. Truly a shame he went back on his threat to give up his Hall of Fame vote.

     And it just goes to show how out of touch the BBWAA is with baseball. And this has got to be the year that something finally changes. As always, you have the idiots who will deny someone a vote just to ensure that nobody is unanimously elected. If you think Mantle, Ruth, and Mays weren't first ballot hall-of-famers (and as nobody has ever received 100% of the vote, somebody had to have thought this), you should be taken out back and shot, or at the least kicked out of the BBWAA. Or Marty Noble, the half-wit who limited his ballot to three players for the sole reason that "I don't want 28 people entering the Hall at once," proving once and for all that absolutely no justification whatsoever is needed to grant or deny a vote to anyone. If this isn't proof enough that the process by which players are elected needs to be entirely overhauled, then there really is no reasoning with you.

     The worst part of all of this is that players who should by all logical rights be in the Hall based on individual merit are now held to an unfair standard simply because of the era in which they played. And, as Buster Olney rightly pointed out six years ago, the fault lies at the feet of Major League Baseball for not doing more at the time to get to the bottom of the problem, instead making whipping boys of Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens while simply ignoring the greater problem. And until MLB addresses the issue head-on and completely instead of leaving it in the hands of the ink-stained wretches' best guesses and stances on morality, we're in for several repeats of the class of 2013.

     Call Dan Le Batard self-serving and sanctimonious if you will, but in his explanation as to why he agreed to give his vote to Deadspin's readers, he raised some entirely valid points about the antiquated process that is the Hall of Fame vote. The process has become less about honoring the greatest players in the sport, and more of a grand power-trip of writers carrying out their agendas and wielding their vote as a weapon against anyone who's ever slighted them. Besides, to dismiss Le Batard's actions as simply attention whoring ignores the self-righteous saber-rattling on display by the rest of the organization at large on a regular basis. There's a part of me that believes that the reason that he has been so vilified for taking part in this, is that he's exposed just that, and proven that, at the very least, the fans are better at this than the writers. The BBWAA has been forced to confront the debacle the election process has become. The self-congratulatory circle-jerk has come to a screeching halt. Egos have been deflated. And for one brief moment, the public was allowed to be part of the good ol' boys club, and the good ol' boys didn't like it one bit.

     And for that in itself, this was all worth it.

This Is America's Most Uninformed Article About Flint, And You've Probably Never Heard Of It

     ...Here we go again. Another outsider who's probably never even set foot in Michigan, telling us what a post-apocalyptic nightmare we're living in.

     If you live in or around Flint, you've probably already been linked several times to an article posted on the website PolicyMic, which appears to have all the journalistic integrity and substance as Buzzfeed, Upworthy, or other similar 'news' sites that do little more than take whatever photos they can find in the public domain, add a couple lines of vapid commentary between each one, and call it a day. And the actual writing is about as self-centered and unaware as your average Thought Catalog rant. Essentially, upper-class twentysomethings assuming they know how the world works, without ever having had to work for anything. And in fact that would appear to sum up the author of the piece in question, Laura Dimon, whose father just happens to be the CEO of JPMorgan Chase.

     With the very title of her piece, the author makes you aware that she believes she's somehow breaking new ground: "This Is America's Most Violent, Apocalyptic City, And You've Probably Never Heard Of It." Because clearly nobody has ever written about what a hellhole Flint is before. Not like Flint is already known nationally as "Murdertown, USA" or anything. And god knows, it's not like a fairly well known documentary was made about the decline of the city and it's most well-known industry either. Maybe you've never heard of it if you have been living under a rock for the last 25 years, or in New York, apparently. Note, by the way, that the title of the article has since been changed since they were called out on it.

     Now, mind you, I don't currently live in Flint, nor have I ever. But I've spent plenty of time and money there over the last several years, attended college there, and as a born-and-raised Detroiter, I know a thing or two about the media making a national punchline out of your hometown. And naturally, the writer starts out with a couple digs at my "dwindling, deteriorating," financially insolvent city, before getting into tearing a new one into a city that she's never actually set foot in. (Apparently, BuzzMic doesn't have much of a budget for sending it's "reporters" to cover their stories worth a damn.)

     What I love most about this piece is the fact that the primary source quoted in the article has spent a lot of time lately distancing himself from and condemning the article as publicly as possible. Gordon Young, Flint native, actual journalist, and author of Teardown: Memoir of a Vanishing City, posted this in regard to another article about the PolicyFeed piece: "In this particular case, I wish the author would have devoted less space to all the negative statistics and old news about Flint's decline, and more to the inspiring residents of my hometown who are using innovative approaches to improve the city." He goes on to mention a few of said residents he suggested Dimon interview for the piece, which of course she didn't.

     After several paragraphs of the usual statistics about Flint in decline, shots at the Midwest in general ("the hell that has become most of the Rust Belt"), pictures of the desolation of Flint that looked more like shots from the east side of Detroit and Israel (because, go figure, they were shots of Detroit and Israel) and a choice quote or two from Michael Moore (gee, and I thought you were treading new ground here), Dimon devotes a whole 150 words to the possibility that maybe, just maybe, all hope is not yet lost for Flint.

     And it doesn't end there. There's a companion piece, "16 Portraits Of Everyday People Who Refuse To Let Their Hometown Be Defeated," which rehashes the stats from the previous article, then presents 16 photos she says "depict the stories of the everyday people who are fighting for a better Flint." Except, y'know, without actually fucking telling the stories. Dimon then presents 16 completely context-free stock photos, without even identifying the people in them, much less tell any story. This is even more disingenuous than the original article; like you're doing some great service by posting a bunch of photos you copied from AP or a photographer's Flickr stream without giving any of the context or backstory behind them. Hell, how do we know these aren't just more photos of Detroit, Baghdad, or wherever, seeing how PolicyWorthy clearly doesn't fact check anything until they get called out by it?

     This is the problem with journalism in the 21st century. The media assumes we don't have the attention span to comprehend anything more than three sentences long without pictures to break it up, so they feel the need to dumb things down for us, or worse, try to pass off lazy, barely-researched pieces like this assuming we're too stupid to tell the difference. It's not that you're only telling one side of the story while giving a couple sentences (and 16 photos!) of lip service to the other. It's that you can't even tell that side of the story correctly.