Media to blame for violence in Ferguson?

   It was a split-screen spectacle, the president of the United States appealing for calm while Ferguson was starting to erupt in flames.
   As Obama was saying “there is inevitably going to be some negative reaction, and it will make for good TV,” the images of tear gas and looting were competing for attention.

   I don’t know that anything the president said at that point could have deterred the protestors and agitators after no indictment was returned, and here’s why: They were reacting to a media narrative that hardened into cement soon after the tragedy. And we now know that narrative was filled with misinformation.

   We now know that some eyewitnesses changed their stories, or admitted they never actually saw the shooting.
   But their accounts echoed across the media landscape, that Darren Wilson shot Michael Brown in the back, that Brown had his hands up, that he was trying to surrender.
As St. Louis County prosecutor Robert McCullough said in scolding the Fourth Estate:
STORY