The protest touched off another wave of condemnation of the police from politicians, community critics, and journalists. Columnists and editorial writers cited the cops' behavior as yet another example of why minority groups were right to distrust and fear the police. The media's outrage was certainly appropriate. But no New York City news organization acknowledged that it would also have been appropriate to point out the errors of its coverage of the Garcia shooting, apologize to O'Keefe, or explain to readers and viewers why much of their reporting had been false and misleading. Reporters know that eyewitnesses at crime scenes are often unreliable, excitable advocates for one side or another, sometimes so anxious to be on television that their accounts become more melodramatic than what they actually saw.
Reporters also know that some politicians exploit police-community tensions.
Add to the threat of violence and civil disorder and there are lots of reasons for reporters and editors to be extraordinarily cautious about explosive eyewitness accounts of police-community confrontations offered in the heat of the moment. New York's media, prodded by the city's first black mayor, had helped to squelch rumors and maintain calm in the wake of the L.A. riots last spring. But there seems to be less restraint or caution when police shootings are involved. The New York Times disingenuosly wondered in an editorial following the grand jury report. Coverage of the shooting was not on the list.