Subscribe: RSS
(Image: Free Press)
This week on CounterSpin: At FAIR, we say you can change the channel all you want, but you can’t turn on what isn’t there. The loss of an information source—a particular place for debate, for conversation, on issues relevant to you—is incalculable, but very real. We talked about the loss of local journalism, and why we can still be hopeful, with Craig Aaron of the group Free Press.
Rana Plaza collapse
Also on the show: Fashion is always a huge media story, but what goes into it is not. The “fashion” industry is a prime driver of structured exploitation, whether we’re talking about blocked fire exits or a piece-rate system that steals workers’ wages systematically. The Garment Worker Protection Act, passed in California late last year, aims to address some of those harms. In light of that undercovered victory, we’re going to remind ourselves of one of the spurs for it. Barbara Briggs, then associate director of the Institute for Global Labour and Human Rights, spoke with CounterSpin in 2015 about the 2013 collapse at Rana Plaza, which brought murder charges against Bangladeshi factory owners and government officials—but, we can say now, somehow didn’t convince corporate media to keep a critical eye trained on the human costs of “fast fashion.”
Anyone doubting the reality of an organized attack by corporate interests upon the final vestige of American local journalism, might want to invest some time on this story:
https://www.npr.org/2021/11/12/1055057480/storm-lake-documentary-depicts-the-triumph-and-struggle-of-a-local-newspaper
In response to your coverage of the Triangle Shirt Factory disaster, I would like to share a personal story:
In 1991, there was a fire inside a factory in Newark, Ohio where several people were killed and injured because the managing supervisor chose to intentionally lock all fire exits in direct violation of local, state, and federal law.
So… lock him up and throw away the keys, right?!!!
When I questioned Judge Jon Ray Spahr as to why this murderer would only be spending 90 days in the local jail (on the weekends), I was told his plea agreement had been agreed to by the local prosecutor and therefore Judge Spahr’s clean white hands were tied.
Unfortunately such a cop-out is completely untrue: as the presiding authority, Judge Spahr retained an option to reject the original charges proffered by the prosecuting attorney as being insufficient. End of story. For reals. Sorry kid, that’s the truth.
If he had taken the ethical option, an opportunity to impose an appropriate criminal sentence should evidence have been provided which proved the defendant clearly demonstrated intentional negligence, having prior knowledge of the safety requirements as per applicable law, would have ultimately been created in regards to this case.
Aggravating factors such as the possibility the defendant may have been able to prevent the untimely death and painful injuries inevitably sustained by these victims, would also have been taken into consideration prior to any sentencing if a conviction have been obtained. I’m thinking 10 to 20- with an uphill battle if victims showed up at parole.
Of course, by trashing the 90 day plea agreement Judge Spahr would have actually forced the prosecutor to EARN his conviction, and Spahr would have been required to do his job by presiding at trial, and all the while alienating rich campaign donors in the very process.
The fact such deceit is wielded as a standard ploy to cover up the games played by our courts, in order to protect the most heinous actions carried out in pursuit of profit at the expense of innocent lives, should provide adequate proof of the hypocrisy of a system which shouts “Justice for All,” while actually intending to say: “Justice for Us!”