It seems that there are really a lot of ideas, let's talk about Richard first. Richard is a man with an excessive sense of justice, is sensitive to the red flags of the world around him, and has respect for law enforcement agencies, which are all extensions of the first point. But while the second makes him a hero, the third also deepens his suspicions in stealth. Therefore, the character itself is not good or bad, it is only good or bad for the influence of the interests you want. I don't think there's anything wrong with the principal who suspects him, I think he's doing the right thing, after all he's just stating his concerns, and whether such concerns are justified is law enforcement -- the FBI -- thing. The problem is that the FBI locked Richard down because of this, and moved the investigation center to "How to prove Richard was a thug". Again, he was only suspected as a suspect at first, and was not locked. The real locking came after the headlines came out. After that, the FBI did not pursue other suspects, but repeatedly questioned Richard and tried to induce him to admit his guilt. Due to its own profit model, the media reported a report that was very public opinion. As the female reporter said, she was stating the facts. In fact, the FBI had indeed classified Richard as a suspect. But the FBI was also terribly wronged by the news, and the source of Richard's tragedy. Speaking of media, the stench of the media industry in pursuit of traffic has existed since the day the media industry was born, and now it's just getting more and more disgusting. That female reporter was just an extreme case, digging up eye-catching news without a bottom line, and in the case of black and white, she used emotional rhetoric to guide the direction of public opinion. Heisenberg's uncertainty theory has a philosophical explanation: it is a matter of principle that we cannot know all the details of the present. So what is the responsibility of the media? Report objectively, avoid any guiding rhetoric, pursue truth, and keep reporting. To put it bluntly, it is a sense of responsibility for the facts. This is not what the media industry lacks, but what is lacking in society. In today's fragmented world and a lot of information flooding our world, it seems that news is just some jokes and talk materials, and what is forwarded is just a casual thing, and it even reflects oneself. Caring about the goodness of society. Please the media and the public realize what impact their actions will have. It is true that we cannot guarantee the authenticity of our reports and reposts. Sometimes we do need public opinion to achieve justice, but please don’t be hasty, please be cautious. Okay, can't say that these pretty-sounding but hard-to-do things really don't make sense, it has to make sense. Just like Richard's vigilance that others seem to have no effect or even exaggerated, sometimes it may really save save some people. Finally, let me talk about my understanding of lamentation. On the whole, in the end, Richard was wronged, which is a case of "justice will come sooner or later". But if you carefully scrutinize Richard's final counterattack against the FBI agents, you will know what the lamentation is - the public gradually loses trust in authority and justice. Richard cooperated with the investigation all the way and even occasionally seemed to be "groping" himself. He understood everything the law enforcement officers did and knew that they came according to the rules and regulations. He trusted law enforcement and the U.S. government. But in the end, he said, he had always respected and longed for the justice that the circle represented, but now, he no longer yearned for it. What will the people think when this happens? The most authoritative representative of justice in a society: law enforcement agencies, if they have lost the trust of the public, how can they pray for justice to take root in society? This lament belongs not only to Richard, but also to society, and sadly, it still haunts us today. Reflect on why Richard is suspected of being misjudged by the application of the principle of "one kind of person" to define "one person". Is the experience useful? Yes, it can help us analyze the present, but can it absolutely tell? What's more, some experience itself is wrong, such as racial discrimination, do you still want to put such experience into current and future applications? Obviously extremely unreasonable. The film explores many social issues and is well-paced, and it is even more thought-provoking with the delicate depiction of how the lives of Richard's mother and son were devastated. Some experience itself is wrong, such as racism, do you still want to put such experience into current and future applications? Obviously extremely unreasonable. The film explores many social issues and is well-paced, and it is even more thought-provoking with the delicate depiction of how the lives of Richard's mother and son were devastated. Some experience itself is wrong, such as racism, do you still want to put such experience into current and future applications? Obviously extremely unreasonable. The film explores many social issues and is well-paced, and it is even more thought-provoking with the delicate depiction of how the lives of Richard's mother and son were devastated.
View more about Richard Jewell reviews
