Talk:Stop Snitchin'

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

NPOV[edit]

I don't see this as an NPOV violation. That's like saying (in the extreme) that an article on genocide is slanted against genocide, and some people think genocide is really cool.

This "movement" was started in a DVD by people claiming to be drug dealers. They're not protesting against police violence, they're trying to commit crimes and get away with it. We're all intelligent people, let's be honest: this "movement" has nothing to do with violence by police. It is completely driven by criminals who want to get away with their crimes. If you want to defend that, then that's your perogative. N2007k 14:24, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

<N2007k, please read the top two paragraphs on this page [1]>

Am I the only one that see this article as an NPOV violation? Almost everything in the article is slanted against the stop-snitchin' attitude. I for one, support the refusal to cooperate with police if they feel that police do not treat them with the proper respect.

The "other side of the coin" can be expressed as community solidarity in the face of abusive, unresponsive and often unproductive policing. The popularity of the shirts is highest in places with the least community-oriented policing and conversely lowest in the places where the police have reached out to the community. That should be a sign that it's a product of external circumstances as well as internal dynamics. Wrath0fb0b 02:14, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

For a more cogent analysis than the one I provided, see http://www.popmatters.com/columns/hill/060224-1.shtml Wrath0fb0b 03:35, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I recognize the very serious problem of police abuse in some places, and I don't mean to offend you, but from what I can see, the "Stop Snitchin'" attitude is horrifyingly wrong. It seems to me that it does absolutely nothing to solve the problem of police brutality, and instead trades it for utterly uncontrolled gang violence and vigilantism. HowardW
That's a reasonable opinion but NPOV requires all points of view. You are absolutely right that SS does nothing to stop police violence! I never claimed that. What I did claim that it is a *response* to the perception in some communities that the police do not serve their interests. It could be argued that it is a misguided response or a counterproductive one but it is a response nevertheless.
Furthermore, there are larger cultural precedents for the stop-snitchin movement. The blue wall of silence, union codes, the move to shield reporters from giving up their source and the mafia code of silence. IIRC, Brutus and Judas are in the ninth ring of hell.
Complicating matter even further is the fact that snitches are often criminals themselves that become informants for the police for protection, money, leniency, to eliminate rivals or settle grudges. The police become unwitting (and frankly, uncaring) accessories to the destruction of the community by encouraging every arrestee to turn on someone else in order to boost their numbers.
To make matters even worse, many of the overturned death-penalty convictions were the result of dishonest or outright perjurious testimony from paid or otherwise rewarded snitches. See Ellen Reasonover, Nicholas Yarris, Ronald Jones were all on death-row due to snitches that were paid or otherwise bribed to lie. A whole lot more are at http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?scid=45&did=1149 (didn't have to time read too far into it).
I don't mean this as a wholesale affirmation of the movement but the issue is more nuanced than the article makes it seem and certainly more nuanced than "horrifyingly wrong". Hope this clears up my thought process. Wrath0fb0b 08:16, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
First off, I agree about the NPOV stuff - which is why I put my comment here rather in the main article. It's also true that this isn't the first instance of a subculture encouraging its members not to participate in the legal system, as you point out. What's more, I also agree that the desire to participate or promote something like this is complex.
However I still would say that this movement, as far as I can tell, is very, very wrong. In effect it's saying to the members, Don't even try to fight for your place in society, to participate in the greater society. Instead, give up, drop out, and allow the wanton violence of the streets - along with its vicious crime lords - be the source of legitimacy.HowardW


Well, for a start I'm not sure how relevant all of this is to the talk page. The article discussion is 'about the article, not the subject in its own right'. That does not mean, "forget about discussion"- though there are proper channels, including in the wiki community, for dicussion of topics rather than page content. However, it does mean a discussion about how the article should be presented, structured, and what perspectives it should note.
My comments on certain parts of the article are these:
  • Noting the courtroom actions doesn't, to me, seem like a breach of NPOV. Rather, it emphasises the controversy and noteworthiness of the subject. I don't think that the article glosses this enough, though.
  • There are certain choices of language: 'homicide', for example, that I think rather tastefully and, in accordance with the NPOV policy, at least attempt to avoid sensationalism iwth a more dispassionate attitude. I htink that should be the approach the article takes.
  • The final quote is a little dodgy- in fact i think it can be thought of as breaching NPOV in the other direction to the one first suggested: by not using direct quotation, and still insisting on words such as "when"- words which imply that their conditions and objects are 'objectively existing' conditions- the writer is implying that it is a fact that the government does not admit responsibiloiuty for its actions etc.
    • Perhaps that's a little unclear- I'll try to give an exaggerated example:
    • "John Johnson argues that baby-eating should stop when babies learn to stop being so scrummy-licious." The predicate is that he 'argues that they should stop when this condition is reached'- the emphasis is on this, not on the condition itself. As such, it imagines that this condition is one that need not be questioned- it is the axiom of the predication, as structuralists would say.
    • As such, I think that it should be replaced with direct quotation. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Bosola (talk • contribs) 17:56, 24 December 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Spamming and External Links[edit]

I am too guilty of using too many external links. When writing articles for Wikipedia, all editors must advise themselves that there is no place for Advertising, Opinion, Wessel Words and Spamming. I advise all users who contribute to this article to look at Wikipedia's not. Also look for Wikipedia's spam policy, keeping a neutral point of view and citing sources. This is a rule, in a nutshell. Please use this wisely and do not promote this advertising. This article is oozing with external links (spam) and nonsense. It's too irrelevant for the writers to clean up this article due to it's growing fan base. Prodominately this article look like it needs some efficient cleaning. LILVOKA 01:09, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • I'm removing two of the three external links, and changing the language on the remaining one. The second two (Putin Stop Snitchin' and "Another Stop Snitching Detournment") are only sites for t shirt sales. That's classic advertisement, and not kosher with wikipedia. The third remains because the rap group seems to advocate that position (??), but certainly not under the headline "the official stop snitching movement site;" 1) see my arguments earlier about campaign vs movement, and 2) there's nothing official about TANGG buying the "stopsnitching.com" domain name. Thanks. Jahenderson 20:54, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Added some info regarding the (earliest known) origins of the T-Shirts in Boston, MA. As well as some media updates, such as the America's Most Wanted episode dealing with the stop snitching issue. Also added some references and external links. Please add more if you can find them. Interesting subject.

Also, That DVD cover posted down below is not the original. That was one released in early 2005 that also had that Tangg the juice guy in it, with Young Geezy, Diplomats, etc. Also had some Boston OG's putting out court paperwork on rapper Benzino & his associates. The Original DVD was released by Skinny Suge Records, 2004. That would be the one that gained controversy. Here is the cover for that: File:Stopsnitching.jpg

--OToole 07:58, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the cover. I'll add. -Jahenderson 04:32, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like the person who keeps removing the info about the Diplomats making their own version of the shirts to stop removing it. Lionelxhutz 16:57, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Have added more Boston info -- crime rate, fleshed out controversy, parodies, and other details. This story is unfortunately often reported just as humor without sufficient sensitivity to the community/crime context.

Thanks, your changes greatly improved the article. Rhobite 00:26, 4 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! GroupX

-- I took out the reference to omerta, because they in principal deal with different groups. Omerta refers to a policy of noncooperation among members of the mafia and their families. The stop snitching video discourages anyone who knows about a crime, regardless of their relation to the criminal enterprise, from cooperating. -Jahenderson 18:37, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

<Jahenderson, I'm just curious, have you actually seen the DVD?>

-- Unsigned user: Three things of note. 1) As mentioned above, this isn't a forum for ad hominem attacks. If you've an argument about the characterization of omerta, confine your remarks to that. 2) Seen the video, and live in the city where an elderly woman's house was burned down for reporting the drug dealers on her block. So yeah, I know from what I speak. 3) Please, sign your posts. Thanks. Jahenderson 01:55, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Movement[edit]

- I took out the characterization of the videos and shirt as a movement, substituting the word 'campaign.' That's cause the word movement suggests something more ... legal, or really something with a goal outside of witness intimidation for witness intimidation's sake. Compare the term "civil rights movement" with "stop snitching movement" for a second, and you'll get what I mean. -Jahenderson 04:30, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RfC[edit]

Someone care to enumerate what the problem is here that has led to an RfC? Which sections specifically do you see as being a problem? It needs some WP:EL cleanup, could use better sourcing, and needs cleanup (Omertà for example isn't a valid reference here, it should be in a "See Also" section. From an NPOV sense this article shouldn't support or oppose this effort, it should just explain what it is and if necessary show (with sources) some notable people who have supported or opposed it. Also, the Carmelo Anthony section should be removed unless someone provides a source.--Isotope23 20:05, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I sourced the Carmelo Anthony references. I think the Skinny Suge claim should be removed asap without a source. Wikipedia shouldn't report that a living person is "currently incarcerated" without a reference. The tag has been there a few weeks, I wasn't able to see reference to any part of it accept at places like myspace, so it should be removed.Professor marginalia 22:24, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think the citation deficiencies may lead to NPOV problems. When I just checked, only 5 of the 14 citations linked to correct content, and all 5 of those were biased against "Stop Snitchin." This could lead one to believe that the facts about support of "Stop Snitchin" are spurious. Anonymous 17 August 2007 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.100.135.162 (talk • contribs) 13:36, August 17, 2007

Florida Times-Union controversy[edit]

A reference to the controversy over the cartoon in Florida Times-Union seems appropriate to me. Kjetilho 18:09, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

DVD Title[edit]

I report on crime here in Baltimore and have seen the DVD, the real title is "Stop Fucking Snitching!" but of course the news outlets drop one of the words when they talk about it! But the 'Fucking' was definitely there for the 'original release.' —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Chococatsanrio (talk • contribs) 16:13, August 23, 2007 (UTC).

NPOV Issue Seems Quite Mitigated[edit]

I was just reading the NY Times article about Jay Z's latest work on a soundtrack for "American Gangster". The latter part of page 1 in the article cites Jay Z's view on the Stop Snitchin' campaign. He reiterates the intent of the campaign being "Stop Snitchin' to get a Lighter Sentence" and I gather that really WAS the true intent when the movement started.

"Echoing the “stop snitchin’ ” campaign among some hip-hop fans and artists, however, Jay-Z hastened to dissociate himself from Mr. Lucas’s decision to cooperate with the authorities to get a more lenient sentence. “Me, I believe you choose your path and you walk your path, and whatever happens you got to accept it,” Jay-Z said.

In “No Hook,” a song on the new album, he says:

Please don’t compare me to other rappers. Compare me to trappers. I’m more Frank Lucas than Ludacris. And Lude is my dude, I ain’t trying to dis. Just like Frank Lucas is cool, but I ain’t tryin’ to snitch. I’m-a follow the rules, no matter how much time I’m-a get. I’m-a live and die with the decisions that I’m-a pick."

Had I not read that article AND the article here on Wikipedia (found it on Google), I would not have understood that meaning at all. I'm forced to agree with anyone, like myself, who might initially interpret the meaning as "Stop Snitchin' OR ELSE!" and it appears that the movement has indeed headed in that direction. I'll add some fuel to that fire and point out some Stop Snitchin' supporters just opened the web site Who's a Rat which lists informants AND agents who have NOTHING to do with anyone getting lighter sentences. I realize that this isn't a forum for a debate on Stop Snitchin' so I'll get to my point here on the Talk Page immediately. This particular article has had a GREAT deal of work done on it and I found it to be an EXTREMLY useful and almost balanced presentation of the facts - providing adequate resources to form my own opinions on the matter. As for the article's notability...type it in Google and tell me it's not notable. As for the NPOV, there remains a small amount of work to be done, some citation cleanup is needed, but I believe the dispute over a NPOV is nearly resolved given the additional work that's been put in.LactoseIntolerant 17:07, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Article Flaws[edit]

  • Two different theories about the origin of "Stop Snitching"
  • First theory is not referenced
  • Second theory is quasi-spam
  • Poor grammar and organization
  • Is the section on "The Snitching Project" really notable?

In any case, his article needs some serious cleanup. I'll take the initiative. Huntthetroll (talk) 01:34, 18 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I wanted to add to this: The entire section "The Snitching Project" cites no references whatsoever. Is there even such a community college, or such a professor? Or such a project? 72.129.0.10 (talk) 07:49, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Stop snitching started with the black panthers in the civil rights movement NOT in 1999. It has been bastardized. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.71.22.180 (talk) 04:53, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Stop Snitchin'. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 22:45, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Stop Snitchin'. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 17:42, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Stop Snitchin'. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:21, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Stop Snitchin'. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:52, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Stop Snitchin'. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:10, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Stop_Snitchin%27&oldid=1212404503"