What Billy Porter's Shocking Find Means for Your Family History | Who Do You Think You Are
Vložit
- čas přidán 14. 07. 2022
- Billy Porter had a shocking find in his episode of Who Do You Think You Are. Here's a closer look at the research & what it means for your family history.
#genealogy #ancestry #wdytya
✅ Pick up a free copy of Amy's guide "5 Online Search Strategies Every Genealogist Should Know: www.amyjohnsoncrow.com/search...
🔍 🔍 Find more genealogy and family history tips at www.amyjohnsoncrow.com
📙 Amy's book "31 Days to Better Genealogy" is available on Amazon:
amzn.to/3c2Nono
(Disclosure: As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.)
Check out Amy's playlist with more genealogy tips: czcams.com/video/YswJ0r-qHxI/video.html
Thanks Amy - I found your extra info super useful for further unpacking Billy's story and also for our own research. Enjoyed this behind the scenes style of Who do you think you are content!! There is never enough of that show - even with the different series from different countries!
Even when there’s not a prejudice component the details can differ. My 2nd Great grandmother was unfortunately involved in an attempted murder-suicide from her then fiancé (before she was with my eventual 2GGF). The first articles I found say she lived but he died, but there’s 2 later articles mentioning him being in jail awaiting trial. (Unfortunately I couldn’t find any coverage of the actual trial - though a decade later someone with the same name was involved in another murder case several states away)
Exactly! Even something as run-of-the-mill as a graduation or the meeting of a local charity can have vastly different details depending upon the newspaper.
@@AmyJohnsonCrow I wish there was a person that would plainly say that some news is not news just lies and that this country will always report the news to make black people appear guilty. Yes, our children still have to fear being shot by the cops, that's old news too
I found a murder-suicide report from 1881 because the unusual name of my ancestors house came up in a search. It struck me how respectful the journalism was, and how that reflected that this kind of crime was so rare and deeply shocking for the community. This was a small rural community of just three houses. So everyone knew the couple involved and their children. The journalist gave the facts and also answered the questions that would have been in readers minds. It's a gory crime yet the whole piece reads like literature. It's almost as if the writer is reassuring the reader that the couple's children are being well-cared for in a loving community that is sensitive to their needs. I'm guessing if the writer had been trained in modern journalism he wouldn't have written anything like this. The reporting of the death of Billy Porter's ancestor is so brief and the style of writing is almost casual. Flowery writing isn't necessary but, for family historians, it gives you another layer of information about what was truly important to people.
This issue goes beyond racial discrimination too. In my historic research I've seen newspapers publish verifiably false accounts of events to "preserve the honor" of locally prominent persons. In one particular historic case, a newspaper article cited an official member of law enforcement who described an event as an accident, when in fact there were multiple prosecutable crimes committed and multiple people involved. That a crime had likely been committed should have been apparent to law enforcement and to the press, but the incident had been initiated by a member of a prominent family. No charges were even hinted at, much less filed. - When the first public reference to an incident is an influential person going to the trouble of releasing a statement in the press saying that nothing happened, there is good reason to suspect the opposite.
I've also seen competing newspapers give totally different "facts" based on political affiliations or personal ties/grudges between the papers and those involved. This still happens occasionally but seems to have been much more common historically.
Even in modern times well-intentioned members of the press frequently gets facts wrong. Reporters and editors are generally experts at telling a story, not at mastering the technicalities on which they are reporting. They often spend only minutes doing "investigation".
There are several lessons I draw from this: Always consider the source when trying to understand the historic "facts". Treat historic newspaper accounts as opinions, rather than the last word on a subject. Do the extra research to see if anyone else may have had a different take on the event in question.
Great content. I would add that newspapers especially from 1800-1900s publish historical accounts of their famous and early settlers. I’ve found ones in PA talking of events in 1700s but published in 1800s
That was such an awesome tip and find. Thank you
You’re welcome!
Very informative. Will certainly check out more newspaper accounts - but sometimes I am lucky to just find one.
Telling us what we still know today, a black man shot in the back and the story is reported differently certain platforms . Something’s never change
Great job
Very compelling reasons to look at all sides of a story, as reported from many different viewpoints. We still face this challenge in news reported in today’s media. Regarding this particular story, does the death certificate provide any more information about the gunshot wound? Or was an autopsy performed? These would be the next documents I would try to locate.
With looking back at this one incident, confirms that shooting BY POLICE OF BLACKS IN THE BACK ISN'T NEW BUT HISTORICAL.
What are the best ways to access historical newspapers? Preferably without having to pay a monthly fee.
If you're looking for US newspapers, start with Chronicling America. Also check out a site called The Ancestor Hunt. He has links to more than 47,000 free digitized newspapers.
How do you weigh which one to believe? I would lean towards the “witness testimony”, hoping they were being truthful.
That’s how I’m leaning, based on what I’ve seen so far.
Wow! Bias, hearsays, prejudice, it's a wonder how news gets to the people. A hundred years later, I wonder if the police were held accountable. I wonder if Mr. Richardson just stopped to tell someone to get a hold of his family. I definitely do think that a black man was shot unjustly. It's a norm today, a hundred years ago it would be done in a heartbeat.
The officer was charged with murder and was acquitted after just 10 minutes of deliberation.
@@AmyJohnsonCrow 10 minutes...damn
With such conflicting accounts it is difficult to know which one to believe. Was there an autopy performed on Thompson's body? It would be very easy to tell if he was shot in the back, or in the breast. At least it should be.
At that time, that era, there was a great deal of civil unrest. Was the white-ran paper exaggerated because of hatred? Or was the black-ran paper striving to make Thompson appear brave, yet panicked? It's hard to say, I think.
Ridiculousness, the truth is in your face
@@lm406 How so? If I knew, aka it being obvious, I would not have asked.
How can I email you with a question?
On my "about" page, scroll down and click the button to "view email address." czcams.com/users/AmyCrowabout
Well, there is one thing for certain, he was shot in the back.
You've presented four different stories, and different accounts. I, too, agree the witnesses seem more credible. Strange.
Do