I’m not going to argue the pros and cons of the “Stand Your Ground” law, but the Zimmerman defense did not use this part of the law.  It made its case with the older self-defense law.

Yet, advocates for reforming Stand Your Ground are using the Zimmerman case to rally support. It’s irritating to see the news cluttered with people distorting information to promote their causes.  This is just the latest example of media coverage of misleading “facts.”

Most people don’t read stories all that carefully.  The average person’s takeaway will be that the Stand Your Ground had something to do with Zimmerman’s acquittal.

It would be awkward for journalists to insert a phrase explaining “Stand Your Ground” wasn’t part of the case, but should they?  Do reporters have a responsibility to promote accuracy?

It’s easy to manipulate facts to drive a campaign.  Easy, but wrong.