The ‘inappropriate' post over Iran that led the LA County Sheriff's Department to apologize
The Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department (LASD) apologized for an "offensive and inappropriate" social media post regarding recent U.S. strikes in Iran.
The initial post, published hours after U.S. bombings, referenced "victims and families impacted" despite no reported fatalities.
The LASD faced significant public backlash, with social media users criticizing the statement as a "slap in the face" to the U.S. military.
The department first edited the post, then issued a formal apology, stating the original message was "unacceptable, made in error, and does not reflect the views of Sheriff Robert G. Luna or the Department."
The LASD is conducting an internal review into the post's creation and publication, and is reviewing its social media oversight protocols.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Sky News
26 minutes ago
- Sky News
What happens next after US strikes on Iran? Dominic Waghorn and Stuart Ramsay answer your questions
After the US strikes on Iran, what is likely to happen next? And how could the Iranian response affect the UK? Our experts, international affairs editor Dominic Waghorn and chief correspondent Stuart Ramsay, are here to answer your questions
BBC News
27 minutes ago
- BBC News
World Business Report Will Iran close the Strait of Hormuz?
A narrow area of sea at the mouth of the Gulf has become the focus of global concern after the United States bombing of Iran. While Iran's parliament has voted to close the Strait of Hormuz, there is no sign of disruption of the sea passage that carries a fifth of the world's oil. So is Iran likely to take action there, and what would the effect be? Roger Hearing discusses whether Germany and Italy will repatriate their national gold reserves of $245billion from the New York Federal Reserve over fears about President Donald Trump's erratic policymaking amid wider geopolitical unrest. And we hear how the pursuit of shopping convenience is leading to exhausted workers and struggling family-run businesses in India. The latest business and finance news from around the world, on the BBC.
The Independent
27 minutes ago
- The Independent
Uber and Lyft fighting against laws to make rideshare services safer in multiple states, according to reports
Uber and Lyft are spending thousands of dollars a month to fight lawmakers over legislation that could make their services safer, a new report states. The companies, which dominate the U.S. rideshare market, have a history of mounting lobbying campaigns to either override or preempt safety and worker protection bills at all levels of government. The companies deploy a range of tactics: threats to exit markets if bills are passed, issuing a blizzard of public messaging, or directly pressuring lawmakers. In Rhode Island, Uber has spent $50,000 this year on lobbyists, according to Stateline 's analysis of the state's lobbying database. Lyft has been splurging around $5,000 a month on its lobbying efforts in Rhode Island, according to the report. Both rideshare giants are pushing back against legislation that would require fingerprinting as part of a criminal background check of drivers in the state. Lyft's public policy manager, Brendan Joyce, stated that the requirement relies on data from the FBI's Criminal Justice Information System, which he testified in April is 'incomplete' and noted that checks 'disproportionately impact and have potential discriminatory effects on communities of color.' Colorado legislators introduced a bill earlier this year aimed at increasing safety regulations and enhancing background checks for Transportation Network Companies. The bill, which passed both chambers of the Colorado General Assembly, was spearheaded by State Representative Jenny Willford, who alleged she was sexually assaulted by a man posing as a rideshare driver in February last year. Prosecutors charged suspect Mukhammadali Mukadyrov with unlawful sexual contact last month. In response, Uber devised the 'Save Rides – Urge a Veto' campaign, which displayed a stark message to users when they opened their app. Last month, the company requested that Colorado Governor Jared Polis block the bill, arguing that it features poorly thought-out provisions that would be costly for the company. An Uber spokesperson stated it was 'developed behind closed doors and driven by the financial interests of billboard attorneys, not the needs of Coloradans.' Uber threatened to withdraw its services from the state if the bill were to become law. Lyft also wrote to the governor, claiming that the legislation could harm operations. Following the threats to leave, Polis vetoed the bill in late May, stating that it 'would impose unworkable regulations on (rideshare companies) and potentially jeopardize the continued operation in Colorado.' In Oregon, both Uber and Lyft formally opposed a bill that would give drivers more rights, better pay, and stronger job protections. The companies pushed back against the bill, which passed the state Senate earlier this month, claiming it would increase the price of rides and make the job more rigid. Uber's Public Policy Manager Zahid Arab testified that the bill contained 'unclear and unreasonable requirements that could undermine safety.' In 2024, both Uber and Lyft threatened to leave Minneapolis over a proposed law that would require the companies to pay drivers more when operating within the city limits. A compromise was ultimately reached, and both continue to operate throughout Minnesota.
