Wednesday, June 14, 2006

Duke lacrosse witch hunt numbers

At about 3:30 p. m. eastern today, June 14, a Google search using the heading “Duke Witch Hunt” produced 764,000 hits.

Using the heading “Duke Lacrosse Witch Hunt” produced 46,600 hits.

Using the heading “Raleigh News & Observer Witch Hunt” produced 30,400 hits.

I eye-balled the first 20 of the “Duke Witch Hunt” hits. They deal with the lacrosse witch hunt.

Together, the first two numbers suggest the public is catching on to what’s what.

It will be interesting to see how the “Raleigh News & Observer Witch Hunt” number grows.

The N&O broke the Duke lacrosse story on Mar. 24 with a report in which it called the accuser “the victim” or used the possessive “ victim’s” a total of 7 times.

In none of those 7 instances did the N&O use the customary qualifying “alleged” before "victim" or "victim's."

The N&O followed its Mar. 24 story with one the next day which featured an interview with the anonymous accuser. The N&O's Mar. 25 story was on page one with headlines spread across five columns. The headlines give you an idea of the story's "balance."

DANCER GIVES DETAILS OF ORDEAL
A woman hired to dance for the Duke lacrosse team describes a night of racial slurs, growing fear and, finally, sexual violence
I don't know why in that first story the N&O decided to tell readers 7 times the accuser was the victim.

And I don't know why the N&O decided to headline her allegations without any qualification as though they were facts.

I do know the N&O’s public editor, Ted Vaden, tells me he's not going to answer those questions. He said in a phone conversation he didn't have time.

Well, let's keep our eyes on those "Witch Hunt" numbers.

Maybe as the N&O's "Witch Hunt" numbers grow, someone at the N&O or its owner, the McClatchy Company, will decide it to tell readers why the N&O decided to cast the accuser as the victim while framing the Duke lacrosse players as the victimizers.

The Constitution is pretty clear about presumption of innocence.

Why isn't the N&O and McClatchy?
___________________________________________________
Post URLs:
http://www.newsobserver.com/102/story/421799.html

http://www.newsobserver.com/742/v-print/story/421494.html

http://www.newsobserver.com/580/story/449892.html

0 comments: