Readers’ Note: Below is a comment I just left on a post thread at the Raleigh News & Observer’s Editors’ Blog. For background, read the post by N&O deputy managing editor Linda Williams and the thread that follows, especially comments by N&O executive editor for news Melanie Sill. It is to Sill that I direct my comment below.
John
_________________________________
Dear Melanie,
You say:
I think you'll be hard-put to find another editing team even attempting to respond to this kind of anonymous accusation. I continue to wonder why people who feel so strongly won't step up with their real names. This has become the convention on the Duke lacrosse posts on this blog, but on other such blogs many people identify themselves. I think that identification strengthens the dialogueFirst, as anyone who reads this thread will see, almost all people on this thread aren’t making anonymous accusations. They’re in some cases asking fair and important questions the N&O should have answered months ago. In other cases, they're providing fact-based refutations of statements you and Linda Williams have made.
You wonder why people “won’t step up with their real names.”
Perhaps, Melanie, some of them are concerned you'll target them the way you’ve targeted the teenagers and young men on the Duke lacrosse team.
You published and distributed over 200, 000 copies of the “vigilante poster” knowing that doing so would endanger the lacrosse players.
Now if the N&O would do something that despicable to the Duke lacrosse players who did you no harm, people will surely ask themselves what you’d do to them for asking questions and providing information that expose the N&O’s falsehoods and news suppression.
Think about it, Melanie.
BTW – Has it occurred to you that you’re still keeping anonymous the source(s) of the “vigilante poster” and those at the N&O who decided, “Let’s put it out there anyway?”
Your Mar. 25 story told readers: "authorities vowed to crack the team's wall of solidarity.”
The truth on Mar. 25 was that the lacrosse players had since Mar. 16 been extraordinarily cooperative with authorities.
I detailed some of that cooperation in my comment above at 10/08/06 at 12:54. I also noted police say they reported the cooperation to media as it happened.
Melanie, you need to tell readers on what day the N&O learned of the captains’ cooperation (detailed, signed statements to police voluntarily given, etc., etc.).
Then you need to tell readers on what day and in what detail the N&O reported the captains’ extensive cooperation.
Every question asked in my comment above is fair, needs to be answered, and should have been answered months ago.
Stop whining and answer those questions and the other ones people are asking.
You say, “I think that identification strengthens the dialogue.”
I don’t know about that. Look at all the journalists in the last five years who were identified by their newspapers through bylines, posts and comment threads who turned out to be lying to us.
Sincerely,
John
www.johnincarolina.com
5 comments:
Ruth Sheehan has a new blog posting:
http://blogs.newsobserver.com/ruth/index.php?title=new_york_mag_takes_on_the_times_over_duk&more=1&c=1&tb=1&pb=1
I HOPE that Floyd Abrams is conflicted out and cannot represent the N&O and McClatchy when the civil suits begin. 'Cause they're going to need some lawyers soon.
Duke is probably aware of who created that poster or rather they have the IPs of those who downloaded all the Duke lacrosse images. Assuming DPD/crimestoppers used their work computers it is easy to 'resolve' the ips to seperate govt from private domains. If you can get the address block for the crimestoppers it wouldn't be much of a leap from there; you can mass mail the office where it originated and insert an IP reporter within the message. Not that I'm advocating that.
I am pointing out that Duke is aware or at least retains records of every unique IP that downloaded those images and visited the lacrosse web site. Duke, just like other universities, maintains the IP logs for a long time..after a certain period they are back up on 'tapes'. They do this because they are required to share network traffic info with the music & software industry to trace students illegally downloading files etc.
Yes, it's almost impossible to figure it out. But at the same time N&O can't claim that they are protecting their sources because this is an official goverment publication.
If you can find a copy of the original poster it could be digitally signed or have the username for the individual(s) who created it - probably in photoshop. The police do tend to include signature tags in their documents but it is the DPD so it's probably a slim chance.
John, re: your message to Melanie:
OW! That hurt.
John, when I registered so I could comment, my name and other data were required in addition to my screen name.
So, Ms. Sill doesn't have the problem of anonymity of commenters. She knows their identities. She's just dissembling again. As I once told her on her site.
Post a Comment