“Feel good” & the N&O’s shameless news suppression

Readers note: In the post which follows, I initially misspelled Mr. Lurie's name as "Laurie." My error’s now been corrected thanks to an anon reader calling it to my attention.

I apologize to Mr. Lurie and JinC readers. I've also left an "error correction note" and apology on the post comment thread referenced below.

John
_______________________________________________

Last Sunday Raleigh News & Observer executive editor for news John Drescher's column described the visit a long-time reader and critic of the N&O, Mr. Lurie, made to the N&O’s newsroom at Drescher’s invitation.

Drescher pitched Laurie’s visit as what journalists call “a feel good story:” the critical reader is surprised to be invited by the editor to come meet the journalists he’s been criticizing. He goes with some trepidation. But when he meets the journalists, they're kindness itself; and he’s touched.

You get the idea.

Drescher posted on the visit here and I’ve just left the following comment on the post thread.

Dear Editor Drescher:

I enjoyed your story concerning your invitation to Mr. Lurie, a long-time N&O reader and critic, to visit the N&O’s newsroom. Please pass my appreciation to Mr. Laurie for the effort he makes to improve the N&O.

But the criticisms you cited were few. Some would even say they were mild. And your story quickly began reporting on things Mr. Lurie liked about the N&O.

I was half expecting the story to end with everyone gathering at the water cooler to say goodbye to Mr. Laurie and singing Auld Lang Syne as he left the newsroom.

Question: Do Mr. Lurie’s criticisms ever rise to the level of criticism of the N&O’s biases and agendas which lead it to engage in shameful instances of news suppression?

Take, for example, Lt. Gen. Sanchez’s recent speech to military reporters and editors. He spent the entire first half of his speech castigating the media’s coverage of the war in Iraq where he’d been commander of our ground forces.

Sanchez said that most American journalists in Iraq, driven by political agendas and commercial interests, had thrown away even a pretext of objective reporting.

What they are telling the American people, Gen. Sanchez said, is a grossly distorted account of what’s actually happening there.

His speech included this (sorry for the caps but the speech text is in cap form):

THE DEATH KNELL OF YOUR ETHICS HAS BEEN ENABLED BY YOUR PARENT ORGANIZATIONS WHO HAVE CHOSEN TO ALIGN THEMSELVES WITH POLITICAL AGENDAS.

WHAT IS CLEAR TO ME IS THAT YOU ARE PERPETUATING THE CORROSIVE PARTISAN POLITICS THAT IS DESTROYING OUR COUNTRY AND KILLING OUR SERVICE MEMBERS WHO ARE AT WAR.

But the N&O, in its front-page, above the fold story reporting Sanchez speech made no mention of his extensive and searing criticisms of the media.

Instead you published from the second half of his speech in which he was critical of both Congress and the Administration those portions of the speech which made it appear Sanchez was exclusively blaming the Bush administration for problems in Iraq when he was not.

Your story was not only news suppression; it was deliberately fraudulent reporting you knew would misinform and mislead N&O readers.

Here’s the URL for the post I’ve previously sent you and to which you’ve never responded despite my offer to publich in full you response.

http://johninnorthcarolina.blogspot.com/2007/10/on-sanchez-n-deceived-us.html

Here are a few other examples of N&O news suppression: You withheld for weeks the news you had concerning Crystal Mangum’s criminal background, even as you knew that news was directly contradictory to what you reported she told you and material to the case.

The N&O withheld news you had of the lacrosse players extensive and willing cooperation with Durham Police and instead deliberately published what you knew was the “wall of solidarity” lie. That led directly to the Wanted and “Vigilante” posters and the endangerment of the Duke students those posters targeted.

Are there any plans at the N&O to retract the Sanchez story and your Mar. 25, 2006“anonymous interview” story in which you told readers the accuser was “the victim” who had endured an “ordeal” which ended finally in “sexual violence?”

Thank you for your attention to this comment.

Sincerely,

John in Carolina