tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13073631.post6460322869122002214..comments2024-01-04T07:21:18.243-05:00Comments on John In Carolina: The Chronicle & “off the record”Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13073631.post-14632012887930090532007-08-10T08:40:00.000-04:002007-08-10T08:40:00.000-04:00John, from the moment I read young Mr. Graham's in...John, from the moment I read young Mr. Graham's initial essay and saw that he had closed down the message boards, I gave up on the Chronicle. I feel for Kristin Butler, if she's writing for the Chronicle again this year. Graham seems like a syncophant for the administration, so Ms. Butler may find any articles critical of Duke or the BOT are heavily edited. What a shame- almost wrote "sham"- Freudian slip, perhaps?<BR/>Texas MomAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13073631.post-47846000624634924112007-08-10T01:38:00.000-04:002007-08-10T01:38:00.000-04:00(from JinC): "I count you as a citizen journalist ...(from JinC): "I count you as a citizen journalist opposed to "same old/same old" from MSM. You come to places like this for facts and opinion with the seperation between the two obvious."<BR/><BR/>To JinC: spot on, and I'm honored you see it so. However, I'm not much of a journalist (a grumpy old engineer in fact), though if I had the time to research stories I might some day try it. I've developed a reliance on such blogs as yours, since the MSM has largely dropped journalistic ethics in favor of steering public opinion by means of savagely biased news stories in coordination with a single political party.<BR/><BR/>There's still good journalism here and there (KC Johnson pointed out today's Stanford Daily article on Duke LAX, and the Duke Chronicle got off some good ones too over the last 16 months), but like a miner one has to do a lot of sorting and rejecting of waste before processing the remaining stories that pass the assay.<BR/><BR/>Selective omissions are the key it seems, hence you're quite right in pressing this new Editor on his intentions toward actually covering and informing the public of any further mis- and malfeasances by Duke's Administration and faculty. They have not atoned one millimeter for their blatant sins (their craven non-disclosure settlement was a fraud against their endowment), and could stand lots more sunlight. Per the Stanford Daily: "it was a vocal minority of faculty members and administration enablers, rather than an athletic team, that was out of control".Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13073631.post-2016922090106184292007-08-09T22:39:00.000-04:002007-08-09T22:39:00.000-04:00To Insufficently Sensitive,Your sensitivity seems ...To Insufficently Sensitive,<BR/><BR/>Your sensitivity seems very sufficent. <BR/><BR/>I share your hope that Graham proves you wrong.<BR/><BR/>BTW - I've appreciated your comments here and at other places.<BR/><BR/>I count you as a citizen journalist opposed to "same old/same old" from MSM. You come to places like this for facts and opinion with the seperation between the two obvious.<BR/><BR/>Is that right?<BR/><BR/>To Ken in Dallas,<BR/><BR/>I do appreciate Graham's invitation. <BR/><BR/>I hope you'll join me as we go along.<BR/><BR/>You've commented here often and added to this blog.<BR/><BR/>I've never said, "Thank you."<BR/><BR/>Now I just did.<BR/><BR/>To Jeffm,<BR/><BR/>I plan to respond to your comment in a seperate main page post tomorrow.<BR/><BR/>For now, I'll just say I'm stumped as to whether you really are a reporter or a Troll or just a person like President Brodhead who struggles with situations in which the facts keep changing and whatever people have done is bad enough.<BR/><BR/>In any case, your comment is useful.<BR/><BR/>To Jack,<BR/><BR/>Thank you for a well-organized, fact-based and thoughtful comment.<BR/><BR/>I've noted similiar previous comments which I think have been from you.<BR/><BR/>My failure to respond to them is not a reflection on the merit of what you've said.<BR/><BR/>You're making some very important points.<BR/><BR/>I plan to give them a better response this weekend on the main page.<BR/><BR/>Please look for it.<BR/><BR/>And if I haven't done it by Sunday night, feel free to remind me on a comment thread.<BR/><BR/>To Anon @ 9:59,<BR/><BR/>The Duffer is one of the worst of them.<BR/><BR/>I hope you've made a full recovery from that surgery.<BR/><BR/>But "hanging" in a hospital bed watching Nancy Grace?<BR/><BR/>The pain must have been something awful.<BR/><BR/>Thank you all.<BR/><BR/>JohnJWMhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08275423713054782480noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13073631.post-12505375276690735472007-08-09T21:59:00.000-04:002007-08-09T21:59:00.000-04:00"rubbed elbows with top notch reporters" Like who..."rubbed elbows with top notch reporters" Like who would that be? Certainly not the Duffer and like ilk. All the reporters, I saw at the time (I was recouperating from surgery and spent a lot of time watching this case) were of the Nancy Grace variety. They were out to hang these guys as best they could and made outrageous statements.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13073631.post-49268664975909553382007-08-09T21:51:00.000-04:002007-08-09T21:51:00.000-04:00John, as you are a Duke alumnus, I can appreciate ...John, as you are a Duke alumnus, I can appreciate the place your alma mater holds in your heart; this affection and dedication is certainly the basis for your diligent and thorough attention to the awful travesty that was visited upon the school, the Lacrosse team, and a few players in particular. I admire your efforts, the thoroughness of your inquiries and how pointed you often are. As these events unfolded over the past year and some months many, many disturbing characteristics of Duke university came to light – the radical elements in the faculty and administration, the disgraceful abandonment of students in a time of dire need; the complicity with the Gang of 88 by most of the faculty, and more of the student body than one might expect; there is considerable resentment toward the students and the university in the Durham community and the media picked up on it, and using their own bias, made for a disgraceful display of pre-judgment, political correctness, and racial and class tension. My impression of the Chronicle’s position during this period is that the editors were less than strident in their support of the players, they never made too much noise about rushing to judgment, failed to express with the appropriate outrage the despicable behavior of the radical elements in the university, and on and on. There were a few columns here and there, I recall one young woman, since graduated, who made some very pertinent remarks, and tried calling out those she felt had failed in their responsibilities. But in the main, the Chronicle was a flaccid organ, if you’ll pardon the marginally tasteless pun. It should come as no surprise that this Mr. Graham failed to respond as you would have hoped – an individual meeting your expectations for the position would never have the position! <BR/><BR/>As I have noted before, every time a new angle of this fiasco is examined, another uncomfortable, objectionable or distasteful aspect of Duke University is revealed. While these issues may not be unique to Duke, it is Duke in the spotlight, and to that I say these problems are far deeper and more entrenched than you may want to believe. Your alma mater has been hijacked by some very nasty people, with a very specific agenda, one that is contrary to the alumni and parents who send their children and $45,000 a year. And they have more control over the direction of Duke than all the bloggers and posters and other concerned citizens across America.Jackhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16530476676444348404noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13073631.post-63669963694421533952007-08-09T20:02:00.000-04:002007-08-09T20:02:00.000-04:00JohnPeople respond to reporters off the record all...John<BR/><BR/>People respond to reporters off the record all the time, and it is honored. I know; I have done it. <BR/><BR/>I think it is simple courtesy to honor a request that a response not be quoted. I also think that it is fair in that case to say that you got no response when what you clearly asked for was a publishable response. Quite honestly, if I responded to a query of yours with the request that you not publish it and you did publish it, I would never respond to any query from you again. <BR/><BR/>Tell me: if someone says that he is telling you something in confidence, do you always feel yourself free to violate that confidence?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13073631.post-67459901801594144822007-08-09T16:54:00.000-04:002007-08-09T16:54:00.000-04:00John:"I hope you enjoy and are enlightened by it a...John:<BR/><BR/>"I hope you enjoy and are enlightened by it and imagine I'll be hearing from you about it as we go along."<BR/><BR/>Make sure you accept David Graham's invitation to comment on his promised "aggressive coverage".<BR/><BR/>Ken<BR/>DallasAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13073631.post-29279078415207634692007-08-09T16:38:00.000-04:002007-08-09T16:38:00.000-04:00What I read from his initial essay, and from his c...What I read from his initial essay, and from his condescending response to JinC (off the record,huh?), leads me to the conclusion that his approach to journalism is "we'll tell you all you need to know" - much like the top-down MSM. A license to steer public opinion, rather than examining and publishing all the facts.<BR/><BR/>He doesn't seem likely to follow in the footsteps of his distinguished predecessor. I hope he proves me wrong.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com