Wednesday, January 17, 2007

The N&O's precious ampersand

Readers’ Note: If you’re not familiar with the kinds of things that can happen at the Raleigh News & Observer’s Editors’ Blog, you may not believe that at the same time the editors are doing a “Nixon/Watergate” routine by refusing to release a transcript of the anonymous interview, one of them actually posted in detail on the history and color shadings of the N&O’s ampersand.("Black and white and red all over")

Managing editor John Drescher said he posted in response to a reader's question.

I’m not making this up.

I left the following comment on the thread. Don’t miss another reader’s comment I’ve placed here after mine.

John
_____________________________________________


Dear Editor Drescher:

Well, you gave us quite a detailed explanation about the N&O’s ampersand.

Now, will you tell us why you repeatedly reported the False Accuser was the victim;

why for many days you failed to report the players had cooperated with police;

why you instead promulgated the lie they were stonewalling and covering up for three team members who gang-raped a frightened young mother;

why you published the False Accuser's unsubstantiated claims she was gang-raped, beaten, robbed, and strangled by lacrosse team members;

why you covered-up the news that the FA had identified the second dancer;

why you covered-up the news that Precious made statements during the interview the N&O first, covered-up; then told us were “only details;” and now said it would have been libelous to report;

why you won't explain who led you to the FA and why that person(s) did it;

why, when Nifong charged the players were stonewalling, you didn't ask him about the players' cooperation with police;

why, when reporting on Mar. 28 on Nifong's attack on the players, you continued to withhold from readers the critically important news of their cooperation;

why you published on page one what you called the players "criminal records" (underage drinking, carry open beer cans, etc) on Mar 28, but didn’t report until Apr. 7 the FA's far more serious criminal record (car-jacking, attempting to run down a public safety officer);

why, when you finally reported the FA's record, you buried it at the bottom of a story the headline of which made no mention of her criminal record;

why you published the "vigilante poster" after Duke told media doing so would only further endanger the players;

why you blame the players and their parents and attorneys for your grossly biased, inflammatory and false coverage, which provided “the script” the Hoax enablers used to launch the witch hunt and inflict monumental injustices on innocent people and the community;

and why did the N&O decided to trash and frame a group of college students you surely knew were innocent?

Editor Drescher, fair-minded readers don't care much about your precious ampersand.

We want answers to the "whys" about your Precious "victim" and all the N&O and she did together to enable the witch hunt.

Answers, please!

Sincerely,

John in Carolina
_________________________________________________

I hope many of you will leave your own comments on the thread.

For those of you who don’t go to the thread, here’s a wonderful comment from it:

Comment from: Erik Blome [Visitor] • http://www.figurativeartstudio.com
01/17/07 at 10:06

I have a dream that someday, editors won't judge themselves by the color of their ampersand, but by the content of their newspaper.

7 comments:

Anonymous said...

ha! John, I shot an e:mail (blasing media coverage) to jane stancill at the N&O about her most recent article on the duke case. She shot back saying "Have you read our coverage? We have been first in many of the stories about the lack of evidence. You can find them all at www.newsobserver.com".
of course i had to register to read any N&O articles (didn't do), but she was offended i would critize local coverage.
i believe the media is clueless. I did mention i have to go to blogs to get info on the duke case...
very sad. keep on the attack.
Lee

Anonymous said...

I got the exact same response from Ruth Sheehan when I emailed her months ago. Pearls before swine, you know.

Anonymous said...

Made the jump over to the N&O blog to see what might have been posted. Mel went all Stalinist and deleted everything anyone posted about the Duke case. It seems to have offended her delicate sensibilities that anyone would follow her from the ghetto of Duke threads to press the case for disclosure. [She wants all you Dukie rabble rousers to stay in your place so she can ignore you with impunity, don'cha know?]

Anonymous said...

Can the Defense supeona the interviewer of that infamous interview where she withheld information. Since this is a criminal case it could be considered withholding evidence and information.

Anonymous said...

It's probably kind of telling that the N&O editors admit in their post about the ampersand that noone really noticed that this one was different from all the others. What? More proof that the N&O keeps having trouble with the details....

Anonymous said...

Perhaps readers are more familiar with N&O coverage than Stancill imagines.

Anonymous said...

They should name a moral illness after Melanie Sills.