For readers of the Daily Courier in Prescott, Arizona. Comment and discuss. Be nice, now.
Muggs archive
▼
Wednesday, May 9, 2007
Verde Independent: "Renzi, Hambrick could have dodged current spotlight"
Here's an example of how an editorial related to this breaking news can express disapproval while maintaining journalistic integrity and credibility. Contrast this with yesterday's Courier editorial.
16 comments:
I encourage you to share your own views and experience with me and other readers. How you do that matters, and I'm committed to maintaining a place where readers and commenters can feel safe from adolescent BS. So here's the deal:
There are two kinds of anonymous comments: those by people who have a genuine fear of revenge from the dark side, and those from darksiders just hiding to avoid accountability. You may post comments anonymously, but I reserve the right to treat anonymous comments as found items that belong to me and do with them as I see fit.
If, on the other hand, you're willing to stand by your convictions and post under your own name or a regular handle, your comments belong to you, and I'll edit them only on egregious violations of respect for others.
If this doesn't work for you, I'm sure you'll be happier somewhere else.
gee Steven ,the big difference between the 2 pieces is
ReplyDeleteA:the inclusion of Rick Renzi and a List of what he is accused of
B:No call for Hambrick to step down.
and on B I suspect that if Hambrick was the tax guy for the Verde area the unnamed editor would have been all over him to resign as well.
I wonder just how many folks will wind up getting implicated in these two unconnected(?) scandals
Assessor is a county office, so Mr Hambrick works for the Verde folks as well.
ReplyDelete"Assessor is a county office, so Mr Hambrick works for the Verde folks as well."
ReplyDeleteOkay
but it does not change the fact that the two editorial are not that different. the Verdes is a little less outraged maybe...
It's exactly my point that the difference is small between a measured response and going over the line into yellow journalism.
ReplyDeleteYou're wrong on this one, Steven. The Courier did its homework on Hambrick. Nothing yellow there.
ReplyDeleteI expect you're thinking of the reporting, MD, where I'm referrring to the editorial.
ReplyDeleteSteven, just wondering where, specifically, you think the Courier editorial crosses the line? Is it the editorial's overall assumption that Hambrick is guilty -- whereas our legal system calls for innocence until proven otherwise?
ReplyDeleteExactly -- the Courier has turned up some things that don't look good, but there's been no comment or action on the official level from law enforcement or people on higher levels of state edministration who are not apparently involved. By pulling the trigger too early, the paper is impetuously betting its credibility and breaking off communication with Hambrick, who may yet be vindicated, for all we know, for nothing more than bragging rights if things go the way the editor expects. The media have a constitutional role to play, but it is neither prosecutor nor judge.
ReplyDeleteWe should bear in mind that there's a quiet war being waged inside the Republican party between the right and the extreme right statewide, so we should watch out for media manipulation to further the various inside strategies. I'm not saying I know anything specific, just that I'm sure there's more to know about this matter.
I see the difference between the two editorials, but I am reading the Courier editorial differently than you are, I guess. I just took it to mean that Hambrick's simultaneous employment as assessor and Townsend employee looks unethical. I don't think the editorial is saying it WAS unethical, just that it appears to fall in a gray area -- and therefore looks suspicious. Just a thought...
ReplyDelete=> I don't think the editorial is saying it WAS unethical,
ReplyDeletePerhaps you missed that the Courier called for his resignation in response to this appearance.
I think you're missing something here, Steven, like most people do: It's the opinion page, which is where opinions belong. Joanna did it right in the news hole, and the editors are giving their opinion where it belongs. Pretty simple.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Media Dude -- the editor's opinion is that Hambrick should resign. I'm not sure that's a "call for his resignation," rather, it's the editor's opinion that he's "smelly." A call for a resignation typically says something like, "Hambrick, resign before you're voted out," or something -- more directly to whoever has offended the editor. In this case, it sounded more like an opinion, not a call for action.
ReplyDeleteMD=> It's the opinion page, which is where opinions belong.
ReplyDeleteOf course it is, and I don't contend otherwise. My point is that if the Courier editors hope to be taken seriously as journalists, they would do better to be more measured and thoughtful in print.
Bear in mind that there's a difference between a byline column and the main editorial, which states the opinion of the organization rather than the person writing it.
Steven , If the reporting bears it out ,isnt this editorial showing the right amount of outrage?
ReplyDeleteI mean you yourself have made statements that things look kinda fishy .
Perhaps you feel that the editor(although unamed ) should recuse him or herself from commenting since the paper backed Mr.Hambricks opponent when he was elected.
=> If the reporting bears it out ,isnt this editorial showing the right amount of outrage?
ReplyDeleteSince you're commenting on my post on the Verde Independent editorial, I'm not sure which you mean by 'this.' I'm guessing you really mean the Courier editorial, so on that basis I'll reply: if the issue eventually leads to a solid legal case, the Courier's call for his resignation now will have been justified. I'm saying it's impetuous to make that call now, and that the Verde editor did a better job at basically the same point.
Moo
ReplyDelete