News-Record.com

A lot of people feel they are out of your glorified journalistic loop, John.

Maybe if you DID print stories of local interest . . . stories the public has paid for . . . stories affecting and of interest to women (like mine) . . . stories that investigate . . . stories that jostle the status quo . . . maybe if you if you did keep your promises to communities that the newspaper has since left behind in the dust . . . more people would want to read the paper.

It's not "our" newspaper in Asheboro and Randolph County when your newspaper inserts are from High Point.

One of the excuses I've repeatedly heard from you and your staff (even some fellow bloggers) is that "complicated" stories are harder for "ordinary" readers to wrap their heads around. That argument plays to the lowest common denominator, and really is an insult - especially since the WorldCom verdict - where a jury full of "ordinary" people was able to sift through a whole lot of complicated evidence and convict a CEO of wrongdoing. We're smarter than you think we are. And we're tired of being taken for a ride.

A lot of the furstration that I (and others obviously) feel has to do with how you decide to use your column . . . your ink.

Your blogs seem to be a way for the News & Record to say that it's giving everyone a forum . . . but you're not really. Blogs only really work if the stories they tell are picked up by the established media. You reserve the right to pick and choose what you will present to the community for its consumption - either in your column or reporter assignments.

I expect it's the ultimate power trip.

Dr. Mary, it's relative - I look at what y'all have in Greensboro with envy. I think it's much more typical for editors to be a lot more high-handed in their communications unto readers - try reading other editors' columns and/or blogs and see if the tone doesn't set your teeth on edge. (send me an email, I'll send you an example...)
If you will excuse the fawning approbation, compared to the competition JR is a breath of fresh air.

Where's your blog? Blogger's free - Publish a list of stories not covered, or not covered well; start a dialog with reference to specific examples.

Dr. Anna, in Calif.

Thanks, Anna.

Dr. Johnson, I'm embarrassed if any of our staff told you that any stories are too complicated for ordinary readers to understand. You're absolutely correct in saying that insults readers. I know very well that our readers are smart and sophisticated. What that person who told you that really meant was that he or she wasn't good enough to make a complicated story easy to understand.

I appreciate your desire to get your story into the news pages of the News & Record. Until then, though, as other commenters have said, you have used this blog to point to it on the web. You can also easily create your own blog, and you can submit a story to be posted on YourNews.

Blogs only really work if the stories they tell are picked up by the established media. You reserve the right to pick and choose what you will present to the community for its consumption - either in your column or reporter assignments.

I expect it's the ultimate power trip.

I think that comment shows a lack of understanding about the power of blogs and bloggers. Blogs don't work only when mainstream media picks up the stories they tell. Blogs work when mainstream media loses the power to pick and choose and must start talking about the stories being batted about in the blogosphere.

Think about the case of Trent Lott. His questionable comments about Strom Thurmond's presidential bid were glossed over by mainstream media but bloggers did not let the issue die. When the online fervor of the blog world could no longer be ignored, mainstream media was forced to deal with the issue. This pressure from the bottom up ultimately forced Lott from his position of power.

The same holds true in the embarassing case of CBS. The blogosphere "worked" as a counterweight to mainstream media, correcting a bias or an oversight.

My point is that blogs work whether mainstream media plays ball or not. I think in the case of the N&R, the difference is that the newspaper wasn't forced to deal with bloggers, it chose to deal with bloggers. That's the unique thing in Greensboro, I think.

Dr. Johnson, if you have something you need to be heard, you really should start a blog. If what you have to say is relevant and provoking, people will hear and start to amplify your message.

To quote, Ronald Reagan, there you go again.

I DO understand the power of blogs, and I am going to start one soon. It's particularly important in this upcoming Medicaid debate - before we address the future of that program and what moneys are appropriated, we have to discuss how public money has been spent in the past.

But, with respect for all the freshness in the air (that to me feels very stale), the both of you have missed the point entirely. I should not have to rely on blogs as a way to get my story investigated and reported by a "mainstream", "local" newspaper.

John, if you want to know why your circulation is down - and you've had so much criticism of your paper on these blogs, consider this. People can get the wires from practically anything and anybody. And we KNOW nearly everything in the mainstream media - both on the Internet and TV - has one corporate (or political) slant or another. What people want, what they are obviously HUNGRY for, is REAL journalism - the kind that investigates and holds pubic officials (regardless of what party they're in) accountable for their actions. There is a saying, "All politics is local." I believe that is so with the news.

In my own case, the News & Record simply has no journalistic excuse for the opportunities it missed in the past. As I have said before, my Father, who walked with me on my protests (count them - TWO), and stood with me at an Asheboro City Council meeting last year, died last month waiting on someone, ANYONE, to do right by his daughter. And that just fuels my fire even more.

I copied John two e-mails yesterday - examples of the kind of "journalism" we in Randolph County have been subjected to FOR YEARS. The local Chamber of Commerce - in which both the hospital vice president and newspaper have served as officers (the good-ole-boy network is pretty thick down here), has openly decreed that unions are a bad thing, so the newspaper takes every opportunity it can to tell the good people of Asheboro what they should think - in "news" articles that are obviously so slanted and biased, that it makes one choke. My boyfriend is President of the local postal union and if you want to talk about "high-handed" slights from local newspaper publishers, ask him.

In my own case, years ago, when I first filed my lawsuit against Randolph Hospital, the newspaper did not see fit to report on the filing. I waited a year - and did not see any ink at all until I was sued (if you want that story - about the blatant and heavy-handed abuse of power - go to my website: www.asheboropediatrics.com). The newspaper editor told people who complained that it was "policy" that the paper did not become involved in "employee disputes". What is going on a Thomas Built Buses is exactly that - an employee dispute . . . in this case one man standing in the way of many. The newspaper can't have it both ways. It's about credibility.

The TRUTH is that my situation could not be spun to suit the paper's agenda (if I had been in a union, I daresay somebody would've thought twice about what they were doing), while the what's going at Thomas Built Buses can.

Part of my story now is how the media squashed it - and in the process helped other obstruct justice.

Hold on tight, John. I'm going to be at that blog class.

Dr. Johnson, I looked into your website last night. I do think you'd be best served by setting up a blog. It would certainly help you organize the material a little more clearly. I didn't have any idea as to what to read first.

Secondly, your website seems to be long on rhetoric and indignation and short on actual factual evidence to support your case. Maybe that is why you're having such a hard time getting someone to investigate. Maybe you should give a long, hard look at the way you've presented your case to the media and the public before you blame some huge conspiracy for the injustice you perceive. There's nothing truly provocative or compelling for an outsider to the situation. It's one side of a "he said, she said" story. Even a blog won't work for you if you don't make your case based on rational argument and factual evidence.

A useful quote? If you do the same things you've always done, you'll get the same results you've always gotten.

Okay, unrelated but needed:

Any blog site that has a photo included, yep, that includes you Mr. Robinson, MUST have a RECENT photo..

No more photos from 10, 15, or even more years ago. I've never seen you in person Mr. Robinson, but surely you still do not have that horrific moustache?

I refuse to post on any site where the main-frame picture scares me!

Thanks! Otherwise, I'm loving the new format!

For clarification, I believe that Dr. Johnson's references to the newspaper in her sixth, seventh and eighth paragraphs refer to the Asheboro Courier-Tribune.

As for scaryhair, I still have the mustache and consider myself incredibly fortunate that I've had that photograph online since August and, I think, this is the first comment from someone other than me that has made fun of my looks! :)

As far as I know, the News & Record's circulation has trended upward for a few years, Dr. Johnson. That bucks the national trend, and I attribute their success to a shift toward covering more local news and less news that is widely available from other sources.

You have made it clear that you are unhappy that the N&R has not printed the story that you want them to run. I suggest you set up that blog and tell your story now. If it is as compelling as you contend, you will see lots of traffic, and lots of eyes will read that story.

Mr. Robinson,

I didnt' mean to offend you. You're a pretty cute guy......if the year was 1975.....I bet you could be just as cute in 2005!! Here, this is for you:

Hair Styles For Men

Okay, so we know the clean cut look, short hair, clipped sideburns and clean-shaven face is never going to go out of style, but there are lots of options out there. Try them out! Experiment! Who knows, maybe you?ll find a whole new look that does wonders for you!

Moustaches

Moustaches are out! Please guys, if you sprout one, get rid of it. They are totally out of fashion ? they?ve been out since the end of the 80s, and are very, very uncool. Be brave and try going moustachesless for a while.

Sorry, but it's true.....

Thanks, Scary. I wasn't offended. Usually its my male-patterned baldness or my pencil-neck-geek look that gets the comments.

Well, you're in luck! Baldness and pencil-neck looks are IN!

Bald is beautiful!

Glad so many people want me to set up a blog. As I said I am working on it.

As for the Asheboro Pediatrics website, it has not been updated since before the Presidential election. You're absolutely right, there's a lot of "indignation" there. I freely admit it. But I invite each of you to walk in my shoes . . . go to school for over twenty years and come home to serve your community. Watch three years of hard work (and your dream) destroyed in a matter of days by people who obviously cared more about money than the promises they'd made (or ethics or medicine or the law) . . . watch these same people jack up their salaries to absurd heights on the public's dime while you struggle to keep your head above water . . . spend seven years getting nothing but the bureaucratic runaround and jurisdictional dodge trying to find any kind of "justice". I expect you'd all probably be pretty unhappy too.

The website will be updated and streamlined and simplified as soon as I can find more hours in my day. Remember I am a Pediatrician who practices medicine full time . . . ON THE ROAD . . . frequently out-of-state . . . because of what Randolph Hospital administrators did (and have gotten away with - in large part because the "local" newspapers have not done their job to help police the situation). In the past, the website has been has been about posting what I could when I could. I am going to blog class tomorrow. And I am looking forward to it.

That being said, the facts ARE there to back my story up - including the full text of a criminal complaint I presented to District Attorney Garland Yates back in 2003. Mr. Yates promised an independent SBI investigation - then turned around (behind my back) and made it crystal clear to the SBI agents assigned to review the case that he would not prosecute even if they found sufficient evidence to proceed. We're back to friends in high places and "he who has the most gold (or access to the public's gold) rules". The SBI agents I communicated with were pretty matter-of-fact about not spending time on a case that the DA would not prosecute. Mr. Yates did not have the grace or class to inform me (I spoke to the SBI agents), of his position and he has yet to respond to a single piece of correspondence. This is not justice for all.

In North Carolina, unlike other states, citizens must go through the DA to pursue indictment and criminal prosecution.

Martha Stewart went to jail because the DA's office was agressive and strict in it's interpretation of the law. In Randolph County, our DA is asleep at the wheel. And when he is awake, he winks and nods.

So now, I'm waiting on responses to letters sent in December to the Governor of North Carolina, his Attorney General (Roy Cooper) and USDHHS Secretary, Tommy Thompson. I should probably post those letters on the website, but again, I have not had the time.

Mr. Robinson has alluded, in several posts, that the general trend in circulation is down. And it was very specifically implied that this was the reason the News & Record pulled its Randolph County reporter.

The COURIER TRIBUNE is back to having no daily competition, and no reason to pursue any agenda that does not agree with that of its publisher or his well-appointed friends. So we look to Greensboro . . . and a newspaper that did not keep a lot of the promises that it made.

I have no position on Mr. Robinson's appearance.

John,

Just had an idea-- I know that I offered you, *totally* unsolicited advice, (and sorry, I just calls 'em the way I sees 'em)....but it gave me an idea for another N&R blog--especially after reading that you're seeking more women/minority bloggers.

How about an Advice Blog? Ya know...

Dear Advice Blog, My husband ran off with the babysitter's mom, should I throw all of his things out the window, or send them to Habitat for Humanity?

It would be a great place for seeking advice and community members could chime in with their experience/advice? And of course we know that this site would be "manned" by a woman, since we all know they give the best advice...

Just a thought, but I am loving the new format of instant gratification by way of posting.

Keep up the great work and I'll be looking for your updated photo on the main page.

For the record, our circulation went up in 2001, 2002 and 2003. It dipped in 2004, thanks primarily to the federal do-not-call legislation, handcuffing us from selling over the phone. It's back on the rise this year.

Scary, a good idea. Now, if we can just find someone who actually can give good advice....

Yikes! Dr. Johnson,

It sounds like you are carrying around a lot of hostility to be working in the pediatric population. Until you resolve this little matter that you're very verbose about, maybe you should take a leave of absence from the little tykes.

Now that was just a little uncalled for wasn't it?

When I post my opinions, Pediatric RN, I post my name. It's risky to be so "verbose", I know (particularly as a woman). But the future of medicine really depends on more doctors and nurses standing up for themselves and their patients - and doing so with passion and conviction. Look around. Corporations rule medicine. I wonder. Who signs your checks?

Medicaid is all but bankrupt. We're not asking the questions we need to be asking about accountability - particularly in the "not-for-profit" sector. We don't enforce the laws we have. And before we fund the future, we should ask where the money went in the past. We're not asking those questions, in large part, because lawyers and businessmen rule Congress.

The "little tykes" are the only reason I have hung onto the fight for so long. I cared about one so much on night seven years ago, that I went in to help her (at a pediatric nurse's frantic request, I might add), despite knowing that it would probably get me fired. And I was in that position because I had complained about a number of other matters that affected the care and welfare of my patients. Doctors should never be put in the position of making a choice like that. And they should not be afraid of speaking their minds - because someone like you will pop up out of nowhere and label them "disruptive" or worse.

The little tykes cannot speak for themselves. They, and their parents, and the doctors and nurses who serve them deserve better than they got from the exceptionally well-paid administrators who run Randolph Hospital - and the state & federal governments that supposedly regulates what happens there.

I've been working on resolving this matter for seven years. I've told the truth (more than I can say for a good many of the main characters in this mess) and I have expressed myself as honestly and forthrightly as I know how. I think my efforts and feelings are directed in the appropriate directions.

Your post was the cheapest of shots.

Dr. Johnson,

I believe that sometimes the truth is painful to hear. Even to someone as educated as yourself.

My post to you was my honest reaction to your posts. I believe that I would not be alone in this judgement. If you are not open to reactions, comments, criticisms, advice--then don't pour your dilemmas out on a blog site for all the world to read. And I don't believe a blog-site will be beneficial to you. I sense that you will attack all who have different views than yourself.

Your story about the child, "I went in to help her...despite knowing that it would probably get me fired.." is troublesome, at best. And your comment that you did so "at a pediatric nurse's frantic request" didn't affect me like you intended. In fact, this story that you wanted to tell to make you sound heroic, only troubles me more. That, as the professional that you claim to be, you would risk going against hospital orders at the request of ANYONE is unethical.

Yes, I receive a check that is signed by hospital administrators. Your point? Just because you have difficulities at Randolph Hospital, EVERY hospital administration is evil? Should I be working for free?

Just in your posts here at the N&R, you've attack the N&R, the Asheboro Chamber of commerce, Asheboro papers, Randolph Hospital, The D.A.'s office, etc.. Really, is everybody out to get you? I'm starting to see why you have great difficulties in seeking help and having your story investigated.

I still stand by my first post that possibly, your hostility could interfere with quality patient care.

Also, keep in mind when/if you create your blogsite. Libel laws still pertain to internet sites. I'd be careful what you "admit" to on-line as well as anywhere else. I wouldn't want you to be "fired" for admitting something that you did that you know you shouldn't have done.

I would think, even being the lowly pediatric nurse that I am--and yes, sometimes calling a doctor 'frantically'-- that this is a risky way to practice medicine.

> > How about an Advice Blog?

Absolutely!

> Now, if we can just find someone who actually can give good advice...

Select one or more advisors from your readers - Make it a (good natured) competition. And find some way to reward the best (most creative?) commenters - enter their names in a weekly drawing for, I don't know, a free cup of coffee or something.

It sure is fun setting up projects for other people to work on...
:-)

Again, Pediatric RN. I sign my name to my posts. And I stand by them.

The truth is the truth. I simply don't understand your reasoning or ire (wow, I sound like John Robinson). At the risk of being accused of attacking you, NO hospital has the right to give any physician (or nurse for that matter) "orders" that may place a patient's life in jeopardy. Your argument seems to be that, in the situation that got me fired (a situation that I reported to medical peer review the very next day - defying "orders" to do it), I should have ignored the nurses' request (nurses whose clinical judgement I implicitly respected and trusted) and allowed a critically-ill baby to suffer the consequences of grossly inadequate management by a physician who had misdiagnosed her problem. This physician had been marketed by the hospital as having special skills in neonatal management that he, in fact, did not possess. Would you have had me consider the situation too "risky", hang up on those nurses, and stay in bed? Now THAT's "troublesome".

Every time a doctor walks into an exam room there is "risk". But patients come first. That's just the way it is. If an order is wrong, it is wrong. Be it in a hospital nursery or a prison in Iraq.

If you had visited the Asheboro Pediatrics website before you posted your criticisms, you might have a better handle on what actually happened.

In case you're interested, my actions were exonerated by the hospital's peer review committee. Of course, this happened AFTER I was fired . . . hospital administrators insisting the whole time that the incident had nothing to do with my termination (what else were they going to say? . . . "Yeah, sure. We threatened her - then fired her - for doing her job the way she was supposed to do it."). By ALL accounts, the baby's life was in imminent danger, and I did what the cannons of my Oath (as well as my Medical Board) required. All these decisions were made in seconds or minutes, and I have paid for them for years.

Stating one's opinion or standing on one's beliefs is always "risky". Actually I've already been sued for "libel" - for reporting my experience as a public servant at this hospital to the Department of Health and Human Services (you'd know this if you had visited the website). The complaint was supposed to be confidential, but hospital administrators decided to open that "can-of-worms" in what was a fairly blatant intimidation tactic. It wasn't fun, getting sued. But we have a little thing called the First Amendment in this country - and truth is an absolute defense in a court of law. It was my successful defense. People are also free to have their opinions. Be advised that both JCHAO and the Department of Health and Human Services forwarded correspondence or (eventually) made decisions that supported my position. And two physicians (who have since left Asheboro) provided letters (to JCAHO) that supported my version of events.

I ruminated over your post all the way home (these days an almost three hour drive). Your (baseless) postulations that my "hostility" towards the people and/or organizations that have used & abused me (or the patients/public I served) may, in any way, affect the "quality" of care I provide really does not deserve a response. It's a cheap shot - posted for reasons I cannot fathom.

But your posts are actually a very telling example of exactly what is wrong with the way we "police" medical care in this country. As things stand with medical peer review today, anyone can make an accusation or observation (as groundless in fact as yours) and see that accusation stand to destroy the career and/or reputation of even the best or most honest physician. You don't like a physician? Do you covet their "business"? Well, it's easy enough to get rid of them. Call them crazy or disruptive . . . or (better yet) trump up a series of anonymous complaints. It's called "sham peer review", and it's done not with the intent to improve the qualtiy of patient care, but to economically dominate or destory a competitor.

Sham peer review is medicine's dirtiest little secret, and there are a number of websites now dedicated to the subject . . . the best of them belongs to an organization called the Semmelweis Society. I suggest you take a look. Physicians struggle to defend themselves against the kind of accusations you tossed at me (and the blanket immunity afforded hospitals) because there is simply no good way to fight an enemy who is immune to accountability. This must change. Due process - and the ability to face one's accuser before one is deprived of rights or property - is a constitutional right.

One of the ways to fix peer review is to simply enforce the laws we already have. That is basically what I have been asking for for over seven years.

I am all for whistle-blowers - mostly because I am one. But whistle-blowers need to sign their name and be responsible for their actions. I think I have been.

Not all hospital administrators are "evil" (although some doctors might disagree). But here's a thought to ponder. I've discussed, in previous posts, the "disproportionate share" Medicaid billing program - in which hospitals were/are afforded extra moneys to compensate for the disproportionately large number of poor & indigent patients they see. Ralph Campbell, our former state auditor, referred forty-some North Carolina hospitals to the Feds for criminal investigation on the premise that the program had been collectively over-billed to the tune of at least half-a billion dollars. During this six or seven year period, senior administrative salaries at Randolph Hospital (which participated in the program) increased by 200-300 percent. Physician salaries at the hospital-owned "not-for-profit" practice likewise skyrocketed (while private physicians struggled with harsher realities and no net). You simply cannot look at these facts and argue that the extra money was going exclusively to serve the poor and underserved. If you assume that the disproportionate share program was being abused in all fifty states - at least as badly as it was in North Carolina - that's 25 billion dollars. And it more than covers the 14 billion dollars President Bush wanted to cut out of the budget. "Show me the money???" becomes a valid question.

Yes you should get paid (I never said that you shouldn't - I just asked who signed your checks). And I NEVER said you were "lowly" (now who has issues?). But if you worked as a nurse at Randolph Hospital during the same time frame in which hospital administrators saw their salaries mushroom, your salary increase - as a nurse on the front lines of patient care - would have been comparatively miniscule.

Is everyone out to get me? No. But I call them as I seem them. I've reported CRIMES against my person and my practice to the DA's office. The DA promised an independent investigation - then killed it before it even got started. It's obstruction and it just smells. As does the behavior of our local newspaper publisher (for the record, I'm talking about the Courier Tribune) - who has done everything he possible could to bury this story - in deference to one of his biggest advertisers (the hospital), and his friends in high places (a number of whom are affiliated with the Chamber).

I'm no hero. I'm a doctor who came home. All I ever wanted to do was practice good medicine in my hometown in peace. As things are, I may never get home. But you know what? I'm going to learn how to blog. And I am going to do everything I can to fix what is terribly wrong with the profession that I love.

Think what you will. But please don't just follow orders for the sake of following orders.

Please take a vacation.

What a totally amazing waste of bandwidth, electricity, and server space. If you can't restrict your comments to the topic at hand, start your own blog. If you want to pummel John Robinson, start a hater's club and see if you can get anyone else in Greensboro to join. I don't think you will.

John doesn't deserve what he's getting here, and neither do we, the other readers of news-record.com. This is supposed to be a community space. To be in community, people must put aside their individual agendas in deference to the notion of community - sharing and cooperation. If this is going to work, we all have to work at playing nicely, yielding when it's no longer our turn to speak, and respecting the golden rule. Community first. Me second. On your own blog, you make the rules, so it can always be you first. This is DIFFERENT. This is Greensboro's newspaper.

I'm afraid the world is going to begin thinking that this groundbreaking online endeavor is totally wasted on Greensboro, and that perhaps our Town Square's idiots outnumber our savants. I don't believe this is true. Help me prove it.

Well, Chewie, you will no doubt be dismayed that I went to blogging class today. And I had a BLAST! It was a breath of fresh air . . . almost as good as a "vacation". I met all sorts of interesting, passionate people there - all of them with strongly held opinions & agendas about what our local and global community needs to be talking about (mine happen to center around the immediate need for better medical and fiscal accountability in healthcare).

So I will be starting a blog soon - and updating my website - and linking to others - and incorporating all of the ideas (well, maybe not all of them) that have been offered in this series of posts. John has a convert.

But I passed on the hat.

John's original post spoke to the frustration of people feeling out of the journalistic loop, and of the convictions many of us hold about what should or should not be printed in the newspaper. Based on experience (which I won't re-hash . . . pause for wild applause), I have some pretty strong opinions about that. After all, "Greensboro's newspaper" came down to Asheboro and promised us all great and wonderful things. Then "Greensboro's newspaper" abruptly left. A lot of us down in Randolph County think that some of the grief John is getting is deserved. And while I don't want to join a "hater's club", I am a member of the "you could be doing a better job club". That's what my first post spoke to. It obviously evolved.

My last post (admittedly long-winded - I learned today to try and keep it short) spoke to the looming Medicaid crisis. My boyfriend slyly noted that I had found all the money and "solved" the crisis. I wish it were so - and that simple, but this IS important stuff. And journalists, so far, are not asking all of the right questions about where our healthcare tax dollars are going. So I think it's a tad harsh to call all of this "a total waste of bandwidth, electricity and server space."

But that's your right. Blog on.

Thanks, Chewie and, Dr. J., I will welcome your blog!