Truth and Rec
Many people are weighing in now on the Greensboro City Council's action not to endorse the Truth and Reconciliation Project. If this isn't an example of the benefits of the blogosphere and citizen journalism, I don't know what is. On her blog, a council member articulates her position and some of the background maneuvering. A citizen who attended the meeting posts his thoughts with promises of more commentary to come. The newspaper's editorial page editor does the same. It's particularly effective because our newspaper coverage was constrained because the late hour the council addressed the subject ran smack dab against our deadlines. Beyond that, the meeting itself also made compelling television if you stayed up to watch (or watched it at 5:30 a.m., as I did on Channel 13.)
On a related topic, reporter Jim Schlosser has been asked to give a statement to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. He's declined, with my support. Jim was not a witness to the events that November day in 1979. He did report on some of the events afterward as did scores of reporters over the years.
By not participating, we are not expressing an opinion on the commission's work one way or the other. We simply avoid getting personally involved with an ongoing news story. By submitting a statement, Jim would -- presumably -- be asked to express opinions and feelings about what led up to Nov. 3 and what came after. While there is much debate about the value of reporters letting their opinions be known, we still prefer to pursue stories with objectivity and fairness, and to put any personal feelings we have on a controversial subject aside.
Comments (11)
To report abuse of the comment feature on this site, please use the feedback form at the bottom of any page.
LOL.......
Posted on April 20, 2005 10:15 AM
John,
In the absence of expanded coverage by the N&R, would this not have been an opportune time to link to the blogosphere from Jason's online article?
Due to the late hour, I was actually surprised you guys got anything about it in the print edition...
Posted on April 20, 2005 11:19 AM
Good idea, David. Consider it done.
Posted on April 20, 2005 1:55 PM
"Many people are weighing in now on the Greensboro City Council's action not to endorse the Truth and Reconciliation Project."
Um, yes, but did you mean to write that in a way that neglects to mention that the Council actually went a step further and voted to OPPOSE... something?
My reason for stopping by was to see if you could shed some light on what exactly the Council voted to oppose. Robbie Perkins' motion was that that Council oppose the Truth and Reconciliation "program." What is that? Will this be the out for the Council when they go back to "clarify" that what they meant was the Truth and Reconciliation PROJECT not the Commission?
Posted on April 21, 2005 10:33 AM
Roch,
John asked me to take this one. I haven't been able to talk with Mr. Perkins since the meeting, but he does explain in the meeting why he made the motion.
The motion he made was a substitute to Mrs. Burroughs-White's: "I would offer a substitute motion that we oppose the Truth and Reconciliation...(thinking of right word)...movement."
In response, Mayor Holliday asks if anyone will move to table both motions so that no vote is taken. "Quite frankly, I think we're going to regret having this motion," he said.
After some other discussion, it moves back to Perkins, who says, "I would rather be straight with the people and have them disagree with my position than I would try to sugarcoat it and make everybody feel better.
"I'd rather say I'm choosing to go in another direction. I respect your right to go study this as much as you want to study it, but I can't be with you on this issue."
On Wednesday in an interview, Tom Phillips said if he had made the motion, it might have been to merely "not endorse" the project instead of "oppose." But he supported Robbie's motion because he said that it does reflect his views and the fact that he does oppose their work.
Posted on April 21, 2005 2:16 PM
So, they voted to oppose the Truth and Reconciliation "movement." I'm not sure what the movement entails. I doubt if all six who voted for it would give the same answer either. But I guess the City Council voted against the Project, the Commission, those who signed petitions and those who are advocating for the process on campuses, in churches, in newspapers and in blogs -- afterall, we are all part of the movement. Good job Council.
Posted on April 21, 2005 3:12 PM
BTW, Matt. Thank you for the info.
Posted on April 21, 2005 3:13 PM
When Robbie was asked for clarification of his motion just before the vote, that is when he hesitated and finally said... "program".
Someone could check the tape. It's kinda important.
Posted on April 21, 2005 7:10 PM
Hoggard is right, Perkins' motion was to oppose the truth & reconcililiation "program."
Posted on April 22, 2005 12:09 AM
According to Allen there are two orgaizations receiving funding under one umbrella. One is the TRC and the other is TRP.
Figures quoted by the TRC for the amount of funding received don't add up to what the Andrus foundation's numbers are. Did not find any dollar amounts listed under the foundation that supposed funded the TRP. One of the funding groups has totally disappeared from the web. Anybody see red flags?
Posted on April 23, 2005 10:15 AM
As described on Allen Johnson's blog, the funds listed on the Andrus Family Fund website are a grant to the Beloved Community Center, which is the 501(c)(3) organization that houses the Greensboro Truth and Community Reconciliation Project (the commission's initiating body from which the Commission is independent). The $60K grant the Commission received from AFF was received several weeks ago and is not yet listed on the AFF website. As the commission's executive director, I am happy to talk further about our funding with anyone who is interested. Our 501(c)(3) fiscal sponsor (the group that handles the Commission's money) is the Community Foundation of Greater Greensboro and they would also be happy to answer any questions you have about our funding.
I'm not sure what Mr. Produce means when he says, "One of the funding groups has totally disappeared from the web." So far, our two funding sources are the Andrus Family Fund (a sub-fund of the Surdna Foundation) and the JEHT Foundation. I would be alarmed if either of these groups has disappeared in any fashion.
Thanks for your interest in these issues. Don't hesitate to contact me or visit the TRC's blog (www.gtrc.blogspot.com) if you have any other questions or concerns.
Posted on April 24, 2005 1:20 PM