News-Record.com

"Their concerns miss the point, as do our frustrations on occasion."

Very heavy sigh. Perhaps our frustrations, as bloggers/readers/commentators/citiznes, are that the N&R's concerns miss the point on so many occasions?

I guess that was critical of the paper.

John, even David Wray's lawyer entered one of the threads you referenced - giving quite a different look at the issue at hand than you did. Then you went off-line.

Perhaps, Mary. But I think we simply disagree about many things. If you view that as missing the point, I plead guilty. I, however, think it means we disagree.

I welcome Mr. Clifford into the blog. But I wasn't going to negotiate with a lawyer about an interview with his client in the comment section of the blog. Sorry about that.

John:

Perhaps you could establish a quota system for comments on your blog, since you are such a firm proponent of them elsewhere. Then you wouldn't have the same old people commenting, but an artificial mix of people based on selective criteria and not merely quality of intellect/passion.

Or you could just start editing comments like the GNR does interviews with sources, so that they fit the thesis you want to promote.

Don't tell me it doesn't happen. I had it done to me twice.

Regarding Locke Clifford, maybe you could podcast the negotiations and then blog about that.

Whaddya say?

ps. If all your critics went away, would there be anything besides tumbleweeds in here? Besides, I enjoy it here.

John, YOU initiated the dialogue on the thread you now denigrate by essentially calling the lawyer on the table for not playing by your rules of engagement. I'm still not getting why Mr. Clifford should have to "negotiate" anything about a document/report commissioned by the City government and paid for by taxpayers. You were baiting him for commentary from his client - and he called you on it. You made a promise you should not have made to your "source" (obviously someone in city government or law enforcement), and (according to you), "the usual suspects" have come on board to challenge that decision. The thread you reference was "strong" until you got annoyed.

"We disagree about many things." If we really do disagee that much, that tells me alot about the N&R - and how it uses its gift of public influence. It sounds like you'd just as soon not have some of us here. And like another local ("we want public input") enterprise I recently participated in, you're "listening" to say that you did (for show) . . . but not really. You have the clear advantage in any dialogue because you control the board. And I am mightily discouraged.

Hello Mr. Sykes. Nice to hear from you again.

JR,

what you call moving the ball foward and what i call moving the ball foward are two totally different things. In my opinion, the N&R pretends to move the ball foward. That is the game. Make it seem like the N&R is moving the ball foward. But, the ball hasn't really moved. Keep in mind this is simply my humble opinion. What would i know about moving the ball foward.

Despite my obvious bias against the GNR, I do want to be on record as saying they are doing a great thing with the interactivity of this site. I think we should at least agree on that point and tip our hats to them.

Their Media General counterparts in Winston are ahead of them on comments on stories, but limit the comments to 500 characters. They are woefully behind John, et al, on blogs, however, and light-years behind on willingness to try.

I apologize for not clearly articulating my post. The OTHER editors were expressing concern about comments on these posts, not me. I was attempting to explain how we view them and how important they are.

Yes, I know that we don't think the same. That doesn't mean I don't value your thinking. It means we don't see things the same way. No more and no less. I would hope that you would accept the disagreement in that way, too.

> "Comments are another way we can listen to readers... We may not like what they have to say. We may not agree with it, but we need to listen to it. And we need to respond back. It's interactive. We learn by doing, we learn by listening, and we learn by discussion."

thanks, John. Here's hoping they got it.

"....why they would want to enable that kind of low level bickering"?

As opposed to enabling "high level bickering", which is one-way in nature?

Do these editors run Paul Krugman, Molly Ivins, or (in all fairness) Ann Coulter, or other similar partisan columnists in their papers?

And they look down their noses at the N&R blog comments?

John, our differences stem from our vantage points - and our relative power to influence. Your 3/12 post says that "The First Amendment Puts the Power in Your Hands". That may have been true a couple of centuries ago, but it's not true now. There are too many corporations, too many lawyers, too many "networks", too many agendas in the mix.

By the way, I e-mailed all of the officers of the NC Coalition of Open Government today - gave them my website (as I have done with every member of the NC General Assembly). I wonder if the response of all of these forward-thinking reformists will be the same as my elected representatives (like Howard Coble - I'd love to know what he talked about off the record) and local newspapers?

By the way, do you value my thinking enough to want a copy of that e-mail? Because it appears I/others set a "bad example". That was not the other Editors talking.

Yes, the N&R is light-years ahead of anybody with respect to blogging (John's original post certainly does speak to other Editors lack of willingness to even try). After hitting a wall for seven years, finding this outlet last year was like walking in sunshine. But in terms of what the N&R actually does with many of the stories and opinions posted here, "agreeing to disagree" doesn't move anything. I honestly don't see stories moving forward or citizens "enabled" because of these blogs.

It's a place to vent. Not much more, no less.

You're right, Mary. Agreeing to disagree doesn't move anything. But it sounds like you're assuming that the comments here aren't read and considered. I may not find your arguments persuasive, but others may.

I've never said we're going to do all the stories suggested here or follow all the opinions. I've said that we'll read them and respond when we have something to add.

I'm sorry you see this as nothing but a place to vent. Venting may make the venter feel better, but it rarely has that effect on others in the conversation. If I had my way it would be less that and more of a place to talk about differences and explore other ideas, without the anger that defines venting.

John, one obvious solution would be to configure the blogs so that comments require moderation, which would, of course, require hiring someone to moderate, or someone already on staff to find/make the time to moderate.

Frankly, I think a moderator is unnecessary, because:

1. It would greatly reduce the entertainment value (not the primary intent, I realize) and
2. For even a casual participant, it is fairly simple to quickly determine who among the regular posters is off their medication and can be disregarded.

Frankly, I think the N&R blogs are a great service to the community and salute the N&R for providing them. Even with all the warts and bad smells.

Best regards,
Tony Ledford

"They were concerned about discussions like this, which start strong and quickly devolve into the same folks saying the same things, all critical of the paper."

Maybe that's because the newspaper is always writing the same things and always taking the same sides. If it is always the same people saying the same thing, including myself, then perhaps "they" aren't that off base. After all, the criticisms seem pretty uniform so maybe there is some truth behind them. If you don't want to acknowledge this, that is your prerogative. It would however, indicate that your papers frequent calls for public input to improve your paper are hollow at best. It could be worse, we could ignore you.

P.S. I think Locke is still waiting for your phone call.

I don't think that it necessarily follows that because some people think one thing about us that that indicates there's truth behind it. It does sometimes, but others it simply means that's the way they feel.

I also don't think that it indicates anything about our efforts to improve the paper. Lots of people tell us to increase the size of type and to reduce the number of ads. Others tell us to stop publishing so many photos of African Americans and not to write about crime. There are reasons why we can't or won't do these things.

But people also give us excellent suggestions that we follow, including content to add and events to cover.

Just because we don't agree doesn't mean we aren't paying attention. I admit, however, that when a commenter tells me the same thing over and over again on a topic we've already discussed, it loses its impact.

I know of no other way to publically post to the NR Editor so I will do it here.

What is the explanation for this headline on the news section of the NR home page ?:

"N.C. student loses computer over Bush criticism"

The first sentence of the article reads:

"A college student who used modified song lyrics to describe the violent death of President Bush on a Web site said he meant no harm — but the U.S. Secret Service seized his computer nonetheless."

What kind of Editor take to calling the description of the violent death of any President, "criticism"?

Also, the comments feature available at each online news article has read as follows: "We've had to postpone our plans to allow readers to append comments to individual articles until we can put additional safeguards in place, and we apologize for the delay."

Are those plans cancelled? If so why not delete the comments button? If not then why is it taking so long?

We plan to permit comments on news stories. We're in the process of moving our site from one platform to another, a process involving contracts and lawyers and disagreements. That's why it's taking so long.

As for the headline, I'm assuming by your question you think the word "criticism" should be stronger? The student apparently intended the lyrics as criticism, according to the story. And headline writers try to convey the general idea of a story in a limited number of words. Suggestions for another headline? Send it on.

Thank you for the article Mr. Robinson. Perhaps if the press keeps at Alston he will get things done as he should.

Now as to your blogs: You people have some of the best blogs around which shows there is enormous talent and intelligence on the staff. So why is the news paper so bad? I am sorry Sir but I had to start refering to it as The Sports Daily and now have changed to The Sports and Nonsence Daily. This is not to be derogatory either, it is to try and tell you that you are failing your readers and yourselves. I understand from people who have lived in Greensboro a long time that the paper once did very good in-depth coverage of state, national and international news and not the sound bites we get today. They say there was also a lot more investigative reporting. One instance is the Homestead Project. You brought the whole thing out, but now you are allowing it to die with the word of the DA when it stinks to high heaven. And Sir, you really are one sided on David Wray. I don't know him and have no preconceived ideas about him except my psychology background refuses to allow me to accept that he has been a closet racist for 22 years or more. This is just my opinion Sir, just my opinion.

Editor,

"The student apparently intended the lyrics as criticism, according to the story"

What else do people who threaten the President say when confronted with jailtime? Of course he's going to call it anything but a threat.

The headline is misleading and it's not beyond your authority to change "criticism" to "threat". I've seen online N&R article headlines changed in the past.

Brenda, it's true that we don't do as much in-depth state, national and international coverage. That's purposeful, and I've posted about it here many times. Readers have many, many places to get that information, and many, many places to get it as in-depth and timely as they want it. They have not depended on the daily newspaper for that for some time. Instead, we focus on giving them information about Greensboro, Guilford County and the region. And sports has been quite a local story with the ACC and NCAA tournaments.

As for investigative reporting, our reporting on Homestead wasn't back in the dark ages; it was two years ago. The story isn't over; we're still working on it. Meantime, while I know you don't like our Wray coverage, without us, the story would be over. There's more there, and we're trying to get it. As for other stories, in the past year, we've written about illegal immigrants using NC as an easy place to get driver's licenses, about how easy it is for illegal immigrants to get work in Homeland Security sensitive locations, about the real-life dangers of lead paint, about the operations of the High Point ABC Board, and, as you note, St. James.

There you are, Hugh.

Fair and balanced, Editor. Thank-You.

"Meantime, while I know you don't like our Wray coverage, without us, the story would be over."

John, I'm going to have to disagree with you there. I'm fairly certain that most everything you've reported, Ben Holder's reported too, and most of it, he reported first. He's also reported information that you haven't. Yes, you have a much wider audience than he does, but it would be hard for anyone to ignore the story while he's writing about it, which he's been doing since long before it broke in any other media, including the News & Record. I'm surprised you'd make that statement.

"I admit, however, that when a commenter tells me the same thing over and over again on a topic we've already discussed, it loses its impact."

When you write about the same things over and over, they lose their impact. You, know the boy who cries wolf...

JR,

WOW. Holy half truth telling Batman. i cant even believe you wrote some of those above comments. With all due respect Mr Editior ...while u say you guys have stayed on things.....I dont see it....and I certainly am not going to list the things u missed...but....please.....you are not what u claim....u covered a few things....that is true...but...the N&R falls short of what could be done repeatedly...way short....the police story would be over??? Where is the Roxy story???? I report what u r gonna report before u report it...God has even guided your secret e mails to me....i KNOW WHO U GO SEE AND WHAT U ASK....and i know lots more....and will put it together..whether anyone listens aint my problem...i am providing info too..so...u r a paper champion....I am the people's champion....now I am laughing...tell Lorraine I said hey....Go TEXAS...by the way...i hear butch called the N&R today to straightne some things out...he actually called me to thank me for getting everyone on the same page...so...my information was good...you can read and listen to it later on....the title of your good step story could easily have been..."city holds CO's until steps are repaired" Then you could have examined what a CO is and has anyone been punsihed for renting without one? If so why? That kind of thing...but....the story u put out left that out..maybe even get a qoute from a ruco board member..i would choose Ron Tuck...i got the audio coming JR....I have a blog..i will post what i know...blah blah blah

Readers can decide for themselves. But I gotta tell you, Ben, you're sounding a little bit like a stalker.

A stalker? What nonsense, and you know better yourself, John. I know Ben, and he's smart and funny and unfortunately for the bad guys, persistent! His passion for truth and justice and his strong advocacy for the rights of the poor and the voiceless continue to amaze me. You'd be well served to have a reporter like Ben on your staff. How about it, John?

Cara, I was kidding about the stalker remark.

John,

Have you listened to the song that supposedly contained the lyrics in question regarding Bush?

If you haven't, changing the headline is premature. If there was a threat. I doubt it. If there were, this student would be in custody.

Don't knuckle under to these right wing folks, John. They are never satisfied until all news has a right-wing slant on it.

Fair and Balanced my ass.

In the absence of the universally recognized ;) thingy, how are we to know that you're kidding?

And I notice you didn't answer my question. Hmmm... Perhaps you're stalling...

How ironic that we're having this chat in a thread on the danger of comments. What fun! ;) [Note the kidding symbol. This is how we do it. Hugs, CM]

I think Ben knew I was kidding, given some of our other conversations. If not, sorry.

I'm not aware that he's applied, and judging by what he's written about the paper, I don't know why he would want to work here.

yeah JR....get your butt handed to you and call names. Funny how you would not address my stuff like you do others. I know why. You do to. You know I have kicked your Papers ass on several occasions. A real honest person could admit it. Your flippant response speaks volumes. The only they I stalk is the truth. Y'all should try it.

Well, you could be right, Ben. But I like our work and am fine with letting readers decide.

". . . without us, the story would be over."

That one statement tells me more about your opinion of yourselves - and the rest of us - than anything else could. And you wonder why some of us are "angry"?

As much as you apparently do not want to admit it, there is a great deal of truth behind the way many of your readers feel. And the truth hurts.

If anybody has any questions about that, Bledsoe's "Death by Journalism" is a good start.

I look forward to posting commentary on news stories (been waiting for a long time). But it's farily clear that offering commentary here is a waste of time and effort.

Amen Dr. Johnson! JR, the funny thing about this is I dont do a whole lot of anything but answer the phone regarding the Po Po story. (Po Po is the street name for Police JR) It is the people your staff is chasing that call me and tell me what goes on. How else would I be able to post what u r going to write b 4 it hits the stands? The people your staff stalks informs me of what is said. Then we talk about how the N&R will present it to make Mitch happy. Stalk that clean shaven one! There are several things that are not even considered that illustrate how this is a one sided story. The city needs very much for Wray to be found in a Klan outfit. the N&R needs very much to stay close to the city cuz if it aint spoon fed to y'all u cant write it. many of your staff want to find the evil racist in the police dept...got news for u...wrong department... I am not as crazy and stupid as your reporters tell folks...and u my friend, r not presenting the whole story for the readers. Not becuase you can't...but because you won't. it would not be politically incorrect to examine the investigators as you have the investigated. Linda Miles is fair? Mitch does not hide things from council? Why dont you do a lil look see at the transfer station property on Burnt Poplar road...hell JR, take a look into the carl Essa/Mitch Johnson connection...ask around about how Linda treats her employees...wanna talk about bad management, harrassment, prejudice and broken rules? I am just saying....the pot is calling the book black..and I aint buying all of it...it stinks...u can pretend the leak and the homestead stuff coming a the same time means nothing...but I wont...and u can keep writing to make Mitch happy...I wont. I have been ahead of u on this dating back to the first GTRC hearing...who talked to Virgil? Did Allen? Lorraine? Who got Rick Ball to speak? You? Schlosser? You see JR, I am all about opening communications and getting to the bottom of things to ensure a level playing field...if u had a clue u would see that.

ccduxjba http://tajiqpzx.com wpbfwabq exnlyyzd [URL=http://uvcdqjqj.com]oizpydcf[/URL] gjbndqno