tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-39641491481070657.post8260072310103558097..comments2023-11-05T03:55:13.209-08:00Comments on Lauren's blog: Do reasons justify the crime?Bellehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03454348883713706404noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-39641491481070657.post-69001531517164593292007-10-05T14:07:00.000-07:002007-10-05T14:07:00.000-07:00Hi Lauren, I really enjoyed reading this post. I s...Hi Lauren, <BR/><BR/>I really enjoyed reading this post. I stumbled across it while searching for criticism of the Helmsman’s coverage of Bradford's murder investigation. <BR/><BR/>I wrote the Jena 6 article, which was the subject of this post, and I'd like to address some of your criticisms. <BR/><BR/>The Jena 6 story was originally intended simply to cover the student rally that took place on campus, and the U of M NAACP chapter that was organizing a road-trip to join the protest. <BR/><BR/>Well, as it turns out, and to my surprise, very few people on campus knew any of the back story about the events that occurred in Jena La. during the months leading up to the protest. <BR/><BR/>So I found myself in the difficult position of summarizing this incredibly complex and much debated situation--in about four paragraphs that were allowed by newspaper space and time restraints. <BR/><BR/>After reading your post, I agree that I should have included more details about the attack, but I was unable to independently verify any of the details of the attack beyond that the victim was admitted to the hospital and released later that same day.<BR/><BR/>Ironically, given the criticisms in your post, I chose not to include the detail about the victim's admission and same-day release from the hospital--because I felt it would unfairly portray the attack as a minor incident. <BR/><BR/>Instead, I wrote that the victim was attacked (verified), the assailants were charged with 2nd degree murder (verified), and civil rights leaders were protesting because they claimed the charges were disproportionate to the crime. (Civil rights protesters interviewed and quoted).<BR/><BR/>That story was not intended to be stand-alone coverage of the entire controversy. If comprehensively examined, that story could (and probably will) fill a book, and still leave out many details. Goodness knows, its discussion has already filled the talk radio waves and the blogosphere for months. <BR/><BR/>All of the opinions, and points of view that you cite in my story came directly from Professor David Acey, an expert in the history of the civil rights movement, and current day race relations issues, and Ashlee Roberts, the president of the U of M chapter of the NAACP. <BR/><BR/>I felt that their contributions more than explained why students at the U of M were protesting. And that was all my story was intended to report on. <BR/><BR/>Your allegations of personal opinion and bias… They seem to be based on a preconceived notion that reporters are supposed to write in a nonobjective and opinionated way.<BR/><BR/>In your first paragraph you said, “I know that you don’t have to present information in an objective way and that your writing should express your opinions…”<BR/><BR/>This couldn’t be farther from the truth. <BR/><BR/>I’d ask that you reread the Jena 6 story without assuming it includes writer bias, and see it for what it is: a story about student protesters standing up for what they believe in, and their disappointment that more students aren’t cognizant of current events. <BR/>http://media.www.dailyhelmsman.com/media/storage/paper875/news/2007/09/20/OtherStories/Um.Students.Come.Together.For.jena.6.Cause-2981606.shtmlTravis Griggshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12033756845126070506noreply@blogger.com