Showing posts with label bloggers. Show all posts
Showing posts with label bloggers. Show all posts

Thursday, November 20, 2008

Chinese SpaceWalk: Real or Hoax?



Your Ad Here

Wag the Chinese SpaceWalk?
Does the CCP Shenzhou VII Spacecraft video indicate a hoax?
Bloggers Debate


Rhonda Roland Shearer,
StinkyJournalism.org



[ABOVE: Ian O'Neill, Astroengine.com, did an analysis of the Shenzhou VII spacewalk video that bloggers have questioned. He wrote,"If you have a look at the image above, I decided to trace the paths taken by our 'bubbles' in an attempt to see where they originated."]




Controversy about a Chinese space mission video has gone out of this world. Epoch Times presents arguments that support that it's fake, whereas, Astroengine.com. has declared it legit. Both sites have done an impressive, detailed analysis .

Shu Yu reported, "The Epoch Times contacted Chinese expert Dr. Qu Zheng, who worked at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory, to scientifically analyze the video discrepancies" of the CCP Shenzhou VII Spacecraft "spacewalk" broadcast.

Dr. Zheng said, "In addition to the air bubble problem pointed out by bloggers, they also includes technical pre-launch concerns, a lack of atmosphere around the Earth, abrupt large scale changes in the clouds, and no background noise heard in the space-talk."

In contrast, Ian O'Neill, Astroengine.com, concludes, after doing a careful review of the blogger challenges, that the space video is fine. He wrote, "So, we are presented with two options. Either, China went into space and performed a flawless 15-minute EVA, or the mother of all space hoaxes has just been carried out.

So which is it?

Continue reading: Wag the Chinese SpaceWalk?

by Rhonda R Shearer
image/source: Wag the Chinese SpaceWalk?




Tuesday, October 28, 2008

Obama, McCain Flag Pin Watch: Taking Turns Playing Gotcha



Your Ad Here

Hey, MsM and Bloggers, Dems and GOP:
Stop the flag pin blood feud!

by Rhonda Roland Shearer



Nicole Belle, CrooksandLiars.com, claimed, gotcha!, Apr. 19 08, "Notice Anything? John McCain doesn't wear an American flag pin on THIS WEEK" (Arrows in photos are original to Belle's article. Are they big enough? )
Image source




Taking Turns on the Obama, McCain Flag Pin Watch

On Sunday, Oct. 26, Fox News showed The View’s Elisabeth Hasselbeck introducing VP candidate Sarah Palin. Hasselbeck emphasized that Palin wears a flag pin for her son, who serves in the Army. Palin reached for her lapel and smiled right on cue, as if she were Hasselbeck’s sidekick modeling jewelry on the Home Shopping Network.

That's fine. But what does the focus on the pin mean for her boss, John McCain, who does not always wear his flag pin? McCain made it clear last October, when he was asked about Barack Obama not wearing a flag pin, that he "doesn't wear a flag pin on a daily basis."

Obama soon started to wear a pin after that dust-up. (See LA Times, Breaking News: Obama caves! Flag pin returns to his coat lapel, Apr.16 2008). Case closed? Not a chance. Dem and GOP pin watchers alike cannot give it up.

Later on Oct. 26, there was Fox News again, this time Hannity's America, flogging the flag pin flap, replaying a 2007 Obama interview - breaking news! - in which he first said he would not wear the flag pin.

Not to be outdone, one web site has assembled a "montage" of press photos of John McCain in the 70 days after he secured the Republican presidential nomination. In none of the more than 1,300 images reviewed between March and May was McCain wearing a flag pin. Yet by the fall, the pin's absence was still enough of an issue that the Louisville, Ky., Courier-Journal reported on Oct. 1 that McCain "did not wear an American flag lapel pin during the debate."

So what's the "gotcha" all about?

Continue reading: Hey, MsM and Bloggers, Dems and GOP: Stop the flag pin blood feud!


by Rhonda Roland Shearer

image: Stinky Journalism
source: Hey, MsM and Bloggers, Dems and GOP: Stop the flag pin blood feud!



Wednesday, August 13, 2008

John Edwards Scandal: Copying Continues As Rielle Hunter Web Info Keeps Vanish



Your Ad Here


Info Keep Disappearing
Readers Keep Copying






Simon Scowl, at Deceiver--that name's popping up quite frequently over the last month--reports on what's rapidly becoming a Deceiver specialty: disappearing websites with information about Rielle Hunter. [Yet Another Rielle-Related Site Vanishes].

Yesterday the Newark Star-Ledger tried to talk to Rielle Hunter’s old business partner Mimi Hockman (pictured), as I recommended somebody do almost two weeks ago. They approached Hockman at her home in New Jersey, but she wasn’t too cooperative. Which isn’t surprising at this point. Nor is this (emphasis mine):


Deceiver's work on another vanished website was part of our story on disappearing Rielle Hunter information as the start of the Edwards' campaign cover up, John Edwards Scandal: Who in the Edwards’ Campaign Ran the Cover Up? UPDATED.

Thankfully, it's harder for the information to vanish now: a small army of readers are now aware of the problem and are screen-saving, copying and downloading Net info before it disappears--including Deceiver readers and our own Research Dept.

We'll call it: The Forces of Darkness vs. The Forces of Light, Internet Rielle Hunter Info Division.

by Mondoreb

image: Deceiver

John Edwards Affair: December DBKP Montross Story Confirmed Yesterday



Your Ad Here


DougRoss@Journal, DBKP December stories Confirmed:

Eric Montross Angle Valid


"Come on, guys! I told you it was OK to write about it, but this is too much!"


[The following is published not to toot our own horn. Okay, okay--maybe a little. The impetus is to record where this information was first published; as well as how much time elapsed before a member of the traditional media confirmed it.]


Another part of the John Edwards story uncovered by bloggers was confirmed--almost eight months after it was first reported at DBKP and DougRoss@Journal.

The Raleigh Telegram--which didn't let readers in on the scandal until days ago, and which ran an editorial citing Edwards' "continuous denials" as a reason for its non-coverage--confirmed, in a pair of stories yesterday, that ex-NBA star, Eric Montross was indeed involved in the scandal--most likely, unknowingly.

Rielle Hunter Stayed In Chapel Hill Last Year and UNC's Montross Rented House To Edwards Worker both confirm that Andrew Young was staying in Montross' house--in the same Governor's Club gated community that the Enquirer reported that Rielle Hunter was staying.

Although it is not known by this newspaper who owned the house that Rielle was living in, it has been confirmed that Young was renting his house from former UNC basketball star Eric Montross.

Montross is well-known to Tarheel fans for being the star center of the UNC NCAA Championship team in 1993, before going on to a ten year professional career in the NBA.


[The Telegram's earlier "continuous denial" quote was one, among others, that prompted DBKP to write John Edwards Scandal: The Myth of the Edwards’ Denials on August 7--one day before John Edwards quit denying the affair. It seems that the Telegram was stung by taking Edwards' October denial of the affair--when it was deniable, since the Enquirer had published, at that point, only some unnamed sources about an unnamed "other woman"--at face value and has been busy making up for lost time.]

On December 27, DBKP published "John Edwards Scandal: Rielle Hunter Housed by Former NBA Player". It left details of a tip we'd received from someone describing themselves as, "someone who partied with Rielle in LA".

We'd hoped that by publishing the info, that it would excite the curiosity of just one reporter in the MSM--maybe who was also a sports fan.

But, it was a blogger, Doug Ross, who responded to our article within minutes [John Edwards Love Child Saga, the NBA and the MSM] with the name of Eric Montross.

Doug did some detective work--work that any MSM reporter could have done in December, as The Telegram proved just yesterday--and ran down Montross. As Ross related:

"Okay, so I was curious. Went to OpenSecrets and did a donor lookup."

The only ex-NBA player and heavy Edwards donor I found is Eric Montross, who is listed in Chapel Hill. That's not to say Montross is hosting Rielle, but if the DBKP story is accurate, he's someone for the MSM to check into.


As Doug Ross, DBKP and the rest of the world was to discover: no one in the MSM did check it--until The Telegram did.

Now, for the first time, we can tell a bit of the story behind our December 27 story.

We received a credible tip about Rielle Hunter living in Eric Montross' house at the Governor's Club. LBG, after about 10 hours digging, discovered in December much of what The Telegram published yesterday, and from many of the same sources. From yesterday's Telegram:

Young and his family rented the substantially large house at 32340 Archdale Drive owned by Montross and his wife in the Governor's Club subdivision. Montross actually lives in another house over the county line in Orange County, according to tax records.

An online newsletter for the Governor's Club community called "Ginny's Community" welcomed the Young family to the neighborhood and mentioned them by name along with their new address.

According to a real estate listing on the Chapel Hill Realty Group's website, Montross' house at 32340 Archdale Drive that Young rented was formerly up for sale at an asking price of $1,425,000, although according to Chatham County, the assessed tax value is $1,658,822. Although the property is listed as "sold" on the real estate website, the Chatham County records do not indicate that a sale took place and Montross has owned the house since 1993.


DBKP's efforts were redoubled on December 26-27 in an effort to locate exactly which house Rielle Hunter was living in. It wasn't known if the Youngs had relocated to another nearby house when Hunter appeared in the Governor's Club, or if, more likely, our tipster had some of the info right.

We just could not tell.

So, we left messages in the comments sections of several NC blogs--including one in the Chapel Hill, NC area--appealing for someone nearby to do some legwork. The comments and emails went largely unanswered.

The decision was made to publish our story the way we did. We knew from the Enquirer's December reports and LBG's digging that Hunter had been in the house at 32340 Archdale, but we couldn't say for sure she was living there. It was hoped that by posting something, it might excite a reporter in the Raleigh area to check the information out.

As it happens, that occurred--over eight months after our story and Doug Ross'--was published; after John Edwards' Nightline appearance green-lighted the Edwards scandal for the major press organizations. to cover.

ENTER RADAR



Several weeks ago, in the wake of the Enquirer's reporters' confrontation with Edwards at the Beverly Hilton, interest in the Montross angle was renewed. On July 31, Radar published John Edwards’ Money Man: Fellow Tar Heel Eric Montross?. In the story, Radar took a look back at Ross' and DBKP's stories seven months earlier:

In a follow-up story published on December 19, the Enquirer reported that after word of the affair got out, Hunter moved into a home owned by an Edwards supporter in the exclusive Governors Club, a gated community less than five miles away from the Edwards HQ in Chapel Hill and only a few blocks away from the Young residence.

Here's where things get weird: five days later, a right-wing blog called Death By 100 Papercuts received a tip that the house Hunter had moved into was owned by a former NBA player who had contributed money to the Edwards campaign. Doing some digging, Doug Ross reported that the only former NBA player who had donated money to Edwards was Eric Montross, a UNC graduate who was drafted by the Boston Celtics back in 1994 and ended his NBA career in 2003. Montross gave $4,600 to Edwards during the 2008 election cycle; he was described as a "big backer of John Edwards' White House bid" by CNN. (Edwards went to UNC law school.)



We took note of the Radar reference in John Edwards Scandal: Birth Certificates, NBA Players and the Waking of the MSM the same day.

Less than a week later, Radar seemed to be backpedaling, however [Eric Montross Would Like You to Know He's Never Met Rielle Hunter, Thank You Very Much]. Radar then said:

Last week, we culled together some thinly sourced material from around the Internet and posted an (admittedly) wildly speculative theory about how Tar Heel and former professional basketball player Eric Montross was the guy paying off both John Edwards' alleged mistress Rielle Hunter as well as Andrew Young, the professed father of Hunter's (Edwards?) kid. Which would be news to Eric Montross! "I don't have anything to do with this," Montross told Radar by phone. "Whatever is going on with Edwards, I can tell you unequivocally that I am uninvolved."


Both Doug Ross and DBKP were relegated to the ranks of the "thinly-sourced". A letter was dispatched to Radar detailing how Montross' name had come to be connected with the scandal, along with the observation that DBKP "believed Montross didn't know Rielle Hunter".

Today, Radar commented on the Raleigh Telegram story with some interesting observations: [Eric Montross Back in the Picture!]

A little while ago, we floated an admittedly crazy theory that former NBA player, UNC alum, and John Edwards supporter Eric Montross not only owned the Chapel Hill house Rielle Hunter was reportedly staying in after Edwards knocked her up, but also that Montross might have been the mystery man paying off both Hunter and professed baby daddy Andrew Young. Montross vehemently denied having anything to do with anyone involved in the scandal ("I am 100 percent detached," he said), and soon after Texas lawyer Fred Baron was outed as the money man, and we assumed that was that. But it turns out Montross isn't totally insulated from the whole scandal: the Raleigh Telegram is now reporting that Montross rented a house he owned in the exclusive Governor's Club development to none other than Andrew Young—and that the house was just a few blocks away from a home Hunter herself was living in.

Granted, that doesn't mean Montross knew anything other than that his tenant had a crazy chick for a neighbor (it's still unclear who rented Hunter her home), but it's not like Young found him off of Craigslist. How much John Edwards actually told him is anyone's guess. The Telegram also corroborates an earlier story from the Enquirer in which it was reported that Hunter was an occasional dinner guest at her neighbor Young's house. (Young is married with kids.) Given that it's not exactly common practice to have the woman you've supposedly had an out-of-wedlock child with over for supper, the most logical conclusion to draw is that Young—surprise!—isn't the father of Hunter's kid.


We're just hoping all this gets us out of that "thinly-sourced" category.


[This past Thursday, DBKP and Doug Ross again collaborated to beat the MSM to the punch on the Fred Baron story: John Edwards Scandal: Is Fred Baron the Enquirer ‘Hush Money Man’? and [Rumors Run Wild: Is Fred Baron the Wallet for John Edwards Scandal. The next day, Fred Baron began releasing his statements that he was involved in moving Rielle Hunter around the country.

Doug Ross was emailed in the early afternoon with our info; but was away at the time. In the meantime, a Radar commenter had posited the names of both Baron and ex-Dallas Mavericks coach, Don Nelson.]


DBKP knew Rielle Hunter had been in Eric Montross' house back in December: either as a guest or a lodger. Then, there was no way of knowing the particulars. Today, it's still not known if Eric Montross knew about it; in all probability, he didn't.

We're only happy that aspects of our stories were finally confirmed.

We just wonder what took so long for someone else to "get some feet on the ground" to check them out.


by Mondoreb

images: dbkp file; Radar

Sunday, July 27, 2008

MSM Stealing Blog Content: Times Online Joining Growing MSM Trend?

John Edwards Love Child Story Goes International
No Attribution in TimesOnline Edwards story

Is This a New Business Model for a Mainstream Media in Trouble?




- - - - - - - - - -


"We contacted an AP senior editor and ombudsman both and both admitted to having had the article passed on to them, and both stated that they viewed us as a blog and because we were a blog, they did not need to credit us."
--Larisa Alexandrovna, Huffington Post & at-Largely

- - - - - - - - - -


DBKP.com was alerted yesterday to both a good news-bad news situation by Doug Ross, of DougRoss@Journal.

The good news was the TimesOnline had used several of our quotes from our interview this week with David Perel, Editor-in-Chief of the National Enquirer, in a story it ran on John Edwards' run-in with the Enquirer's reporters at the Beverly Hilton while visiting his mistress and their love child.

The bad news was that the Times reporter, Sarah Baxter, in her story, Sleaze scuppers Democrat golden boy never credited DBKP as her source for the quotes, which were taken word-for-word from our story, "John Edwards Affair: Interview with David Perel, Editor-in-Chief of the National Enquirer".

Doug has an account at "Sunday Times runs Edwards-Mistress-Love Child story, rips off Blogosphere".

As Doug points out: "When this story first broke in December I wrote that the blogosphere renders the mainstream media less relevant by the day.

Through its questionable behavior, the Times has done nothing to counter my assertion."

At first, we tended to attribute the non-attribution to an oversight. After all, the story was widely mentioned this week, among other places at Slate, The Corner at National Review Online, Ace of Spades HQ and made the front page of FARK.

But upon closer inspection, doubts began to arise. We sent a letter yesterday to the Times Editor-in-Chief asking that proper credit be given. We also sent a copy to the Times News Desk.

Easy enough, right? Just add the proper credit and link to the corrected story on-line and publish a small correction later for the print edition.

Then we received some disturbing news.

DBKP's LBG sent in an email: I posted a comment on the story at the Times yesterday noting that the reporter did not attribute the Perel quotes to the story written by DBKP. My comment was never published." She included her comment to the Times:

"The reporter who wrote this story did not attribute the original source of the Perel quotes, a story at Death by 1000 Papercuts.com."

I received another email shortly thereafter from Doug Ross with basically the same message.

Though other comments to the story made after both LBG and Doug Ross' had been published, their's were not. So, someone at the Times was aware of their concerns.

This got us wondering if this practice was widespread among the major media; we then started searching the Internet.

Yikes!

At least in America, the MSM is mining blogs for stories and flipping off the original creators/writers when reminded whose work they're using.

The Associated Press commenced suing bloggers quoting AP stories in June 2008. AP's Intellectual Property Governance Coordinator Irene Keselman had this to say in a letter to Cernig, of Newshoggers:

"... you purport that the Drudge Retort's users reproduce and display AP headlines and leads under a fair use defense. Please note that contrary to your assertion, AP considers that the Drudge Retort users' use of AP content does not fall within the parameters of fair use. The use is not fair use simply because the work copied happened to be a news article and that the use is of the headline and the first few sentences only. This is a misunderstanding of the doctrine of "fair use." AP considers taking the headline and lede of a story without a proper license to be an infringement of its copyrights, and additionally constitutes "hot news" misappropriation."
--Fair Use and the Associated Press

The above mentioned dispute involved Drudge Retort using excerpts--some as small as 18 words, according to many reports--under Drudge Retort's own headlines.

AP, thy name is hypocrisy.

Larisa Alexandrovna, Huffington Post and at-Largely wrote about a disturbing experience with AP in "MSM Plagiarism Strikes Again – AP Welcome to the Party"

On March 14, 2006, the AP did their own article, left out any attribution to me or my publication and lifted not only my research but also whole sections of my article for their own (making cosmetic changes of course).

We contacted an AP senior editor and ombudsman both and both admitted to having had the article passed on to them, and both stated that they viewed us as a blog and because we were a blog, they did not need to credit us.


Alexandrovna goes on to state in the same article:

"Unfortunately this is far too common and has happened to me and to other writers and bloggers far too frequently. This time, however, we made a point of tape recording the AP apparatchiks admitting to taking our work and using it without attribution, stating "we do not credit blogs".



She then goes on to list six or seven of the most egregious examples of AP plagiarism at the time of her article, March 27, 2006.

More recently, the New York Times tried to take credit for the Iranian Missile Fauxtography.

The Iranian thugocracy doctored a photo adding in a fourth missile, most likely to cover up a failed one. The blogosphere exposed the manipulated photo. Charles Johnson of Little Green Footballs [Iran's Photoshopped Missile Launch ] was the first to the scene. However, the New York Times blog, The Lede, is taking credit [in a Iranian image, a missile too many] for exposing this even though their report was given much later. FOX, obviously slacking on research, also credits the lede. Mac's mind: Ny Times Commits Plagiarism on Fake Iranian Missile Photos


The above article cited Ace, of Ace of Spades HQ, [Shock: NYT Blog Claims Credit For Fauxtography Story They Didn't Break] who said:

"Whether CJ (Charles Johnson of Little Green Footballs) deserves all the credit, I don’t know. I do know the NYT deserves little of it, and ought to stop claiming otherwise."

Exactly.

The New York Times, forced to eat the bitter fruit from its looney-left editorial policies, may have hit upon the only business model that allows it to survive the death spiral of falling ad revenue, circulation and stock prices: lay off its news reporters and rely on ripping off content from the Blogosphere.

But the AP and NY Times are not alone.

There is so much news theft going on, in fact, that Hamilton Nolan, of Gawker, had to explain "The Golden Rule" in The Complete Guide to Stealing New Stories:

Media outlets can only steal outright from other media outlets that are not their direct competitors, and do not fall in their same class. First-class outlets: National TV news networks (including the big three on cable), the top five national newspapers, top-level weekly news magazines, and a select few websites like Drudge. Second-class outlets: Niche TV networks, local TV news affiliates, smaller metro papers, smaller but still well-respected news magazines, well-known internet news operations that don't fall in the top handful. Third-class outlets: Trade magazines, niche magazines, smaller local papers, niche internet news sites. Fourth-class outlets: Others.


Nolan also includes tips for the aspiring news thief.

All this occurs after many pompous, blow-hard pieces have been written by ex-members of the MSM, now posing as "professors of journalism", about the defects of citizen journalists, and bloggers, in particular.

This was all touched upon in "Citizen Journalism: “911, I’d Like to Report an Unregulated Blogger”. In that piece, David Hazinsky, an ex-NBC-reporter-turned-journalism-prof had railed against the 'dangers of citizen journalism'.

The premise of citizen journalism is that regular people can now collect information and pictures with video cameras and cellphones, and distribute words and images over the Internet. Advocates argue that the acts of collecting and distributing makes these people "journalists." This is like saying someone who carries a scalpel is a "citizen surgeon" or someone who can read a law book is a "citizen lawyer." Tools are merely that. Education, skill and standards are really what make people into trusted professionals. Information without journalistic standards is called gossip.


As we noted then: "One images Hazinsky in the pre-Revolutionary American colonies: he'd be the one beating on John Peter Zenger's printing press with a pitchfork--or shouting down Tom Paine."

So while the MSM dismisses bloggers and other citizen journalists as the great unwashed, it's not above "borrowing" stories from the rubes when it suits them.

As Alexandrovna noted, "What the AP and others are saying essentially is that, while "your work" is good enough for us to steal, you are not credible enough to cite."

"Trusted MSM news professionals" was our nominee for "Oxymoron of the Year".

Although DBKP did not yell, "Stop, thief!" when first alerted to the Times reporter using our work without credit, the more we researched the subject, the more it became apparent that that may have been the proper action to take.

We've been checking our email hopefully; we sincerely hope that an upbeat update will be added to this article.

We're loathe to lump the Times in with the likes of the NY Times and AP. We hope we're contacted--sooner rather than later.

by Mondoreb

NOTE: Ah my! We originally left out one source (see how easy it might be?) but caught it within 10 minutes of this article going up. We marked the quote as a quote--just forgot to include the link. It is now corrected.

Friday, December 14, 2007

Citizen Journalism: "911, I'd Like to Report an Unregulated Blogger"



Danger to the Republic



People typing on keyboards endanger the Republic.

DAVID HAZINSKI offers humor from an expected source and tips about dealing with the "Evil Power of the Internet".

Hilarious musings from an ex-NBC guy who had the sense to find other employment.
Supporters of "citizen journalism" argue it provides independent, accurate, reliable information that the traditional media don't provide. While it has its place, the reality is it really isn't journalism at all, and it opens up information flow to the strong probability of fraud and abuse. The news industry should find some way to monitor and regulate this new trend.
Hazinski offers a solution. That's considerate.

DBKP would like to offer Hazinski a clue: the news industry's "monitor and regulate" policy toward what people read is at the bottom of this trend. More evidence that the mad professor needs to call Vanna.
The premise of citizen journalism is that regular people can now collect information and pictures with video cameras and cellphones, and distribute words and images over the Internet. Advocates argue that the acts of collecting and distributing makes these people "journalists." This is like saying someone who carries a scalpel is a "citizen surgeon" or someone who can read a law book is a "citizen lawyer." Tools are merely that. Education, skill and standards are really what make people into trusted professionals. Information without journalistic standards is called gossip.
What a dangerous, eroneous premise. Computers in the hands of regular Joes? What a menace.

We'd like to interject here that small-town reporters at news dailies resemble more closely their blogosphere brethren: they toil in the trenches, as likely to write about a cat caught in a tree as 'big stories'. They exhibit none of the arrogance we've come to expect from media gatekeepers in the "professional" major leagues.

They live among the subjects of their reports--unlike the denizens of CNN, New York Times, etc.

One images Haransky in the pre-Revolutionary American colonies: he'd be the one beating on John Peter Zenger's printing press with a pitchfork. Or shouting down Tom Paine.

Can't have the yokels putting out non-professional news without the guidance of their betters.

Similar danger stalked our Forefathers

Hazinski now has us rolling on the floor.

Having just anyone produce widely distributed stories without control can have the reverse effect from what advocates intend. It's just a matter of time before something like a faked Rodney King beating video appears on the air somewhere.
Kinda like fake documents showing up on the air at CBS Evening News right before the 2004 presidential election? Kinda like Dan Rather saying that he (alone) knew the truth?

Or kinda like NBC's faked Pinto videos? Those were 'recreations' of how dangerous the Ford product was to the public. Only they didn't say they'd rigged the Pinto with an explosive charge to make sure we got the point/joke?

Hazinski's prescription to this dangerous power? Regulation, clarification and certification.
• Major news organizations must create standards to substantiate citizen-contributed information and video, and ensure its accuracy and authenticity.

• They should clarify and reinforce their own standards and work through trade organizations to enforce national standards so they have real meaning.

• Journalism schools such as mine at the University of Georgia should create mini-courses to certify citizen journalists in proper ethics and procedures, much as volunteer teachers, paramedics and sheriff's auxiliaries are trained and certified.
Professor Hazinski (a former alumni of NBC News, sister organization of MSNBC, home of uber-journalists such as Keith Olbermann, Rosie O'Donnell and Chris Matthews) sums it all up in a big finish.
But we have already seen the line between news and entertainment blur enough to destroy significant credibility. Continuing to do nothing as information flow changes will further erode it. Journalism organizations who choose to do nothing may soon find the line between professional and citizen journalism gone as well as the trust of their audiences.
The wacky professor is too coy.

Who blurred that line, Prof? It wasn't a thousand blogs like DBKP; we're mere pikers in the blurring biz.

But we're going to be generous and offer professor Hazinski what he didn't offer the dangerous citizen journalists who are threatening his beloved NBC and other big "professional" media: a clue.

How about a little honesty, Prof?

Quit the sham that "professional journalists" are anything other than a bunch of guys--and a few gals--sitting around discussing your likes and dislikes and writing it into your evening newscasts.

When the gossip clubs known as "professional" media lowers their masks, I suspect part of the blogosphere may lower their disdain for the media gatekeepers and their apologists like Hazinski.

Citizens typing on keyboards are no danger to the Republic.

We are a danger to Hazinski's buddies in the big "professional" media, however.

by Mondoreb
[images:goodexperience; etc.usf.edu.]
Source: Unfettered Citizen Journalism Too Risky

Digg!

Death by 1000 Papercuts Front Page.

Sunday, December 9, 2007

Lori Drew, Megan Had it Coming: All Big Internet Stories Start as Local Ones



The Internet is a big place and stretches over the world.

It ties together people from America with those in England, France, China, Japan, Australia: in short, every nation on earth.

Although the big stories on the Internet often happen in New York, LA, Hollywood, London and other big cities, sometimes they originate in much smaller locales.

And they almost always start with a single individual who hears or sees something and tells someone else. Sometimes, that single individual is a reporter where that 'something' happened.

That's apparent after reading the latest from Steve Pokin, the journalist who reported the original Megan Meier story for the St. Charles Suburban Journal.

The Megan Meier story, her online harassment by "Josh", a fake boy created in the household of Meier's neighbor, Lori Drew and the subsequent uproar and outrage, swept over the nation a few days after the story appeared on November 11, 2007.

On November 18, a blog appeared with the name "Megan Had it Coming".

The blog's author claimed first to be "Kristen", then on December 3, the author published a post entitled "I'm Lori Drew".

For most of those who read and reacted to the Megan Meier story, this was a story with more twists and turns than a best-selling novel or TV movie. It inspired countless posts on countless blogs across the Internet, and in some cases, calls for justice for Megan Meier.

Particularly, readers of those blogs responded with an outpouring of comments, most of which were of the outraged variety.

For Steve Pokin, the saga of Megan Meier's MySpace Suicide and the subsequent happenings is different one: a local story. It happened to local people in a place with which he is familiar.

"Megan Meier--it's a local story for us," commented Pokin.

The people affected were local people. The businesses contacted were local businesses.

This is Steve Pokin's latest article, dated December 8, 2007.

POKIN AROUND: Who is 'Kristen'? And who, really, is 'Lori Drew'? Let the Investigation Begin

"I'm Lori Drew" is the introduction to a Dec. 3 posting on the inflammatory blog "Megan Had It Coming."

The blog's creation Nov. 18 was a painful and sad moment in a story with enough pain and sorrow for a lifetime.

Megan Meier, a 13-year-old who lived in Dardenne Prairie, took her life in October 2006 not knowing that Josh Evans, the 16-year-old boy who was mean to her on MySpace, was not real. Instead, he was created as part of a hoax played out by neighbors down the street and an 18-year-old girl.And now the St. Charles County Sheriff's Department, with its highly regarded computer forensics department, will try to find out who stooped so low.

"The matter is under investigation," Lt. Craig McGuire said. "Where that is going to lead us, we don't know."

Will it lead to Lori Drew? The real Lori Drew? The one in Dardenne Prairie?

Absolutely not, says James L. Briscoe, Drew's attorney.

"Someone claims to be her," Briscoe says. "It's not her. She has not done anything anywhere. So that makes it pretty simple."

Briscoe on Friday released a statement that, in part, said: "Any internet message that purports to be a member of the Drew family is being managed by an impostor and undoubtedly is being done for the purpose of further damaging the Drews' reputation."

Then who is it?

Some insider? Someone close to the story? Someone in the Waterford Crossing neighborhood?

Or will investigators discover this dismaying chapter was penned by someone a thousand miles away who'd read about the case and had no personal connection to it?

Will it be someone who, for whatever reason - maybe there wasn't anything good on TV that night - sat down at a keyboard to see how much anger, hate and sadness could be set in motion?

The debate in the blogosphere is whether this was really Lori Drew. Some argue it must be. There was so much detail, they say.

I read the posting and, for many reasons, I say it's not.

The "Lori Drew" post ends this way:

"The final word from authorities has come down that there will be no charges, so I don't have to remain silent. There's no point in hiding anymore. The internet has made it clear that mob revenge must prevail, even if there's no justice in it. So be it.

"Here I am internet. Come get me."

Can you imagine anyone in Lori Drew's position saying that?

I can't.

But if it's not Lori Drew, asks Randy Bierce, who in August created the blog "Death By 1000 Papercuts," why hasn't the real Lori Drew called Google and demanded that "Megan Had It Coming" be taken down?

"Lori Drew could have this blog shut down at the touch of the button," says Bierce, who blogs as Mondoreb and, at times, as Randy Richochet, in an office near Pittsburgh.

His blog has covered extensively the Megan Meier story, as well as the controversy surrounding "Megan Had It Coming."

Bierce says he and co-workers are split on whether the person posting as "Lori Drew" is really Lori Drew.

"The question is, 'Why would anybody in their right mind do that?'" he said. "But the reaction to the whole story is why would anybody do what she did in the first place?"

"Megan Had It Coming" falls within Blogger.com, which is owned by Google. A spokesman for Google on Friday responded to my questions via e-mail.

According to Google's Terms of Service, although negative and distasteful content is allowed, it is a violation to impersonate someone by using their real name. (Impersonating someone by using a nickname, handle or screen name is allowed.)

"When we are notified of the existence of content that may violate our Terms of Service, we act quickly to review it and determine whether it actually violates our policies," according to the Google spokesman. "If we determine that it does, we remove it immediately. We are currently reviewing an impersonation claim related to this blog."

The "I'm Lori Drew" poster also claimed to be the same person who started the blog. The creator, in that first post, wrote in the persona of a teenage girl who called herself Kristen, acknowledging that Kristen was not her real name.

Kristen claimed she and Megan were "sort of friends," and she called Megan a "drama queen" just as likely to have killed herself for not getting enough to eat at dinner.

Predictably, others responded with shock and anger and accused "Kristen" of being the real Lori Drew.

It makes me wonder: Who writes this stuff? For what purpose? Just to do evil?

Bierce explained that "trolls" are people who have no connection to a story but post comments simply to pour gasoline on a burning controversy.

Bierce said his analysis of postings from "Kristen" and "Lori Drew" indicates that Kristen, after making that first entry, did not post for several days. That behavior is unlike a typical "troll," he said.

On the other hand, "Lori Drew" posted and responded for several hours until, apparently, he or she quit following an avalanche of response. This would more closely fit the "troll" pattern.

Bierce said he expects law enforcement to eventually ascertain who really posted as "Kristen" and who really posted as "Lori Drew."

Ron and Tina Meier, who are divorcing in large part because of Megan's death, support the investigation by the sheriff's department.

Ron said the blog puts his daughter in an untrue, negative light.

"I am just glad that they are looking into this stuff and treating it more seriously," he said. "I don't know if it's Lori Drew who did it. I believe not."

Tina Meier sees irony in that someone posing as Lori Drew could possibly be charged under a new Dardenne Prairie law created in response to Megan's death and the MySpace hoax behind it.

Tina wants the sheriff's department to pursue not only this case, but also all local cases where there's a complaint of cyberspace harassment, bullying or impersonation.

The real Lori Drew has not complained to law enforcement.

Jack Banas, the St. Charles County prosecuting attorney, said he asked the sheriff's department to investigate the blog after being questioned by a TV reporter.

"I have not talked to Mrs. Drew about this at all," Banas said.

He would not comment on what the possible violation might be.

"I'm not going to speculate on what crime it might be or what it might not be because I don't know until it is investigated," Banas said.


To read more Steve Pokin, Pokin Around, the first entries are on the Megan Meier/Lori Drew story.

The search box can also be used for finding earlier articles he did on the story.

The debate continues to rage over the Internet, among people hundreds and thousands of miles from Dardenne Prairie and O'Fallon and nearby St. Louis.

"After this dies down, we'll still be here covering what happens here", Pokin quietly said on Friday.

Megan Meier's story is known in countries the world over: DBKP alone has had readers from 131 countries read at least one story on Megan Meier and the subsequent story of Lori Drew, Megan's parents, and the Megan Had it Coming blog.

Meanwhile, Steve Pokin will continue to report on what remains for him, a local story about local people.

by Mondoreb
[image:insidesocial]

Digg!

Death by 1000 Papercuts Front Page.

Lori Drew, Megan Had it Coming: A Multitude of Statements



Latest statements concerning the "Megan Had it Coming" blog.


"My daughter had nothing to do with this. Everyone needs to leave her alone."

--from "I'm Lori Drew"

"Here I am internet. Come get me."

--from "I'm Lori Drew"

"I have not talked to Mrs. Drew about this at all."

--Jack Banas, St. Charles County prosecuting attorney. Banas said he asked the sheriff's department to investigate the blog after being questioned by a TV reporter.

"Someone claims to be her. It's not her. She has not done anything anywhere. So that makes it pretty simple."

--Jim Briscoe, attorney for Lori Drew

"We have not received an impersonation claim to date from the individual allegedly being impersonated."

--Google statement 12/6/07

"Lori Drew could have this blog shut down at the touch of the button."

--Mondoreb, DBKP

"More than likely MHIC was posted by a group of people just looking for the attention and to see how many people they can get to fall for it."

--Trench Reynolds [3]

"When we are notified of the existence of content that may violate our Terms of Service, we act quickly to review it and determine whether it actually violates our policies," according to the Google spokesman. "If we determine that it does, we remove it immediately. We are currently reviewing an impersonation claim related to this blog."

--Email from Blogger.com. about whether the Megan Had it Coming Blog is operated by a Drew impersonator (12/7/7)

"The matter is under investigation. Where that is going to lead us, we don't know."

--Lt. Craig McGuire, St. Charles (MO) Sheriff's Department

"Jim Briscoe, said he has told Google, the blog host, that Drew did not write it. Google has said it will remove the blog if it finds Drew was not involved."

--Harassment Law may Help Family who Taunted Girl


PLEASE CONTINUE THE PRESSURE ON THE LAW MAKERS TO CHARGE LORI DREW!

--from Exposing Online Predators and Cyberpaths

20 days, 18 hours, 39 minutes

--Latest reading on DBKP Megan Had it Coming Countdown Clock
[Time elapsed since MHIC blog was created]

3544

--Number of comments on "I'm Lori Drew"

The real Lori Drew has not complained to law enforcement.[1]


The debates continues to rage.

That's where the matter stands on Sunday morning, December 9 2007.

by Mondoreb
[image:webekunst24]
Sources:
1- Who is "Kristen"? And who, Really is Lori Drew? The Investigation Begins
2- I'm Lori Drew - Megan Had it Coming
3 - Megan Had it Coming: Work of a Troll?


Digg!

Death by 1000 Papercuts Front Page.

Wednesday, December 5, 2007

Megan Meier, Lori Drew: St. L P-D Believes Bloggers Are the Real Culprits


Post Dispatch tackles important issue


The St. Louis Post-Dispatch has fingered a culprit in the Megan Meier story.

And the guilty parties are--surprise!--bloggers.

The traditional press, ever mindful of mouthing ethics that fall far short of what they actually practice, is again pointing a finger at their Internet brethren.

Joel Currier, the P-D writer seems upset that readers, upon reading Megan's story, became upset. The Post-Dispatch can hardly direct their ire at readers, having lost over 10,000 of them over the last year, so bloggers are not only handy, but also a logical target.[1]

Besides, bloggers most likely don't read the Post-Dispatch anyway.

Why's Joel so upset? We'll let him explain.
Rage against Curt and Lori Drew of Dardenne Prairie continues to explode on the Internet — targeting the couple and people who did business with them.

Bloggers want justice for Megan Meier, 13, and vengeance against the Drews, whom they blame for Megan's suicide last year.

Dozens of names and phone numbers of businesses that advertised in Lori Drew's coupon book have been posted online with demands to boycott their establishments.

Many of the companies have canceled their advertising contracts with Drew and received letters saying Drew is folding her coupon business.[2]
So: there are people upset with the Drews. This is unpardonable. Joel quotes a few of the merchants, who are upset at being contacted by people learning of their association with Drew's Ad Vantage advertising company.

He then moves on to Drew's lawyer to support his thesis. The reporter in Mr. Currier surely knows that someone's attorney may not be the final word in objectivity.

Doesn't he?
Jim Briscoe, the lawyer representing the Drews, told the "Today" show on Tuesday that Lori Drew has had to close her advertising business and her daughter has dropped out of school after the publicity and investigation into Megan's suicide. Briscoe also said it was not clear whether the Drews would be able to continue living in their Dardenne Prairie neighborhood, four doors down from the Meier house.

Drew "absolutely, 100 percent" did not know that Internet messages to Megan had become nasty, Briscoe said. Drew did not write any of the MySpace messages that preceded Megan Meier's suicide in October 2006.[2]
One admires Jim Briscoe. His job of presenting Lori Drew as a sympathetic figure is not an easy one. But he gets paid to do that job.

Joel Currier gets paid to do another job.

And today he earned his pay decrying the reactions of readers--of bloggers. He quotes another harried small businessman.
Stein Hunter, 49, the owner of the Crooked Tree Coffee Shop in St. Charles, says he sees irony in the way people are using the Internet to harass business owners in order to get back at the Drews.

"The issue is harassment," Hunter said. "And they are harassing people."

An expression of opinion is many things to many people. To Mr. Hunter, it's harassment; it must certainly seems like it to him. But then, Mr. Hunter brews coffee: he doesn't report the news.

Another expression of opinion in the Post-Dispatch came from Currier's colleague, Jeff Gordon, sportswriter, about the Cardinal's Scott Rolen. "Rolen's gotta go," writes Gordon today. But no piece on whether Rolen agrees with that opinion or feels harassed. Or whether his livelihood might be affected.

And Rolen didn't conduct a six-week hoax on a 13-year-old girl; all he's apparently guilty of is pouting and frowning.

There's more of the same from Joel Currier in his story; anyone wanting to read it can check out the article; it's listed at the end of this post.

One could do a simple check--we did--to find that most of the phone numbers, personal information and posting of advertisers came from readers of blogs, not the blogs themselves. Whether in comments tagged onto the end of posts, in forums or in emails, readers were almost universally outraged.

Why were readers outraged?

That was simple enough to check also. They were upset that a 46-year-old woman would concoct an elaborate scam on a 13-year-old girl suffering from depression. They were upset that, in Drew's own words, "she, with the help of a temporary employee named "Ashley", constructed a profile of 'good-looking' male on 'myspace'".

They are upset that when "the communication became 'sexual for a 13-year-old', Drew--again in her own words--continued the fake male profile despite this development.[3]

They became upset at a traditional press, which had long published the names and personal information of anyone targeted in frivolous lawsuits or cases where people were arrested for offenses, large and small(and later the charges were dropped), clammed up when it came to an Internet hoaxer.

And now, those same readers appear to be upset when reporters attack the one vehicle they had for expressing their anger: the Internet and the bloggers who chronicle there.

This isn't the first time this has happened. It's one of the reasons that TV ratings and circulation figures continue to tumble for the gatekeepers in the traditional media: poor and unresponsive customer service.

One suspects this won't be the last time.

by Mondoreb
[image:stlbrianj]

Sources:
1-FAS-FAX Numbers from the Audit Bureau of Circulation
2-Internet Fury Mounts in Megan Case
3-What Lawyer said in 2007, What Lori Drew said in 2006

Digg!

Death by 1000 Papercuts Front Page.

CBS Evening News, Initiative Opponents Team Up For Lesson in Investigative Journalism


CBS Evening News Features Courage Campaign Derring-Do


The crack investigative ethic at CBS Evening News, the Courage Campaign, and DailyKOS combine to bust initiative workers and Crooks and Liars brings in a guest to hand out the plaudits.
It is not every day that something from a blog post ends up in the CBS Evening News, but then again using children with cancer to try and steal the White House is pretty egregious. A diarist at Daily Kos noticed that the dirty tricksters, who are advancing an initiative that would switch 20 of California’s electoral college votes to the Republicans were using children’s cancer as a bait-and-switch to get people to sign the initiative and place it on the ballot. The Courage Campaign sent a film crew led by Erik Love to go tape Arno’s signature gatherers (pdf) and we caught them red-handed.

Julia Rosen is the Political Director for the Courage Campaign. CBS Evening News' Dan Rather urged viewers with his trademark: "Courage". Rosen then congratulates soulmate CBS for its courage--well, okay, the pub CC received, anyway.
That video was featured in the weekend edition of the CBS Evening news. Watch the clip. It is a particularly good segment on the initiative. And special thanks to John for grabbing that clip for us.
Of course, Rosen is right: this is a textbook example of how journalists safeguard the Republic from the misdeeds of those who plead for initiative signers. CBS Evening News, alerted by DailyKOS, abetted by the Courage Campaign, is once again a hotbed of investigative innovation.

Hundreds of dishwashers and busboys, who barely speak English, pony up $2300 apiece to Hillary Clinton's campaign: that's not quite so interesting a story.

But CBS is to be applauded. As Rosen points out: opponents busting initiative workers doesn't happen every day.

The chicanery of Clinton campaign fund-raising is old news.

by Mondoreb
[image:buycostumes.com]
Source: Dirty Tricksters Caught on Video: CBS Evening News Edition
[theme:howsthatforbaitandswitch?]

Digg!

Death by 1000 Papercuts Front Page.