April 24, 2009
Michael Beck
Publisher
Wausau Daily Herald
Wausau, Wis.
Via e-mail
Mr. Beck:
Under your watch, the Wausau Daily Herald bowed to the demands of a local government official, unhappy that a reader was writing derogatory comments about him on your paper's website. The reader assures me they did not write any threatening remarks about the official, Village of Weston Supervisor Dean Zuleger. Further, the reader says, the Herald staff has never flagged as inappropriate any of the reader's comments.
My questions:
1. Have the comments at issue been secured, so they won't be deleted or altered, pending any civil or criminal review of the matter?
2. What comments, if any, did you rely upon in concluding the reader posed a danger to Administrator Dean Zuleger? Please provide URLs to those comments, so the public may evaluate them.
3. What was the sequence of events leading to the paper's decision to turn over the reader's personally identifiable information to Zuleger.
4. What conversations have you personally had with Zuleger about Herald website comments that displeased him?
5. How many other readers' personally identifiable information have you released to Zuleger? In each case, what were the events leading to the release of the information to Zuleger?
6. When was your last conversation with the reader in the Zuleger case?
7. In a letter today, the reader told me: "The WDH acquiesced to Zuleger's demands for political expedience and to silence a dissenter." What is your response, please, to that serious accusation?
8. Based on your handling of this case, how would you describe the Wausau community's trust and faith in the Daily Herald to give voice to the disenfranchised?
I look forward to your response.
Jim Hopkins
Michael Beck
Publisher
Wausau Daily Herald
Wausau, Wis.
Via e-mail
Mr. Beck:
Under your watch, the Wausau Daily Herald bowed to the demands of a local government official, unhappy that a reader was writing derogatory comments about him on your paper's website. The reader assures me they did not write any threatening remarks about the official, Village of Weston Supervisor Dean Zuleger. Further, the reader says, the Herald staff has never flagged as inappropriate any of the reader's comments.
My questions:
1. Have the comments at issue been secured, so they won't be deleted or altered, pending any civil or criminal review of the matter?
2. What comments, if any, did you rely upon in concluding the reader posed a danger to Administrator Dean Zuleger? Please provide URLs to those comments, so the public may evaluate them.
3. What was the sequence of events leading to the paper's decision to turn over the reader's personally identifiable information to Zuleger.
4. What conversations have you personally had with Zuleger about Herald website comments that displeased him?
5. How many other readers' personally identifiable information have you released to Zuleger? In each case, what were the events leading to the release of the information to Zuleger?
6. When was your last conversation with the reader in the Zuleger case?
7. In a letter today, the reader told me: "The WDH acquiesced to Zuleger's demands for political expedience and to silence a dissenter." What is your response, please, to that serious accusation?
8. Based on your handling of this case, how would you describe the Wausau community's trust and faith in the Daily Herald to give voice to the disenfranchised?
I look forward to your response.
Jim Hopkins
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDelete"Based on your handling of this case, how would you describe the Wausau community's trust and faith in the Daily Herald to give voice to the disenfranchised?"
ReplyDeleteAre you serious, Jim? The guy was ripping on his weight, and you say this is an example of giving a voice to the disenfranchised?
Gannett must be kicking itself for ever hiring you.
"Are you serious, Jim? The guy was ripping on his weight, and you say this is an example of giving a voice to the disenfranchised?"
ReplyDeleteWhat's the big deal about a comment about the guys weight. From the photo's I've seen, it doesn't appear that the guy's ready to be buried in a piano box.
If anything, Gannett should be kicking itself for ever letting Jim go!
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteGood questions, Jim.
ReplyDeleteDerogatory comments don't rise to the level.
Pultizer quality stuff, Jim. O Defender of the little one. Don't let all those negative comments distract you from your important work.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteI'm loving every second of this. Unless there's more to the story, revealing a poster's name for what he allegedly said is bogus. Why didn't the newspaper take the poster down if what he said was so bad?
ReplyDeleteI can't speak to Wausau on this, but I know at my site the editors look at the forums/story chats sporadically and for all the talk of being an interactive community they rarely comment. Even at our small site with the overload of editors having one key person on furlough throws all the others into a tizzy and they look at the site even less.
Something like this was bound to happen. It will be fun to watch it play out.
And once again, we wouldn't know about any of this without Jim and this blog.
Is this remotely important to anyone on the planet? At a time when they are stealing our money and jobs, treating us like dirt, people are concerned about this kind of crap? Give me another break already.
ReplyDeleteAnd yet, 8:31 am, you visited, read, clicked -- and commented! Remotely important? Yes!
ReplyDeleteHoly batshit, 8:31, this is what it's ALL about! As the Fourth Estate we're supposed to be shining light on politicians for the little guy; not handing over names when the politicians get pissed at the little guy.
ReplyDelete“Were it left to us to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate for a moment to prefer the latter.” -Thomas Jefferson
Blogs are somewhat stupid and different from newspapers because they simply allow people to say anything they want and hide behind anonymity. All the newspapers I’ve ever seen had an editorial policy that you must include your contact information when you write a letter to the editor. Blogs apparently don’t require this.
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion, a post on a newspaper web site is similar to a letter to the editor. Following that line of logic, if it is a blog it shouldn't be part of the newspaper site.
It is a sad state of affairs when one person can trash another in a public forum, especially like a newspaper web site that could be read by many, and do so anonymously. In the legal system the accused is allowed to face his accuser. If this guy is a public official and is being trashed in a public forum like a legitimate newspaper he deserves the opportunity to face the person trashing him. Jim deals with this by removing posts as the blog owner.
That's why I think blogs are silly. You can't trust anything said on a blog. I could say a lot of trash and if even one thing I said came true, everyone would think the vehicle is legitimate. I could say I hear there will be another round of layoffs soon. If there were a few announced - which happens often in this economy - I would be the one that let everyone know, even though I knew nothing. I could just use the psychic hotline script those people use and you'd feel I was getting enough right.
Blogs are far from legitimate. I haven't done anything scientific but I do feel 80% of what I read on this blog is BS; it fits the 80/20 rule. If the 20% that is correct resonates with you, you become a believer. I wouldn't put it past management to use this blog to drop news here and there. People say the only company information they receive is on this blog and they are happy to sort fact from fiction; however, the only way I see to do the sorting is when things actually happen. That’s not sorting fact from fiction - it is actually waiting and seeing what will happen.
Nothing changes because of what is on this blog. Accusations are made, evidence is created or sliced and diced and everything moves on. There is no power here except for the few that allow it to power themselves. This is a perfect example of CS's comment that the web is a mess. It is a mess!
This blog isn’t a vehicle for legitimate news. If it was, news sources would be checked and verified and we would have confidence it is being done. News is provided by anonymous individuals and rarely verified. And when some news is tossed out there that doesn’t fit what people want to hear, the blog owner and others ridicule the person offering up the news and challenge them to prove it. There is rarely a challenge like that when someone offers up negative news.
This blog does several things. First, it provides Jim with a way to release his anger and frustration at anything remotely related to Gannett. Second, it gives others a forum to do the same thing, although under the guise of anonymity. For others it is a source of humor and entertainment as they watch the silliness unfold. The one thing it is not is a source of news unless your version of news is what you verify after it happens.
Jim Hopkins said...
ReplyDeleteAnd yet, 8:31 am, you visited, read, clicked -- and commented! Remotely important? Yes!
4/25/2009 8:43 AM
Apparently you didn't read the poster's comment and so find solace in the fact that they indicated how imnportant they felt this was by visiting, reading, commenting and clicking. You missed the point because you don't want to admit the point. But whatever floats your boat.