"I am shocked for one that a local newspaper would allow this kind of crap to be printed."
The above quote comes from a comment responding to a recent story written by Michael Glover about a child molestation case. I read the story and decline to comment on the validity of the facts in the story compared to what actually was said in a courtroom and what actually happened to the little girl, because I wasn't in the courtroom or present at the time of the alleged incident.
I've written before about the amount of flack that the local newspaper and its reporters get. I'm not sure if the flack is deserved or undeserved...that's not important here. What I don't understand is why someone would expect the LOCAL newspaper to NOT print this story. Why wouldn't the local newspaper print it? It's a local story that just so happens to be somewhat important...!
On more than 100 occasions since I have worked on and off for the publication I have heard that the paper doesn't print newsworthy material or that it doesn't cover the important issues. What the heck is the paper supposed to cover if it doesn't cover the big issues...or is child molestation not a big deal? Last time I checked child molestation ranked just a wee bit higher than chicken dinner reunions.
Do the subscribers of this paper expect the "icky" stories to be filed away and never printed? That's not what the Morning Sun, Kansas City Star or New York Times do so why should the Tribune do so? A newspaper is a newspaper is a newspaper. A journalist is a journalist is a journalist is a journalist. It doesn't matter where that journalist works.
"If the community really wants to hear the whole story, more questions should be asked and more than just one mans opinion of what he heard in a preliminary hearing should be presented."
Michael Glover does not write opinion. He uses the words that come out of other people's mouths and writes a story in Associated Press format. It's the same avenue other writers across the world use - take quotes and facts and put them in story form.
Do I agree with the story? I wasn't in the courtroom to hear the testimony so I'm going to refrain from disputing the facts. I know the defendant and I don't think he could do what is said that he did; however, I wasn't there so I don't know. I believe that a person is innocent until proven guilty. I hope he didn't commit those acts. My argument is that Michael Glover did not make up the things he wrote. Someone said them ... under oath.
So give Glover a break. If you have a problem call the people who are quoted in the story and verbally attack them.