The News' George Rodrigue Defends Decision to Out a Blog Commenter in Nasher Fight

Categories: Schutze

SHZ_GetOffMyLawn_TitleImageV2.jpg
Dallas Morning News Managing Editor George Rodrigue has answered my column in this week's newspaper about the Mike Snyder/ Morning News matter, and now, sadly for you, I think I need to answer his answer. Snyder is the former news anchor and public relations consultant whom the News outed in a story last week for posting blog comments under fake names linked to fake Facebook accounts.

When Snyder posted his comments on blogs at the News and at D Magazine, a local publication, he was working for a lawyer who represents the Dallas Police and Fire Pension fund, owner of a new condo tower locked in a bitter dispute with the Nasher Sculpture Center over reflected sunlight. In my column I took Rodrigue to task for revealing the identity of Snyder, an anonymous commenter who was saying things that contravened the paper's strongly held position in the Nasher dispute, while the paper did not reveal identities of anonymous bloggers who support the paper's side of things.

See also:
In the Nasher Fight, the Morning News Has a Double Standard

I also wondered if some of the comments whose fake personae have been protected by the paper may in fact be Morning News employees, and I cited one example in particular, a fake-name blogger who goes by the screen name, Wylie H. I said I had seen evidence indicating that Wylie H. had accessed Facebook from within the Morning News building. In his response to me in an online column called, "Ask the editor," Rodrigue complained that I had only mentioned this evidence without saying what it was. It's a fair point.

Museum Tower Thibodeaux.jpg
I said the evidence I found "indicated" Wylie H. had gone to Facebook from within the News building because I really do not know if what I was looking at was dispositive. But you can look at it, too, I think, if you are on Facebook. Go to Wylie H.'s Facebook page, click on his timeline and look for events. One of the tags giving his or her physical location is labeled "Dallas Morning News" and shows the location of the News building, unless he has removed those tags since I brought them up. I'm on a plane at the moment and can't check.

But here are the necessary caveats, anyway. I don't know that the Facebook locating mechanism is precise. I just figured out yesterday, for example, that Google Maps sometimes does a good job, sometimes a fairly lousy job hitting geographical coordinates precisely in a search. So how do I know Facebook does any better? Maybe Wiley H. was across the street at Union Station and the Facebook geo software was having a bad hair day and thought he was at the paper.

Caveat No. 2: So what if he was at the News? He could have been there trying to renegotiate the longterm debt on his mom's paid obit. I happen to think the Facebook evidence is only one of several indications Mr. H. works for the News, the rest of which I am hoarding for now. But we're still not really on point.

In his response to a person commenting on his column, Rodrigue asks rather plaintively if the commenter would have him expose every anonymous commenter on the paper's blogs. I think there is an obvious answer. No. Not if you are not going to expose any commenter. Yes. If you are going to expose any commenter.

And here is where the News is on some very thin ice with its readers in terms of the paper's posture on privacy. Rodrigue wants to argue that Mike Snyder is somehow a special case because Rodrigue says he was receiving tax dollars to comment. But this is plainly and simply untrue. Even if we connect a lot of dots from Snyder's paycheck back to the police and fire pension fund, we have not arrived at any public funds.

The money in the pension fund is private money earned by the pensioners. There is some public oversight of the fund, but the money in the fund in no way belongs to the public. To claim otherwise is tantamount to saying that people who elect to live in tax-subsidized housing forfeit their protections from warrantless search and seizure. Rodrigue is reaching way, way, way around the corner to defend an indefensibly hypocritical position.

The more this goes on, in fact, the more it argues that Snyder was right. He was right to set up fake Facebook accounts in order to comment pseudonymously at the News because he was right not to trust the News to honor his privacy. But he's right in another bigger way, too.

The Nasher dispute demonstrates an old truth about Dallas. When you get the rich people and the culture mob lined up with the usual media sycophants, this big city turns into one little East Texas all-cousin one-horse town. For good reason, hardly anybody has the backbone to go up against those pitchforks. But Snyder did, and as far as I'm concerned, it was the right thing to do.

Forget the sunlight fight. This is about speech. The Nasher partisans and the News would have us believe that the pension fund has no right to defend itself, no right even to speak, no right to hire somebody to speak for them. All of their attacks are like the attack on Snyder -- ad hominem, without reference to any of the underlying technical issues. The mobilization in favor of the Nasher is less a political movement than a form of primitive shunning.

If you want a PR guy who isn't afraid to take all of that on, then I guess you call Snyder. From what I've seen over the years, that should get him some very distinguished clients, some of whom will be very surprised to find that they need him.



Sponsor Content

My Voice Nation Help
97 comments
mlandson
mlandson

Wow, Jim Schutz has now completely jumped the shark. (facepalm)

Lurch
Lurch

Snyder is and always has been a slimebag. I had to stop watching channel five "news." I just couldn't stand him and his opinions.

phipho5490
phipho5490

The fact that Rodrigue still won't directly answer whether Wylie H works at the DMN speaks volumes. Yes or no, its not that hard. Of course if the answer is yes it pretty much trashes any credibility the DMN has left on this story, but I think that's kind of gone anyway.

TexMarine
TexMarine

We should all enjoy what the media will do in the final days of their relevancy. They've stopped being journalists and turned into propagandists. Ignore the DMN while its in the final stages and we'll all make it out just fine.

animas
animas

So now I  AM wondering what the original Nasher architectural design team had in mind when the museum was placed in the middle of a busy urban environment.  Is the museum  building too environmentally fragile to coexist with other urban architecture,  or urban environmental features with their vicissitudes?  Even the Parthenon has withstood centuries of relative abuse--is this a problem unique in art museum history?? The responsibility for the design failure is Nashers alone.

roo_ster
roo_ster

I am at a loss why anonymous posting by ANYONE is an issue.  Anonymous speech goes back to the colonial period and many of the Founders engaged in it, the Federalist Papers and Anti-Federalist Papers being but two examples.

So a PR flack posted anonymously.  BFD.  The story is not his anony-posting, but that DMN went to the effort to out him.  

ScottsMerkin
ScottsMerkin topcommenter

So how long till the DMN pissed Jim off so much that he outs WylieH?  Seems you have some proof that Wylie and the DMN have some link.  Wait, maybe Wylie is BMarvel

nammer
nammer

it still amazes me that you are defending Museum Tower.  It seems as though you think the pension fund board is just a group of retired firemen and policemen when they're a bunch of rich white fat old men who made a bad investment and are too cheap to own up to it.

marcbloch44
marcbloch44

Jim evidently won't acknowledge this, but the key thing about Snyder's fakery was always the creation of MULTIPLE fake identities. There is just no reason to do that, if all you want is to make anonymous comments and have your privacy protected. It doesn't offer you any greater degree of protection.  It just shows you're trying to game the system, and create a false impression of public sentiments.  The News never promised to allow anyone to exploit its privacy protections in order to do this, and it was perfectly justified in blowing the whistle in this case.  Jim's objections remain as bogus as they were to begin with.

Digging the hole deeper, he's now claiming that the exposure of Snyder's fakery is part of some larger effort to suppress Museum Tower's side of the argument.  How anyone could make this claim is mystifying. Snyder participated in this debate, a lot, under his own name. Others disagreed with him, but nobody demanded that he be fired from anything.  Nobody "shunned" him for advocating those views openly.

Instead, he got caught trying to deceive people about the level of support for Museum Tower among people not named "Mike Snyder."  Jim - bless your heart, seriously, this is what you're choosing to defend?  Does this kind of conduct really show you have "backbone"?  Please, you look ridiculous. Stop digging.

mavdog
mavdog topcommenter

@animas 

no, when the Nasher was built the Tower tract was subject to a Restrictive Covenant that limited any future building to a maximum of 22 stories in height and prohibited certain exterior materials with high reflection.

the covenant lapsed and the developers of the tower proceeded to build at 46 (?) stories. the higher the tower went, the more possible ROI.

gregmarcydagama
gregmarcydagama

@roo_ster You fail to understand the acute distinction between anonymous and fake, lying names designed to give credibility where NONE exists. See?

Myrna.Minkoff-Katz
Myrna.Minkoff-Katz topcommenter

@roo_ster It's despicable what the DMN did.  Maybe, though, we shouldn't be surprised.  They endorsed that Mitt Romney idiot.

animas
animas

Who cares!  I want Myrna back.

JimSX
JimSX topcommenter

What bad investment?

JimSX
JimSX topcommenter

Marcblock, this is beginning to look more and more like an IQ test. Let's walk back through it one more time, slowly. At the Morning News, you've got at least a couple dozen people sitting in meetings and/or writing about this issue. At D, maybe another half dozen. The product of this process is a blaring unison worthy of the Soviet Army chorus. Do you think that's an accident? Between the two of them, the News and D are the equivalent of about 400 fake Facebook accounts written by paid shills.

What the pension fund is up against is a stone wall of opposition orchestrated in the media by powerful influential people associated with the Nasher. Look how it's being played now, as if the entire dscussion should be about fake Facebook accounts. That's laughable. Marc, why is there no discussion -- none - of the fact that Museum Tower offered a scientifically derived 100 percent solution that would have altered the appearance of the building not one whit, offered to pay for it, and the Nasher refuses even to test it?

The Nasher's intransigence makes absolutely no sense unless there is another agenda. I do notice it took them the better part of a decade to rack up their millionth visitor, while the Perot is already at half a million in its first half year. There is a very real possibily that the Nasher is in the wrong city. What if they know that? What if they are already thinking about getting out of Dodge? Would this absurd story about the shiny building across the street ruining their building start to add up as a cover story for leaving town anyway?

These are the issues that need to be discussed and would be under examination and discussion in the News and D if they were journalistsic enterprises. Given the wall of proganda blaring from the Nasher through all of its shills at the town's major media, a couple fake Facebook accounts start to look like a pretty damned silly issue.

JimSX
JimSX topcommenter

I guess I have done a poor job of expressing this. Let's go back to the beginning. At the Morning News, you've got at least a couple d

animas
animas

Interesting, but someone surely knew that the restrictive covenant might lapse or might have needed to be renewed, right?  The ball was dropped by the museum folks, apparently.

ScottsMerkin
ScottsMerkin topcommenter

@gregmarcydagama @roo_ster wouldnt have positng as Mike Snyder given him more credibility?  Jesus fucking christ people.  As scottsmerkin I am both anonymous and fake, in this instance as with Snyders, there is no distinction 

roo_ster
roo_ster

@gregmarcydagama @roo_ster Because there is none.  A fake name gives no credibility.  Pathos, logos, and ethos; anony-posting rips out any ethos and the reader must rely on the pathos & logos of the words.

JimSX
JimSX topcommenter

Please name crimes.

gregmarcydagama
gregmarcydagama

@animas Myrna is a bulwark standing up to the innumerable regressives who populate this page and much of our beloved Deep South. Keep up the good work, Myna. ;) ~ / ~ OM 

nammer
nammer

@JimSX Museum Tower...how many units have been sold so far?  6?  Doesn't sound like they're getting a good return on their investment...

marcbloch44
marcbloch44

@JimSX Appreciate the reply, I guess. It certainly doesn't make your defense of Snyder any less ridiculous. If that doesn't matter, and if other things are bigger and more important, maybe you yourself should have been writing about those things to begin with.

Your arguments continue to mystify me. You say "the Nasher's intransigence makes absolutely no sense unless there is another agenda," and then proceed further on this premise. Stop! The premise is itself wrong, just flat-out, unarguably false. You may not agree with the Nasher's position, but it makes perfect sense to me and (I'm pretty sure) almost everyone else who's been there. You're going beyond disagreement - you're denying the existence of our case.

Look - it's a beautiful place, it's an architectural landmark, the unique architectural features are part of its identity (as well as its value as a cultural asset) and now this is being ruined. Some of us want to see it protected. This can't be hard to follow, even it's not really your thing. I don't understand your problem.

When you write about the Trinity - or other neglected, threatened, beautiful remnants of our local environment - you make this case yourself, and it resonates. When the Arboretum was trying to "improve" Winfrey Point - using the same kinds of hired gun experts, fancy reports, and bogus claims that Museum Tower has deployed - you blew the whistle yourself (with style, in fact).  But when it's the Nasher, you turn right around.

Honestly, I think we all know that the Nasher is not seriously trying to sneak out of town - that idea is surely your own, based on your own faulty premise. Even if it were true, why on earth would the big bad News be trying to make it happen? It looks like this is not only your idea, but your own preferred outcome - kill the thing, destroy the building, punish the institution for having fancy airs and rich patrons, push it on down the road. Somehow this issue just seems to reveal your nasty side.

animas
animas

@ Jim:Your uncanny analytical instincts are why so many of us read your coumn everyday.  I have often been in the Arts District for various events over the past 20 years, but I have to admit that the Nasher has not been anywhere on my attendance agenda or even on the radar.  I certainly like sculpture in  accesible urban settings and/or european museums,but Nasher to me simply reflects the instincts of one collector (take it or leave it-so there).  If you are "marketing" a point of view through PR, you should be able to be in touch with public tastes and trends.  You obviously have more PR intuition than the sad and moribund Snyder--maybe he like the Nasher is in the wrong setting for success.

Seriously
Seriously

@JimSX   I said as much in a previous blog post under a fake name that now escapes me, after remembering the Nasher built a larger 65,0000 SF museum at Duke University in 2005. 

In racking my brain as to why they were digging their heels in, it occurred to me that maybe the plan was to develop the Nasher property into much needed retail space, in the arts district. Something the family has an awesome talent for. 

Maybe they were worried the arts community would be mad at them, if they consolidated this museum with the Duke Museum and changed the integrity of the building. Every famous architect has had his work modified to meet changing times and needs. That's life and business. It's hard enough soliciting donations for one museum, much less two. It doesn't seem practical. 

Yes, artists are passionate, but we are also business people. Any retail the Nashers developed on that space could easily showcase our favorite pieces of their daddy's collection.  

The elite needs to grow up and stop using the same incestuous relationships who come up with the same PR style plans that always seem to be thoughtless and mean spirited at the root of their campaigns, (See West Dallas) 

That the employees in the arts district did not pick up on this ages ago, is beyond me and another story altogether.

losingmyreligion
losingmyreligion

@mavdog @animas  

What also happened is that ownership of Museum Tower changed hands as it was being developed. In other words, the original design fit within the covenant's restrictions. Then everything went kerflooey, new developers/owners moved in, didn't know about the covenant and pushed everything taller in order to make more money. 

mavdog
mavdog topcommenter

@animas

we disagree apparently on if the Nasher is a "fragile structure". museums are designed to showcase their inventory in the best conditions. the kimball is no different, or the dma.

when the Nasher was designed the architects took into account the surrounding buildings (the dma at that point) and what they were told would be built on the Tower tract, which at that time was limited by the covenant.

"The 1998 covenant held that Museum Tower would have been half as high as actually built." "The 1998 covenant specified,...that no building adjacent to the Nasher carry a “reflectivity” greater than 15 percent. Strick said the reflectivity has since risen to 44 percent."

http://www.dallasnews.com/entertainment/headlines/20120328-nasher-sculpture-center-says-glare-from-museum-tower-is-causing-harm2.ece?ssimg=515748

animas
animas

BTW according to the recent NYT article on this subject which quoted J Schutze's observations, there were "materials restrictions" not height restrictions in effect from the Museum's opening in 2003 until 2008 (5 years) which were "renewed with fewer restrictions"  (stuff happens in big citites that way.) 

animas
animas

Back to the original point.  Why would an architect design such a fragile structure, especially if there was a possibility that the art work within it could potentially be harmed by further urban development if not immediately, at some point in the future?  Sounds like colosally bad planning or lethal narcissism to me, to assume that a developer would be looking out for the museum's interests and not his own investors-(human nature being what it is).

mavdog
mavdog topcommenter

@animas 

the reason for the lapse is land covenants must have an end, they don't go on forever.

the reason for the restrictions not being extended is unlikely to be in the covenant, if there were a set mechanism for their extension we would probably not be having this discussion/issue.

it is a question that I would like answered. as I mention below, if the Nasher failed to act it may say a lot about their current actions; if the Tower gave the Nasher the finger when Nasher requested an extension it says a lot about the Tower tract ownership.

animas
animas

True and I am taking your word for it that a restrictive covenant ever existed.  If there was a covenant ,the reason for the apparent  lapse or non renewal may be found within the document itself.

mavdog
mavdog topcommenter

@animas 

why do you say the Nasher dropped the ball? purely conjecture on your part.

the Nasher could have missed the termination of the restrictions, or they could have requested a renewal and been denied. after all there were financial benefits to the Tower tract ownership if the covenants were not in place.

either could have occured, we do not know what transpired.

JimSX
JimSX topcommenter

Speaking from behind a fake name, you accuse Mike Snyder, his real name, of committing crimes. You are unable to name a crime, because your accusation is false. He has committed no crime. Anonymous and pseudonymous speech are cherished elements of free speech in this country, not against the law but explicitly protected by law. If I had to pick somebody who's on the wrong side of the law right now, I'd be lookin' straight at you, buddy."

Neckbone
Neckbone

@bvckvs@mavdog@JimSX "Your Honor, I read what someone named Neckbone wrote on the internet about Museum Tower and relied upon it when I decided to purchase my million-dollar condo unit. Your Honor, what Neckbone wrote contained fabrications! And it turned out Neckbone wasn't even his real name!"

mavdog
mavdog topcommenter

@JimSX 

my partial legal opinion is there may be a violation of the dtpa with snyder going taking great care to mask his agency. the issue would be if anyone relied on what snyder wrote to decide and buy a unit at the tower, and if snyder wrote fabrications.

ScottsMerkin
ScottsMerkin topcommenter

@Myrna.Minkoff-Katz your failure to be self depricating is what make you miserable on here sometimes.  Laugh sometimes honey, its not 100% serious all the time

animas
animas

How do the kitties feel about sculpture?

animas
animas

@ Greg: Actually she is very entertaining.

RTGolden1
RTGolden1 topcommenter

@nammer @JimSX Easy.  The only thing Jim hates worse than fat, old, rich, white men is the art that fat, old, rich, white men support and patronize.

JimSX
JimSX topcommenter

@mavdog @JimSX 

Ah, good points, sadly for me, on commercial/residential estate and for all I know on sales. But please factor in that the Nasher are actively trying to suppress sales at Museum Tower. 

mavdog
mavdog topcommenter

@JimSX 

actually Jim it is residential real estate, not commercial real estate.

I do not have any insider knowledge on the pro forma financial plan of the Tower, but in my limited experience in real estate development I can say that selling about 7% of the units in the first year is not good.

if it were a rental, it should be at 85% occupancy by now.

The role of "bullies" has changed in the controversy. The Tower was the bully at first, and as public opinion has gone heavily to the Nasher it is they who are playing that role now.

so with them both being bullies Jim, why are you taking either's side?

JimSX
JimSX topcommenter

Never did like bullies much.

nammer
nammer

@JimSX assholes notwithstanding, you still haven't answered the question of why you seem to always defend the Museum Tower.  I've read and enjoyed your column for years and it just seems strange that you would come down on the side of a luxury condo tower with million dollar condos.  I guess this is a good lesson in not presuming to understand what someone's motivations are 

JimSX
JimSX topcommenter

Well, I guess we have given insiders a bad name around here lately, but I do have to ask, what expert knowledge tells you that a building with a five-year sales plan is already a loser when it has sold $20 to $30 million worth of real estate already in less than a year on he market? Does your opinion come from a depth of knowledge about commercial real estate or from your alimentary tract?

RTGolden1
RTGolden1 topcommenter

@mavdog He IS Serious, pseudonymically (??) anyway.

mavdog
mavdog topcommenter

@Seriously 

oh, so because Rees might actually know or met people at the Nasher you see a nefarious conspiratorial connection.....

good god, are you serious?

you MUST be Snyder!

Seriously
Seriously

@mavdog   Christina only recently started teaching at TCU, after her art gallery didn't make it in Deep Ellum. Wrote art reviews for the Observer, Glasstire, participated on judges panels with the ED of the Nahser, ring a bell?  

The art world is very, very small and everyone knows everyone and you know very well that this is fact. 

Just remember, you brought up Christina, not me. 

mavdog
mavdog topcommenter

@Seriously 

Rees is with TCU. From her resume she has never worked for Nasher. Doesn't even show that she ever exhibited at Nasher either.

don't you have any qualms about throwing out crap that you have no facts to support?

are you Mike Snyder?

Seriously
Seriously

@mavdog   She has a relationship with the Nasher organization. Why is that a stretch to conclude?

mavdog
mavdog topcommenter

@Seriously @mavdog 

you are sure quick to come up with conjecture, and with no basis btw. actually, I'm going to coin a new one for what you are doing..."crapjecture".

The Fund established a website to explain their proposal, and yes it IS in writing. no need to wait for a trial.....

http://www.oculisolution.com/

Seriously
Seriously

@mavdog   According to the News, the Pension has made offers to the Nashers. One has to assume they are in writing.

How do we know Christina Rees was not hired by the Nahers?  

Again, no one will know that until this goes to trial. 

mavdog
mavdog topcommenter

@Seriously @mavdog 

what are you saying with "communicated the offer clearly between their attorneys"?

the P&FPF is subject to open meetings laws. The "police and fire culture" has zero, absolutely nothing, to do with anything in the discussion.

what "government culture mentality" are you referring to?

The P&FPF invested in Northpark Center. It was a vey good investment btw. To allude to a possible side agreement is pulling crap out of your ass, unless of course you have anything that points to such an agreement.

I disagree, going to court will not be good for the P&FPF, nor the project itself. The DMN nor D Magazine have done anything that would put them in harm's way, if they had we would have heard from the very aggressive legal team of Museum Tower (see Christina Rees).

Seriously
Seriously

@mavdog  How do you know they have not communicated the offer clearly between their attorneys? We have no idea what happens between the parties. 

Maybe the Pension doesn't do a good job of explaining themselves on social media, but so what?  The police and fire culture is not unlike the military. They don't put their strategies out there to the public and they tend to take care of business behind closed doors. 

That is the difference here. The DMN, on behalf of the Nashers, has attempted to crucify them by taking advantage of that government culture mentality.

Further, in past blogs I remember reading that the Nashers have borrowed money from the Pension fund for other projects. If that is true, maybe letting the restrictions lapse was part of both parties deal, on another project. 

Until this goes to court, we'll never know. I have a feeling going to court won't be pretty for either the Nasher, the DMN or D and perhaps why the DMN is trying just a little too hard to try this by popularity, rather than facts. 

mavdog
mavdog topcommenter

@JimSX

the problem Jim is MT doesn't have any "patrons" but the P&FPB, and that is why they turned to Snyder.

The missing item: why did the Nasher not maintain the restrictive covenant with the Tower tract that would have prevented this problem? Did they forget? Did the Nasher go to the then owners of the Tower tract and get stiffed when a renewal was requested? This is an important point.

marcbloch's right, your theory on the conduct of Nasher is just too far out there. now you have followers who are suggesting the Nasher be converted to "needed retail space". a strong dose of reality is needed!

the Nasher hasn't considered the offer to change their occuli because Tower has done such a poor job in the debate, they have painted themselves into a corner. Nasher knows they have the leverage. why yield in battle if you see victory within reach?

Nasher should accept the Tower offer. They won't get anything better, and an empty eyesore next to them without a resolution to the problem does no one any good.

marcbloch44
marcbloch44

@JimSX Why don't you try this one on. Why not park those cars out on Winfrey Point? Come on, just once, give it a try. See, our experts can prove it won't do any harm to anything. And so forth.

The whole point of the original design of the Nasher building was to get the interior light right. Museum Tower's "oculi solution" is exactly the kind of worthless flackery that you would carve up into tiny pieces, in any other context. If this isn't about "rich fancy" for you, then, honestly, what gives?

JimSX
JimSX topcommenter

Museum Tower has rich fancy patrons. this is either not about rich fancy or it's rich fancy v. Rich fancy, just try this one on for size: why won't the Nasher even test the new oculi?

mavdog
mavdog topcommenter

@Seriously 

DMN has been a seperate company from WFAA for over 5 years.

no, they are not "in negotiations to sell WFAA". WFAA and several other stations have agreed to be acquired by Gannett.

Seriously
Seriously

@mavdog  Exactly!  Are they not in negotiations to sell WFAA?  The DMN needs to take a step back and start getting their groove back on.

mavdog
mavdog topcommenter

@Seriously @animas 

uh, the FCC has nothing to do with print media, save for cross ownership issues of print media controlling a broadcaster.

Seriously
Seriously

@animas  . There is a difference between an opinion and investigative journalism. The problem comes in, when they cross the line and omit facts in a story to justify their opinion.  There is most certainly supposed to be a separation of church and state. Some news organizations are better at it than others

animas
animas

Best laugh I've had all day.  Newspapers are not free of environmental or commercial bias, since most depend upon advertising revenues, etc.  All dailies of which I am aware also have opinion pages which reflect the "impressions" of the editors, columnists, etc.  You may be confusing news media with  academic research media (which can also be corrupted by money- industry occasionally).

Seriously
Seriously

@animas   The DMN is a news reporting agency  regulated by guidelines of the FCC. They are not there to make their friends feel good about themselves, help them make money, or sway a civil case. 

If something is bullish, illegal, festery, wrong headed or just plain weird, it is their responsibility to inform the readers of facts from all parties involved in an investigation and write the conclusion that allows the reader to make up their mind. As in think for ourselves. That's why blogs are more like the way the news media use to be.

The DMN lost sight of that decades ago when it feels like they started investigating stories, as if they were a private investigation company hired on behalf of one particular side of a civil case.  

Did they lose their ability to be objective, in this particular case?  If this goes to court, guess we'll find out. 

animas
animas

The DMN, was in my opinion ,fairly courageous to analyze the lethal festering ingredients composing the toxic environment at  UTSW-Parkland, and they got backlashed by the Dallas elites in the "Positive Response Committee" (who were essentially saying that the miscreants were their good buddies, relatives etc--so take that Dallas County Taxpayers.)  Perhaps DMN management feels that they have expended much of their "political capital" in the affaire Parkland and are now trying to make amends?

Now Trending

Dallas Concert Tickets

From the Vault

 

General

Loading...