by Mary Turck • 10/23/08 • The Strib and the PiPress give strangely different accounts of an RNC-related guilty plea.
Star Tribune: A 23-year-old Michigan man has admitted to plotting to detonate a homemade bomb in the tunnels near the Xcel Energy Center, hoping it would cause a power failure and prompt cancellation of the Republican National Convention.
Pioneer Press: Although he pleaded guilty, he said he intended the explosives to be used only for "self-defense."
Star Tribune: DePalma spent about 90 minutes at the Hennepin County Library on Aug. 18 researching recipes for homemade bombs. He bought the supplies for Molotov cocktails a few days later.
Pioneer Press: "Was it your idea to make them?" the judge asked.
"Yes," DePalma replied, adding that he believed he was "encouraged" to build them.
"By encouragement, I mean it was made very, very easy for me," he said. He said the informant drove him to various stations to get gas.
Star Tribune: On Aug. 22, DePalma allegedly made two jugs of a homemade napalm-like substance for use in the Molotov cocktails. He was seen traveling to a remote location in Rosemount to allegedly assemble and test the Molotov cocktails.
Pioneer Press: DePalma made five of the explosives. He and the government informant blew up two to test the design, and the FBI seized the other three.
Star Tribune: DePalma faces a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison.
Pioneer Press: The judge noted that under federal sentencing guidelines, DePalma could be sentenced to 46 months to 57 months in prison and be fined as much as $100,000.
Sunday, November 2, 2008
Mayhem and the Mainstream Media
by Mary Turck, 10/2/08 • The media's job is to report the news, and that includes reporting inconvenient facts that contradict the "official stories" about the RNC.
Ramsey County Sheriff Bob Fletcher declared September 24 that the city of St. Paul endured "eight hours of chaos and mayhem" and that if police had not acted forcefully, "this town would have been destroyed" on September 1, the first day of the Republican National Convention. (St. Paul Pioneer Press, 9/25/08; Star Tribune, 9/29/08)
These uncritical reports of Sheriff Fletcher's news conference show a failure of reporting. Instead of simply repeating the sheriff's heated rhetoric, journalists need to look for evidence and report whether his statements are accurate.
One example illustrates the need for more careful reporting. According to the St. Paul Pioneer Press article, Fletcher said that police had shown great restraint and that officers in riot gear were not deployed until about 3 p.m. I was on the streets of downtown St. Paul by early afternoon on September 1. So were hundreds of other journalists, and hundreds of police in riot gear. I have videos and photos of police in riot gear lining the streets at 12:30 p.m. I am willing to bet that Star Tribune and Pioneer Press photographers do, too.
Photos from my video at 7th and St. Peter at approximately 12:30 p.m. on September 1
Sheriff Fletcher apparently missed the riot gear deployment. If he is wrong--by three hours--about when police in riot gear were deployed, then what else is he wrong about? That's a basic question that the media need to ask and answer. Our job is to ask questions and find the truth, not to uncritically report the words of public officials.
Chaos and Mayhem?
What, exactly, is the "chaos and mayhem" that Sheriff Fletcher is talking about? What, exactly, is the "extensive damage to the city" that the Star Tribune editorial page (9/3/08) said was justification for "an appropriate show of police force"?
I have seen no reports of injuries to police or convention delegates, only of injuries inflicted by police on protesters, journalists and bystanders. Police booking records reveal no reports of guns fired or bombs exploded. News stories tell of half a dozen broken windows, maybe a dozen cars with flat tires, and miscellaneous damage to trash containers and newspaper boxes.
After the convention, the Minnesota Daily (9/8/08) talked to U of M police chief Greg Hestness, who had four officers detailed to the RNC. According to the report, "Hestness said the RNC protests were far tamer in his opinion than the protests following the 2003 Gopher hockey riots when 'strictly alcohol-fueled' students took to the streets starting fires and causing damage all over the University."
Of the 280-plus people arrested on September 1, only three were booked on charges of criminal damage to property. Of the 700-plus people arrested in St. Paul during the RNC, only 13 have been charged with felonies committed during the four days of the convention. (Eight more -- the RNC Eight -- were jailed before the convention on charges of "conspiracy to riot in furtherance of terrorism.")
Challenge to the media
When the media reports--and we should report--that Sheriff Fletcher claims to have saved the city of St. Paul from destruction, then we also need to report facts that enable the public to decide whether or not they believe him.
At the Twin Cities Daily Planet, part of our mission is to dig for enough facts to raise challenging questions. I wish we had a research staff to dig deeper and get all of the answers, but we do not. I think the big guys -- the mainstream media -- should be assigning researchers and reporters and digging deeper for information such as:
• Who was injured during the RNC and what were the injuries?
• Exactly what property damage occurred?
• How many people were arrested, and what happened to each of them?
• What was the command structure of the security forces assembled for the RNC? What was the role of the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security?
• What was seized in searches of residences and the Convergence Center during the pre-emptive raids before the RNC?
• What residences have been searched AFTER the RNC, and what has been seized in these residences?
At a minimum, raising the questions lets people know that the full story has not been told. But the mainstream media has an opportunity to do much more. They have the opportunity -- and the resources -- to reclaim journalism's role of finding and speaking truth, rather than acting as stenographers for power.
Mary Turck is the editor of the Twin Cities Daily Planet.
|
Ramsey County Sheriff Bob Fletcher declared September 24 that the city of St. Paul endured "eight hours of chaos and mayhem" and that if police had not acted forcefully, "this town would have been destroyed" on September 1, the first day of the Republican National Convention. (St. Paul Pioneer Press, 9/25/08; Star Tribune, 9/29/08)
These uncritical reports of Sheriff Fletcher's news conference show a failure of reporting. Instead of simply repeating the sheriff's heated rhetoric, journalists need to look for evidence and report whether his statements are accurate.
One example illustrates the need for more careful reporting. According to the St. Paul Pioneer Press article, Fletcher said that police had shown great restraint and that officers in riot gear were not deployed until about 3 p.m. I was on the streets of downtown St. Paul by early afternoon on September 1. So were hundreds of other journalists, and hundreds of police in riot gear. I have videos and photos of police in riot gear lining the streets at 12:30 p.m. I am willing to bet that Star Tribune and Pioneer Press photographers do, too.
Photos from my video at 7th and St. Peter at approximately 12:30 p.m. on September 1
Sheriff Fletcher apparently missed the riot gear deployment. If he is wrong--by three hours--about when police in riot gear were deployed, then what else is he wrong about? That's a basic question that the media need to ask and answer. Our job is to ask questions and find the truth, not to uncritically report the words of public officials.
Chaos and Mayhem?
What, exactly, is the "chaos and mayhem" that Sheriff Fletcher is talking about? What, exactly, is the "extensive damage to the city" that the Star Tribune editorial page (9/3/08) said was justification for "an appropriate show of police force"?
I have seen no reports of injuries to police or convention delegates, only of injuries inflicted by police on protesters, journalists and bystanders. Police booking records reveal no reports of guns fired or bombs exploded. News stories tell of half a dozen broken windows, maybe a dozen cars with flat tires, and miscellaneous damage to trash containers and newspaper boxes.
After the convention, the Minnesota Daily (9/8/08) talked to U of M police chief Greg Hestness, who had four officers detailed to the RNC. According to the report, "Hestness said the RNC protests were far tamer in his opinion than the protests following the 2003 Gopher hockey riots when 'strictly alcohol-fueled' students took to the streets starting fires and causing damage all over the University."
Of the 280-plus people arrested on September 1, only three were booked on charges of criminal damage to property. Of the 700-plus people arrested in St. Paul during the RNC, only 13 have been charged with felonies committed during the four days of the convention. (Eight more -- the RNC Eight -- were jailed before the convention on charges of "conspiracy to riot in furtherance of terrorism.")
Challenge to the media
When the media reports--and we should report--that Sheriff Fletcher claims to have saved the city of St. Paul from destruction, then we also need to report facts that enable the public to decide whether or not they believe him.
At the Twin Cities Daily Planet, part of our mission is to dig for enough facts to raise challenging questions. I wish we had a research staff to dig deeper and get all of the answers, but we do not. I think the big guys -- the mainstream media -- should be assigning researchers and reporters and digging deeper for information such as:
• Who was injured during the RNC and what were the injuries?
• Exactly what property damage occurred?
• How many people were arrested, and what happened to each of them?
• What was the command structure of the security forces assembled for the RNC? What was the role of the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security?
• What was seized in searches of residences and the Convergence Center during the pre-emptive raids before the RNC?
• What residences have been searched AFTER the RNC, and what has been seized in these residences?
At a minimum, raising the questions lets people know that the full story has not been told. But the mainstream media has an opportunity to do much more. They have the opportunity -- and the resources -- to reclaim journalism's role of finding and speaking truth, rather than acting as stenographers for power.
Mary Turck is the editor of the Twin Cities Daily Planet.
U.S. Army at the RNC
by Mary Turck • 10/8/08 • Army Col. Michael Boatner admitted October 7 that active-duty U.S. military were sent to St. Paul for the Republican National Convention. Col. Boatner, the future operations division chief of USNORTHCOM, told Amy Goodman on Democracy Now that the army was "up there in support of the US Secret Service. We provided some explosive ordnance disposal support of the event."
Col. Boatman denied that the army did any intelligence sharing. "They were just doing routine screens and scans of the area in advance of this kind of a vulnerable event," he said. "It’s pretty standard support to a national special security event."
This discussion follows the publication of an Army Times article last month announcing training of a U.S. Army unit for domestic operations under the control of U.S. Army Northern Command.
Matthew Rothschild, editor of The Progressive, expressed grave concern: "Now the Pentagon is doing sweeps of areas before, you know, a political convention? That used to be law enforcement’s job. That used to be domestic civil law enforcement job. It’s now being taken over by the Pentagon. That should concern us."
The disclosure of U.S. Army operations at the RNC highlights the still unanswered questions about security forces there.
The RNC was designated as a national special security event. When the Secretary of Homeland Security designates a National Special Security Event, " the Secret Service assumes its mandated role as the lead agency for the design and implementation of the operational security plan. The Secret Service has developed a core strategy to carry out its security operations, which relies heavily on its established partnerships with law enforcement and public safety officials at the local, state and federal levels." (Secret Service web site)
Security forces deployed at the RNC included Hennepin and Ramsey County sheriff's departments, Minneapolis and St. Paul police departments, the University of Minnesota police department, Minnesota Highway Patrol, National Guard, suburban and rural police, and out-of-state police. The Secret Service was here. The FBI was here, and active in raids on homes before the convention. And now it's official -- the U.S. Army was here as well.
The latest disclosure highlights many still-unanswered questions about security at the RNC:
• Who gave the orders for raids on private homes and the political headquarters of protesters? We know the FBI was involved, but what was the nature of their involvement?
• Who ordered the arrests and detentions of journalists and harassment of photographers in the weeks before the convention?
• Who searched the computers and cell phones and cameras of those who were detained?
• Where did the information seized from computer hard drives and cell phones and camera memory cards end up?
• What federal agencies now have the name-and-address information and the photos of people who were temporarily detained but never arrested or charged with anything?
And then there's the $100,000 question: Will the investigation headed by former U.S. Attorney Tom Heffelfinger even address these issues?
Col. Boatman denied that the army did any intelligence sharing. "They were just doing routine screens and scans of the area in advance of this kind of a vulnerable event," he said. "It’s pretty standard support to a national special security event."
This discussion follows the publication of an Army Times article last month announcing training of a U.S. Army unit for domestic operations under the control of U.S. Army Northern Command.
Matthew Rothschild, editor of The Progressive, expressed grave concern: "Now the Pentagon is doing sweeps of areas before, you know, a political convention? That used to be law enforcement’s job. That used to be domestic civil law enforcement job. It’s now being taken over by the Pentagon. That should concern us."
The disclosure of U.S. Army operations at the RNC highlights the still unanswered questions about security forces there.
The RNC was designated as a national special security event. When the Secretary of Homeland Security designates a National Special Security Event, " the Secret Service assumes its mandated role as the lead agency for the design and implementation of the operational security plan. The Secret Service has developed a core strategy to carry out its security operations, which relies heavily on its established partnerships with law enforcement and public safety officials at the local, state and federal levels." (Secret Service web site)
Security forces deployed at the RNC included Hennepin and Ramsey County sheriff's departments, Minneapolis and St. Paul police departments, the University of Minnesota police department, Minnesota Highway Patrol, National Guard, suburban and rural police, and out-of-state police. The Secret Service was here. The FBI was here, and active in raids on homes before the convention. And now it's official -- the U.S. Army was here as well.
The latest disclosure highlights many still-unanswered questions about security at the RNC:
• Who gave the orders for raids on private homes and the political headquarters of protesters? We know the FBI was involved, but what was the nature of their involvement?
• Who ordered the arrests and detentions of journalists and harassment of photographers in the weeks before the convention?
• Who searched the computers and cell phones and cameras of those who were detained?
• Where did the information seized from computer hard drives and cell phones and camera memory cards end up?
• What federal agencies now have the name-and-address information and the photos of people who were temporarily detained but never arrested or charged with anything?
And then there's the $100,000 question: Will the investigation headed by former U.S. Attorney Tom Heffelfinger even address these issues?
Guns and Bombs and Things That Go Boom in the NIght
by Mary Turck • 10/2/08 • Over the past month, both Sheriff Bob Fletcher and St. Paul Mayor Chris Coleman referred to "guns and bombs" that "anarchists" brought to the RNC. The massive local, state and federal security presence is credited by both men with saving the city of St. Paul from the people with guns and bombs. But who were these people and how many guns and bombs did they bring?
Ramsey County Sheriff's Office booking records for the week of August 30-September 5. show seven weapons or explosives-related arrests during that time. Five of these look like regular, everyday arrests, such as domestic assault. Only two seem even remotely connected to the RNC. These two are arrests for possession of explosives. The two people arrested were a 22-year-old Texan arrested at 5:15 a.m. on September 3 and a 20-year-old Minnesotan arrested at 11:16 p.m. on September 3.
But arrest is only the first step. After an arrest, prosecutors weigh the evidence and file charges. Three people have been charged with possession of Molotov cocktails by the U.S. Attorney. No one has been charged with illegal possession of guns related to the RNC.
The Ramsey County Attorney's office reports ten felony cases related to activities during the convention. None of them involve guns or bombs. (The RNC 8, who were charged with conspiracy to commit a riot, were not charged with committing crimes during the convention.)
Some people who were arrested on the bridge on September 4 say that they saw police confiscate a gun or guns from others on the bridge. I've heard this from journalists whose reports I trust. The Ramsey County Sheriff's booking records show no weapons charges filed for that night. Perhaps the individuals with guns were Minnesotans legally toting their registered and concealed-carry-permitted guns. Perhaps they were undercover officers who were legally carrying weapons. I don't know, but it seems fairly unlikely that police would fail to charge a protester with possession of an unregistered or illegal weapon.
I have not heard a single report of any protester or anarchist actually shooting a gun or exploding a bomb during the RNC. Our civic authorities credit the police with this success. I am sure they are correct. I am sure we all owe a vote of thanks to Sheriff Fletcher for protecting the city of St. Paul from destruction and guns and bombs and anarchists and peaceniks and ... well, anyone else who is a threat to public order and decency.
I have not heard of a single lion or tiger or bear running amok in the streets of St. Paul during the RNC. I personally want to thank Sheriff Bob Fletcher and all of the security forces from Homeland Security, the FBI, and the Secret Service for protecting us from lions and tigers and bears.
Ramsey County Sheriff's Office booking records for the week of August 30-September 5. show seven weapons or explosives-related arrests during that time. Five of these look like regular, everyday arrests, such as domestic assault. Only two seem even remotely connected to the RNC. These two are arrests for possession of explosives. The two people arrested were a 22-year-old Texan arrested at 5:15 a.m. on September 3 and a 20-year-old Minnesotan arrested at 11:16 p.m. on September 3.
But arrest is only the first step. After an arrest, prosecutors weigh the evidence and file charges. Three people have been charged with possession of Molotov cocktails by the U.S. Attorney. No one has been charged with illegal possession of guns related to the RNC.
The Ramsey County Attorney's office reports ten felony cases related to activities during the convention. None of them involve guns or bombs. (The RNC 8, who were charged with conspiracy to commit a riot, were not charged with committing crimes during the convention.)
Some people who were arrested on the bridge on September 4 say that they saw police confiscate a gun or guns from others on the bridge. I've heard this from journalists whose reports I trust. The Ramsey County Sheriff's booking records show no weapons charges filed for that night. Perhaps the individuals with guns were Minnesotans legally toting their registered and concealed-carry-permitted guns. Perhaps they were undercover officers who were legally carrying weapons. I don't know, but it seems fairly unlikely that police would fail to charge a protester with possession of an unregistered or illegal weapon.
I have not heard a single report of any protester or anarchist actually shooting a gun or exploding a bomb during the RNC. Our civic authorities credit the police with this success. I am sure they are correct. I am sure we all owe a vote of thanks to Sheriff Fletcher for protecting the city of St. Paul from destruction and guns and bombs and anarchists and peaceniks and ... well, anyone else who is a threat to public order and decency.
I have not heard of a single lion or tiger or bear running amok in the streets of St. Paul during the RNC. I personally want to thank Sheriff Bob Fletcher and all of the security forces from Homeland Security, the FBI, and the Secret Service for protecting us from lions and tigers and bears.
Monday, July 7, 2008
Phoning it in to DC
by Mary Turck, TC Daily Planet
A giant, red phone rolled up to the offices of Senators Klobuchar and Coleman bright and early on Monday, July 5. The phone, and the people accompanying it, delivered a message: stop FISA.
As the Minnesota Independent explains, the FISA amendments bill "would grant immunity for telecoms that break the law in the course of cooperating with the feds and grant the executive branch additional surveillance powers."
Breaking it down—Congress already granted broad and sweeping surveillance and wiretap powers to the executive branch. Telecom companies went even farther than the law allowed, bowing to every demand the federal cops made, without warrants of any kind. Now Congress is going to give them a free pass. Warrants? We don't need no stinking warrants!
FISA is one of the major issues waiting in Washington as congress returns to work this week. The House passed the bill by a 293-129 margin in June, and now it is the Senate's turn to tackle the bill. According to the Red Phone people, "If passed, the FISA Amendment would grant sweeping new powers to spy on innocent Americans. It legalizes mass, untargeted and unwarranted spying on our phone calls and emails, even when they have no connection to terrorism. " Both MN senators have said they'll support FISA.
A second major issue awaiting congressional action is a tiny bureaucratic tweak to health care. Every year, payments to 600,000 doctors serving Medicare patients are cut—unless Congress acts to stop the cuts. This year, the cuts went into effect on July 1, because Congress was too busy bickering to pass the legislation needed to stop them. The
American Medical Association says the cuts have put the country "at the brink of a Medicare meltdown." The House passed the bill—HR 6331—by a veto-proof majority of 355-59. In the Senate, 60 votes were needed to cut off debate and get to a vote. The alignment was 59-39, with two non-voting Senators. Senator Kennedy is hospitalized, and Senator McCain on the campaign trail.
Of course, this is one small vote on one small issue—whether doctors will get paid slightly more to treat Medicare patients—and it will not resolve larger health care issues facing the nation. On the larger issues, Minnesotans are joining people in 45 other states in the Health Care For American Now! coalition. The kick-off press conference is set for Tuesday, July 8 at 11 a.m. at La Clinica, the West Side Community Health Services at 153 Cesar Chavez Street in St. Paul. According to the organization's press release:
A giant, red phone rolled up to the offices of Senators Klobuchar and Coleman bright and early on Monday, July 5. The phone, and the people accompanying it, delivered a message: stop FISA.
|
As the Minnesota Independent explains, the FISA amendments bill "would grant immunity for telecoms that break the law in the course of cooperating with the feds and grant the executive branch additional surveillance powers."
Breaking it down—Congress already granted broad and sweeping surveillance and wiretap powers to the executive branch. Telecom companies went even farther than the law allowed, bowing to every demand the federal cops made, without warrants of any kind. Now Congress is going to give them a free pass. Warrants? We don't need no stinking warrants!
FISA is one of the major issues waiting in Washington as congress returns to work this week. The House passed the bill by a 293-129 margin in June, and now it is the Senate's turn to tackle the bill. According to the Red Phone people, "If passed, the FISA Amendment would grant sweeping new powers to spy on innocent Americans. It legalizes mass, untargeted and unwarranted spying on our phone calls and emails, even when they have no connection to terrorism. " Both MN senators have said they'll support FISA.
A second major issue awaiting congressional action is a tiny bureaucratic tweak to health care. Every year, payments to 600,000 doctors serving Medicare patients are cut—unless Congress acts to stop the cuts. This year, the cuts went into effect on July 1, because Congress was too busy bickering to pass the legislation needed to stop them. The
American Medical Association says the cuts have put the country "at the brink of a Medicare meltdown." The House passed the bill—HR 6331—by a veto-proof majority of 355-59. In the Senate, 60 votes were needed to cut off debate and get to a vote. The alignment was 59-39, with two non-voting Senators. Senator Kennedy is hospitalized, and Senator McCain on the campaign trail.
Of course, this is one small vote on one small issue—whether doctors will get paid slightly more to treat Medicare patients—and it will not resolve larger health care issues facing the nation. On the larger issues, Minnesotans are joining people in 45 other states in the Health Care For American Now! coalition. The kick-off press conference is set for Tuesday, July 8 at 11 a.m. at La Clinica, the West Side Community Health Services at 153 Cesar Chavez Street in St. Paul. According to the organization's press release:
Funded by a $40 million grant from the Atlantic Philanthropies, the campaign will organize citizens to ask elected officials and policy makers to declare if they believe in quality, affordable health care for all or if they think everyone should navigate the system on their own. Between now and election day, the group plans to spend $25 million in paid media and have 100 organizers in 45 states.
How far for free speech?
(Written for TC Daily Planet)
"Stick your political correctness up your ass." So begins one of the comments we recently received (and posted.)
We post almost every legit comment that we receive. By "legit," I mean comments that are not spam or advertising/self promotion. The very few that we refuse to post are overtly racist, probably libelous, or personal attacks of the "I know him personally and he is a crook/liar/shoplifter/child abuser" variety.
Obviously, we print a lot of comments that we disagree with. We do so in the interest of fostering dialogue and civic engagement. I'm not sure this always works. At times, comments seem downright nasty.
Two recent comments pose the issue clearly:
The Des Moines Register has given a great deal of thought to on-line conversation. They have come up with some guidelines that look pretty good to me:
I like the tone of the Des Moines Register policy, though it goes farther than we do in limiting comments. Other suggestions for limiting comments include:
1) require registration for anyone posting a comment
2) refuse to post anonymous comments
3) put up a button that readers can use to flag "objectionable" comments
I'm not sure that we need a more defined comment policy, but I'm open to conversation about it. Comment away!
"Stick your political correctness up your ass." So begins one of the comments we recently received (and posted.)
We post almost every legit comment that we receive. By "legit," I mean comments that are not spam or advertising/self promotion. The very few that we refuse to post are overtly racist, probably libelous, or personal attacks of the "I know him personally and he is a crook/liar/shoplifter/child abuser" variety.
Obviously, we print a lot of comments that we disagree with. We do so in the interest of fostering dialogue and civic engagement. I'm not sure this always works. At times, comments seem downright nasty.
Two recent comments pose the issue clearly:
Troy Wodele, 5/20/08 • I have a very difficult time reading news on both the Star and Tribune and the Pioneer Press’ websites, primarily because of the comments sections at the end of the article. Invariably, I find myself reading them, despite the fact that most of the rants are racist, sexist, and ill informed. I’m not sure why the two papers put up with this type of discourse. They are not required to post every response, so why do they?
In addition, as an educator, I am also appalled at the grammar and spelling that is displayed in many of these comments.
Marcia Lynx Qualey, 5/21/08 • Why do newspapers—and I’ll add the St. Cloud Times to the list, as they hosted hundreds of hateful comments after the recent service-dog story—allow their websites to become forums for unmoderated hate? They certainly wouldn’t allow that to happen in print. Interactive doesn’t have to mean “anything goes.”
It’s damaging to the community and does not fit with a responsible media-outlet’s mission.
The Des Moines Register has given a great deal of thought to on-line conversation. They have come up with some guidelines that look pretty good to me:
Our updated standards make the distinction between offensive opinion and offensive approach.
As we are alerted to them, we reserve the right to remove comments including these types of specific information or language:
- Libel. In general terms, that means a comment that includes a false statement of fact that actually harms a person's reputation (as opposed to insulting or offending them). ...
- Sexually explicit or crude sexual comments about someone.
- Threatening statements or statements that suggests violent acts against someone.
- Crude comments about a child.
- Swearing or obscenity.
- Derogatory phrases to define a group of people.
- Nasty name-calling (language such as "moron" and "white trash").
But we will allow opinions some will find offensive.
We will allow conversation that is simply strident in tone.
We will allow criticism of public officials.
We will allow criticism of people who are subjects of stories.
We will allow opinions that some may find offensive about tough social issues around race and sexual orientation, as long as they don't include the kind of specific language described above.
I like the tone of the Des Moines Register policy, though it goes farther than we do in limiting comments. Other suggestions for limiting comments include:
1) require registration for anyone posting a comment
2) refuse to post anonymous comments
3) put up a button that readers can use to flag "objectionable" comments
I'm not sure that we need a more defined comment policy, but I'm open to conversation about it. Comment away!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
