Two weeks ago, NPR ran a print and audio story about people with past sex offense convictions that was so poorly researched and interrogated that I felt compelled to write a lengthy response to the article’s many problems. You can read that article (which contains a link to her reporting) here.
I had reached out (politely) on Twitter to ask the journalist, Cheryl Thompson, for a response to the criticisms I raised about her reporting, such as why she felt it was appropriate to disclose the HIV/AIDS status of one of her story’s subjects when it had no relevance at all to the story. Thompson, to her credit, did respond to my criticism. Her response below:
If anyone wants to drop Ms. Thompson a line, you can reach her here: [email protected], or at @cherylwt on Twitter
“black ‘woman’”? You really want FAC to print that on this forum? How are readers who are black women, supposed to think of this?
whoa! good catch. removed that comment.
Media is working on a response to Ms. Thompson and NPR. When I think of the very limited knowledge I had in this area 5 years ago, I can understand how a journalist could write such an article. She, along with NPR, just need to be educated about the facts. If they do not listen to the truth, then I will no longer be sympathetic with them.
Ms. Thompson, on Twitter, has been blocking those who disagree with her. May as well go over her head to NPR, which ought to have better journalistic standards than this.
Interesting. Thanks.
Here’s what NPR’s Public Editor has to say.
http://view.nl.npr.org/?qs=c91121eac5d3784a8f018ad17b60f3b2970cd0fd5cae1ead410bc21c67bfa53977f50fd1d3a360bf0a541efd28386ea9d1ce4cda8f082abcb9f6f81b4467e3e419189ae6945ffbb6f7c64ae9fde8c956
As Guy Hamilton-Smith points out on Twitter, “it doesn’t grapple with many of the ethical and journalistic lapses on display, and presumably the stories will live on to leave the public less well informed.“
NPR and the journalist are definitely feeling the heat from all the negative contacts that have been made over this “story”. Even Dr. Kelly Socia — one of the experts who was interviewed by Thompson, wrote to express his disagreement with the piece: that Thompson’s reporting leaves readers with an impression that is contrary to his work, and the interview that he gave.
I reached out with a polite and credible (but firm) message to NPR’s ethics department.
I stressed the fact that I am a tax paying and law abiding citizen.
I also stressed that there are about one million registrants in the USA whose civil rights are daily being violated in the most fundamental ways.
I was polite (but FIRM).
SO Truth, you are correct
Professionally produced Emails based on Empirical Evidence from the US DOJ have been sent to this Rogue Reporter, and we know she opened up the emails, whether, she read them, Who Knows…and We are sure that ‘she’ has sent these Emails to ‘justice officials’, who will try and use them as Retribution and Retaliation, because ‘she is scared of the TRUTHS’ and is a coward in her own right, like ‘Barbie Doll’Book…these people are selfish spine-less individuals, who only care about themselves, and NOT OTHERS!
NPR, used to be an open forum; now since it almost went BANKRUPT, ‘they’ are searching for leftist and socialistic listeners fill in the GAPS!
You might want to check out what SMART has to say in the comment section. From all that I have read about this group, they spend more time trying to come up with “data” to show registrants are dangerous than they do in finding what legitimate research shows. If the citizens in our country were ever able to know and understand what all research tells us, SMART would probably be done away with, and many people would lose their cushy jobs.
It is interesting that SMART is following Guy Hamilton-Smith.
Yes, that is very interesting.
I’ve said plenty to the NOT-SMART people. But I fully expect that they are not that talented and capable of listening. I mean, how many people who are creative and have open minds would work in the NOT-SMART office? Surely not that many.
I do wonder how many jobs are there. I wouldn’t think it would be that many, but duh, it is big government after all. We’d probably all be shocked.
The funny thing is that if People Forced to Register (PFRs) all lived like I do, the Registries would be such a massive failure that people couldn’t even comprehend it. Some PFRs surely do live like that. What percentage? 10? 30? 80?
I don’t know, but I’ve made the Registries worthless. But not just worthless, a whole hell of a lot worse. With respect to me, Registries have definitely been a bad idea and complete failure. The NOT-SMART fleecers can approve/decide whatever “regulations” they like, it’s not going to matter. I’m going to continue to ensure that the Registries are worthless and that there are consequences. Perhaps they believe that if only 5% of PFRs are like me, but the other 95% are “controlled/monitored” by the Registries, that the overall effect is worth it? At what percentage would it not be worth it?
At what level of worthlessness and harm will the Registries not be worth the big government jobs and money being grifted by all of the various people and organizations in the incarceration business? Probably no level. They want that $$$$$.
SMART as in the SMART office of the DOJ? Why are they doing this? To justify their budget?
Yes. As far as I can tell, they serve no useful purpose. I have read of nothing that they have done that has made society safer. If anything, they are a hindrance. They do not promote best practices.