I'd like the panel to discuss the conflict of interest re: the New York Times Jerusalem Bureau Chief Ethan Bronner. Bronner's son serves in the Israeli Defense Forces and readers alerted the New...
Contributor
Emily Rooney
Host
Biography
Emily Rooney is the host, executive editor and creator of "Greater Boston" and "Beat the Press." Since the show's inception in 1997, Emily has brought her journalistic credentials and deep knowledge of media, politics, and culture to the program and has earned numerous awards, including the National Press Club's prestigious Arthur Rowse Award for Press Criticism, a series of New England Emmy Awards, and Associated Press recognition for Best News/Talk Show. Before coming to WGBH, Emily was director of political coverage and special events at Fox Network in New York from 1994 to 1997. Prior to that, she was executive producer of ABC World News Tonight with Peter Jennings. Emily also worked at WCVB-TV in Boston from 1979 to 1993, where she served as news director for three years and as assistant news director before that.
Emily's Posts
Not-so-mighty-Quinn: Airing dirty laundry means Sally is washed up as print columnist
posted by Emily Rooney on February 25, 2010
It's the ultimate gossip story involving arguably the ultimate gossip girl - The Washington Post's Sally Quinn, Style section columnist and wife of 89-year-old Ben Bradlee, the storied former editor of our nation's political paper of record.
As you might have seen in the gossip pages, Ben Bradlee Jr. and ex-wife Martha Raddatz's only child, Greta Bradlee, is getting married April 10th in a long-planned ceremony in California. Sally Quinn and Bed Bradlee Sr.'s son Quinn was supposed to get married in October, but the nuptials were pushed up when the couple announced they were pregnant. The new date was - you guessed it - April 10th. It would have remained just a classic family feud were it not for the fact that Sally Quinn wrote about it in her "The Party" column ("The Kids Are All Right. It's Mom Who's To Blame"), essentially blaming everyone but the Dalai Lama for the confusion.
The column was not well received. It infuriated Raddatz and Ben Jr., who protested to the Post's publisher. Then there were the scathing comments - not that "comments" are any indication of valid criticism, necessarily - attached to the online version. Now Quinn has been relieved of the print version of her column and exiled to online only.
But the question we're asking is: Where was her editor in all this? If the column was worthy of a firing, why didn't Style Editor Ned Martel nix it in the first place? Or, maybe, he had something else in mind ...
(Full disclosure: I'm friends with Martha Raddatz, Ben Jr., and his wife, Jan Saragoni)
Brown nosing: Talk radio blows off fairness, fears Fairness Doctrine
posted by Emily Rooney on January 20, 2010
It did not escape anyone's notice that Boston talk radio was, for the most part, in the bag for Scott Brown. WTKK's Michael Graham, Jay Severin and Michele McPhee used every breath of their substantial airtime the last few weeks to push the candidate - with Brown frequently appearing as the only guest, as in, no Martha Coakley, or Joe L. Kennedy for that matter. Same went for WRKO's Finneran's Forum and The Howie Carr Show - even WBZ's Dan Rea was on the Brown wagon. Only 'TKK's Margery Eagan and Jim Braude offered a little balance.
Okay. But now libertarian blogger David Gold, an edgy force in talk radio, is raising the tired old saw that Scott Brown's win, fueled by talk radio, will bring more liberal pressure to regulate the air waves, even though there's no evidence that's true.
The quirky local writer and essayist, Steve Almond says of all the "lies told by the pooh-bahs of talk radio," the most desperate and deluded is that the Fairness Doctrine would quash free speech. He's even challenged any conservative talk radio yakker to a debate. No one locally has accepted.
While I don't think a Fairness Doctrine would quash free speech either, I certainly don't want to see it come back. I would however, like to see some basic fairness when it comes to balance on the airwaves.
Full disclosure: Emily Rooney is also a radio talk show host, appearing daily on "The Emily Rooney Show" on WGBH-FM 89.7 at noon.
Tags:
21 comments
Abdication: The Boston media gives away an important US Senate debate
posted by Emily Rooney on October 27, 2009
If viewers and listeners were bored to death by Monday night's senatorial debate at the JFK Library, they have the usual suspects to blame - the media. Only this time, they are right.
The entire expanse of Massachusetts television, radio and print media ceded control of the debate to the Edward Kennedy Institute for the United States Senate. Why, you ask? Because it was free - the Kennedy Institute paid for everything. And we all got what we paid for, nothing. The format was lame, the questions were lame, the production was lame and the result was tedious. And for the record, I opposed this lazy and cozy partnership.
Virtually every rule of "don't" was broken. Don't ask everyone the same question, don't ask yes/no questions, don't ask hypotheticals, and don't use a format that doesn't allow for interaction among the candidates.
Peter Meade is one of the most competent, knowledgeable and civically engaged people I know - but that does not make him a debate moderator. Come to think of it, what he is, is senatorial material.
Hot air
posted by Emily Rooney on October 19, 2009
Well, okay, I broke my own rules when it comes to believing the unbelievable.
Rule #1 "Everyone is lying and everything is intentional." Not that I wasn't always skeptical and cynical, but I adopted this hard and firm position in January of 1990, the day Charles Stuart jumped off the Tobin Bridge after convincing law enforcement and the media that he and his wife were victims of violent crime committed by an unknown black assailant.
Rule #2 - "It's always the boyfriend or husband." Same goes for the Denver balloon boy episode. The story was concocted by the husband and father but it was carried out by the whole clan, including the wife.
While everyone is targeting Richard Heene, I actually have a fantasy that I'd like to make chicklets of Mayumi Heene's smile. Just listen again to that 911 call where Mrs. Heene stereotypes her own nationality with her broken-English inability to articulate to an operator what's happening to her own son - even going so far as to tell the woman that her son is "in a flying saucer."
By the way, the unspoken hero of this whole affair is the 911 operator who stuck with the call despite her own skepticism.
As for referencing "Gawker" as the news outlet complicit in this sorry affair; since when is Gawker a news outlet?
CBS News loses the scoop on Letterman
posted by Emily Rooney on October 2, 2009
How is it that not a single person in the audience, on the staff or on the crew of the "Late Show" with David Letterman thought to tip off the folks at the CBS News that the big guy was making news?
The "Late Show" was taped yesterday afternoon at 4:30. That's when Letterman notified his audience that he was the victim of a blackmail scam where someone was demanding two million dollars to keep quiet about "terrible things" he knew about Letterman. Those "creepy things" Letterman told his audience included sexual affairs with women on his staff.
"I didn't know anything about it - until I got a phone call at 5:30 this morning," Executive Producer Rick Kaplan of "CBS Evening News" told Beat The Press today. Had they known, Kaplan said "of course" they would have reported it.
Instead, all the newspapers and morning news shows had the story first. While Letterman did not name his blackmailer, a New York DA has - he is 51-year-old Robert Joel Halderman of the program "48 Hours," whom Kaplan describes as a "brilliant" producer.
Come to think of it this is a great tale for "48 Hours."
Emily's Whiteboard
Hi Emily,
Speaking of the Tribune's ban on 119 trite and sometimes meaningless words/phrases. A lot of them contained adverbs which reminded me of a great line from the movie Outbreak "It's an adverb ... It's the weak tool of a lazy mind."
I found a blog entry on the Shakesphereian Rag by Steven Beattie (5.1.2007)who is also is a fan of this quote and warns against the dangers of using adverbs.
In his blog entry he points to an excerpt from Stephen King's non-fiction book On Writing -
~I believe the road to hell is paved with adverbs, and I will shout it from the rooftops. To put it another way, they're like dandelions. If you have one on your lawn, it looks pretty and unique. If you fail to root it out, however, you find five the next day ... fifty the day after that ... and then, my brothers and sisters, your lawn is totally, completely, and profligately covered with dandelions. By then you see them for the weeds they really are, but by then it's -- GASP!! -- too late.~
I think that if all journalists loose the baggage of adverbs in their reportage we consumers would reap the great benefits of clear thinking.
Cheers,
Scott Sangster
Hi Emily. I appreciate the hard-hitting reporting you engage in at WGBH. We are blessed in Massachusetts to have you as a journalist.
I was hoping you would be able to give us PBS viewers some insight into why PBS will be cancelling the NOW program. It is one of the most
hard-hitting journalism programs available in the USA and a treasure, and an asset to PBS. I am really so saddened and shocked that it is being cancelled, and that PBS is considering conservative-leaning Jon Meacham a program as a replacement for Bill Moyers, and the NOW programming.
I honestly didn't expect PBS to make a decision like this. I may be naieve, but I didn't expect such great journalism to be repaced with Jon Meacham who thinks it's a good idea for Dick Cheney to run for President. This doesn't seem to coincide with the integrity that I always believed PBS stood for.
This has all me worried that other strong hard-hitting journalism programs at PBS could be next on the chopping block. I sincerely hope I am wrong.
Again, thanks for the strong journalism you provide us.
User fees for the public library? Come on Emily, are you serious?
Caught Beat the press on 89.7 this weekend, translates well—that station becoming a regular on the car radio
Emily,
did you/your show check with the D&C show regarding the Coakley staffers comments about having her on the D&C show, if not ,your credibility is shot.
Emily -- I just heard a cut on D&C that says you know for a fact that they never invited Martha Coakley on until the last couple of days. What a lie!
D&C and Howie Carr both asked multiple times for her to be on their show, and she never returned a call. As a D&C listener, we would have been happy to hear her views on the race. But evidently, she didn't have any views on her race -- because she blew off Howie.
Even Dan Rea had to beg her to be on.
The fact of the matter is Martha was a bad candidate. Face it. She either didn't care about winning, or didn't care about the electorate. Either way, she didn't deserve to be elected.
I used to think that the "self interest, and the lobbyist" ran the Government. However, with the recent descision of the Supreme Court on "finance contribution". I finally realize they do in fact "OWN" the Government, including obiviously the Supreme Court. We are in serious trouble. Love your program. Keep up the good job.
I happen to share your reaction to Diane Sawyer's reporting from Haiti but in general I think the press has done a pretty fair job. I do think there is merit, though, in John Keller's lamenting the lack of background information on the historical forces that put Haiti into such a vulnerable situation. I also would like to have heard or read some commentator wonder out loud why God in creating the earth put in sliding tectonic plates that periodically give way and kill tens or hundreds of thousands of people at a time. Pretty shoddy workmanship, if you ask me. Maybe your father, Andy, would raise this point.
EMILY!!! As usual you did no disappoint me this evening on BEAT THE PRESS!!! Bashing Diane Sawyer usual!!! You are so obviously so jealous of this fine journalist and great lady. she could do somersaults on one hand and you would complain. You sure are Andy Rooneys daughter,cranky,nasty and down right mean. Diane did a great job in haiti why didnt you get your behind out there and do some honest reporting?
just shut up about diane and stick to your boston pols. keep an eye on chris brown. wait till the waters calm he will find out how wonderful journalist can be when they start back checking this phony!!!!!
Hi lefty Emily Rooney .. What do you mean by we saw pictures circulating with Scott Brown holding his daughers? What are you suggesting? If you do not want to discuss that statement on your program then do not mention it on the air period.
If I were the MA DNC, I would use this in the next MA Senate election against Scott Brown.
Why would Scott Brown go on the two biggest racist ( Dennis & Callahan and Jay Serevin) radio shows?
Jay Serevin, the racist on WTKK ( Jay Severin, the fiery right wing talk show host on Boston's WTKK-FM radio station, was suspended yesterday after calling Mexican immigrants "criminaliens," "primitives," "leeches," and exporters of "women with mustaches and VD," among other incendiary comments) was on stage with Scott Brown yesterday during his acceptance speech ( Video on acceptance speech should be available).
Scott Brown's circle of friends........
Hi Emily......I typed the following on another site
which I do not know if it was the correct place. I stumbled on to this "Whiteboard" which I guess is more appropriate. Soooo, here (again???) are my concerns = .... Hi Emily...I hope this gets to you. It took me 10 minutes to find this space in which to type.....When discussing media access I have heard you, on several occasions, poo-pooh us "disenfranchised" TV-antenna users. The latest verbalization you made was Jan 8th = You implied there were many various other ways of accessing the media. You mentioned Cable, Sirrus, Internet, etc...My comments are as follows: 1) I am retired & living on limited income thus the costs are prohibitive; 2) Although I live in a rental apartment in Boston, I, for various reasons, am unable to get even the cheaper "reception clarification only" Cable; 3) Consequently, I bought the DTV boxes for my 3 TVs which, due to terrible reception (for 40+ years), I need in this one bedroom top floor apartment since I can get only particular stations on one or another TV depending on where they are situated. For example: Channel 2 in the living room, Channel 44 in the bedroom, Channel 5 in the kitchen. Stop laughing!....it is not funny but I have learned to adapt. Another adaptive example = my flat DTV antenna in the bedroom is lying on the floor for the best reception of Channel 44; 4) While I have a computer I am not enamored with it & use it only for e-mail. My monitor is 10 years old & I often have to go to the BPL to actually view pictures & videos, etc. I still have a dial-up modem & I do not have a dedicated computer phone line; 5) I have visual disabilities & looking at a small monitor screen is very difficult for a myriad of reasons. Therefore, there are a number of issues: financial & physical being the ongoing & unchanging parameters. BTW, this whole exercise took me 40+ minutes which is another reason I find this whole Internet experience tedious. Thanx for reading.............
Emily,
Contrary to your view of the press, the newsroom is not some sacred cathedral and reporters are not the high priests.
On Emily Rooney's comment (from Nov 16,2009):... "There are only a handful of original news gatherers, everyone else rips and reads..... It will be interesting to see what happens to all the parasites when content pay walls go up. Best, ER"
I think that Rupert Murdoch (Wall Street Journal charges for online use) is right on this one: it takes some courage to stick to his guns, keep up the standards and accept a paying, more affluent, and smaller audience. Even if the result is that real journalism and real publishing become niche businesses, so be it. I hope for their survival in some form.
I viewed with sadness your segment on the people in our nation who most disappointed in 2009. It was shocking that all three of the year's greatest disappointments centered on where a particular man was putting his penis.
In this world where so many are suffering from malnutrition and treatable disease, where pollution threatens our health daily and climate change threatens our global existence, where greed and narcissism has made our global economic system fragile, and where ethnic and religious hatreds lead people to murder others, these ludicrous choices of the "greatest dissappointers" sadly reveal the awful trivialization of the concerns of our people, and the dissociation of our lives and attention from the realities of our world.
Hopiong for an intelligent discussion, I stayed with your program until the man from Boston revealed his greatest disappointments as those related to our local sports teams; at this point I had to turn you off.
These inanities make one fear for the future of our democracy.
Re: 12/4 BTP 'White House crashers' - According to today's NY Times, Callie had a valid point about threats against Obama.
Starting to get as cranky as your dad?
Emily, the parasites' bosses will be paying for content, so that they can still do the stories. It'll be business as usual.
Dear MCummings: Are YOU serious? Where do you think CNN, MSNBC, Ch. 5, FOX, (Shall I continue?) get their "news" from? There are only a handful of original news gatherers, everyone else rips and reads. One example: The Spotlight series on the Plymouth studios reported by the Globe and re-read by everyone else. Most of television news uses newspapers as its assignment desk. It will be interesting to see what happens to all the parasites when content pay walls go up. Best, ER
Your comments this morning regarding newspaper's attempts to charge for content suggest a shocking lack of understand of how content is accessed by internet users. I was struck by your comment that if you can not access the Globe or Murdoch's papers; Where will you get your news?" Are you serious? How about CNN, MSNBC, CNBC, TV 5 among all the stations that run free web sites. Gee maybe even PBS. I stopped reading the Wall Street Journal years ago in favor of Bloomberg News online. Your really need to think more deeply about this issue.
Hi - When there is a new name in the news, such as the girl who recently survived a fall onto the train tracks at North Station, the news outlets seem to fill in the person's profile through a hasty internet search. Is there a reason they stick with the simplest results, like the myspace profile photo? I often find much more interesting photos and background with a little digging. Wouldn't at least one channel want to have a different photo?
In this case, the young woman has been through a lot in life already, and in no need of potentially unflattering worldwide coverage, had a photo of her with a beer in hand been broadcast. On the other hand, a relevant quote from her blog (from May 2006) may have leant a more sympathetic edge to the speculative background info: "Stupid vertigo. Stupid falling and making a fool of myself in Blockbuster. Stupid head ache that has been here for days and that only goes away briefly despite the ingestion of medication. I hate having someone (or many people) tell me everything is fine when it is not. Next time they lose vision and cannot stand up someone should tell them there is nothing wrong with that situation."
So with so many young people posting openly about their lives online, how far do news purveyors dig? Why stop at the low-hanging fruit of social media site profiles and skip the more detailed and meaningful forums and blogs? Thanks, love the show and your analysis, Shap
RE: The Innocence Project: You were not only wrong but biased in many ways. First, of course, if a conviction is reversed because of wrongful evidence, the person IS then innocent. In the US a person is innocent until proven guilty. If the conviction is determined to have been wrongfuly issued then the person is innocent until tried again and found guilty. That is true whenever a conviction is reversed but is especially true when the Innocence Project is involved. Their work does not involve reversals because a cop failed to get a warrant, etc, but rather is based on demonstrating that a person was convicted on WRONGFUL evidence such as false scientific evidence, coersed testimony and false police testimony.
Your support for the Cook County prosecuters' office is also misplaced. You would do better to question why they are not either finding the wrongful evidence and testimony themselves, or at least investigating when it is brought to their attention rather than seeking to attack the Innocent Project investigators' motives. Finally, why does the motive even if the evidence demonstrates that the conviction is wrong. And why do you question their motives but not the motives of perhaps the most corrupt prosecutor's office in the country.
Check out the Oct. 26 NPR Talk of the Nation storry for a real, unbiased, objective story about this issue.
Emily Rooney's objection to the name of the Innocence Project is mistaken: the legal standard isn't 'innocent until found guilty', it's 'innocent until proven guilty'.
Thanks for the information
This is a very good website. I am bookmarking it right now
Hi Emily
ST: Interviewing Tactics
Here is a link to Diane's show out of DC and the UpTop from WAMU. I listened to the show on the way home this Thursday at 10PM on WBur
http://wamu.org/programs/dr/09/10/22.php#27921
----------------------------
10:00Unregulated Financial Instruments and the U.S. Economy
A look back at the secretive, multi-trillion dollar U-S shadow banking system. Understanding the role unregulated derivatives played in the economic meltdown last year, and why some say the same risks remain unchecked today.
Guests
Greg Ip, U.S. economics editor, "The Economist"
Michael Greenberger, professor, University of Maryland Law School, director, Center for Health and Homeland Security, and former senior regulator, Commodities Futures Trading Commission
Martin Baily, is senior fellow in economic studies at Brookings Institution, former chair of the Council of Economic Advisors during the Clinton administration (1999-2001)
---------------------------------------
Diane is similar to you in some tactics yet she seems to ask tougher questions some of the time. You are better in other ways on Greater Boston. Anyway soon you will have a chance to examine Patrick's cuts and this segment might help you form an interviewing strategy. Now it would be nice to have another guest on besides him when you do the show, yet , yet he might set the rules.
Hi to this great community, I'm begginer on that forum. It's great for being a part of such outstanding community. Cya. :)
Hello to all.
The forum is nice effort. Looking forward to contribute to it.
Bye.
Thanks Ritt - it's nice to get positive comments!
You have a good site all very tastefully done! I really liked.
Sincerely Ritt.
I enjoyed your "Decline of Civility" segment on "Greater Boston this evening. However, once again tonight you used the phrase, "off the reservation", in describing unacceptable conduct. While "off the reservation" is a colloquialism, there's an inherent disrespect in its meaning, and I thought I would mention this to you. Thank you for your contributions to "Greater Boston" and "Beat the Press". I'm a regular viewer.
In the continuing item of Patrick Administration vs. former MBTA GenMgr. Dan Grabauskas, will you continue your discussion as one of the allegations is that though Mr. G provided emails saying a fare increase wasn't necessary this year, he subsequently appeared on your show justifiying a fare increase. At the time, you didn't have the emails that state a different position on this issue for him. Thank you.
On your segment about the new Market Basket in Chelsea, I was disappointed when you "confessed" to never being in one of their stores. I think it would have been time well spent to travel from the WGBH studios over to Chelsea and see how the other half lives.
Hi, everybody at www.beatthepress.org. I am newbie, nice to meet you all. You have really interesting forum, I looked over many topics with interest, and want to create my own.
Luxury life, what is it? Something inessential but conducive to pleasure and comfort. Something expensive or hard to obtain. Ofcourse, we all remember traditional meaning - wealth persons spend a lot of money to live in expensive and exclusive style, expensive clothes, jewelry, food, cars, trips, yachts and etc.
So if you require to live such life, it means at least you requirement be one of the richest.
How do you think, is it still possible for usual people to have luxury way of life, and what is luxury life for you?
Emily on your segment on "Gates-gate" you said that President Obama had made the assumption that there was racial profiling involved and had as much as said so. In fact the President said he did not know if there was racial profiling or not. You also cut the president's comments immediatley after the word "stupidly" leaving it up to viewer to guess or remember the exact context. Your panel managed to talk about the choice of venues for Professor Gates' initial interviews yet never mentioned that Sgt Crowley had done his first interview on the sports show of Dennis and Callahan, both of whom were suspended for two weeks for making racially insensitive remarks back in 2003. I think this is one of the most salient points of the entire saga. Part of the training for racial profiling should be understanding the social and historical context in which you are performing your duties, not only not singling out minorities but having a little bit of understanding and empathy for members of historically profiled groups, and if need be, reassuring them that you are committed to treating them fairly and evenhandeldy. The purpose of racial profiling training is to end racial profiling in real communities, not protect police officers from charges of racial profiling in courtrooms or during interviews. Sgt. Crowley seems to be a bit clueless on this point and should undergo retraining by someone who would have enough sense not to go on the Dennis and Callahan show.
Your show is a great public service. Thanks!
Don't back down on the Zoo story, Emily. Good for you.
Emily, I love your show, especially Friday's Beat The Press edition. It really provides a great perspective on the operations and ethics of the news business. One request: Please stop inviting Jon Keller. He adds nothing but hot air and gossip to the discussion.
Hello ms. Rooney, I am a regular watcher of the show, part of the reason I do watch is your humanitarian approach to topics...that said, a point that was touched on this evening was how fast news comes and goes, to that I point out that last year a big new item was the Gloucester girls "pact"...well, by now they are all mothers, and not one news outlet that I've seen has done a follow up, or am I wrong on this?
Thanx for taking the time to read this,
Todd.
Regarding NECN: I do watch them, especially when I'm looking for local news coverage. But their worst feature to me, is weather so often!! This is way too much weather, usually with Joe who is very nice, but he gives a not short report, totally interrupting the flow of the news. I laugh when I hear Jim Braude say on his show that Tim Kelly is coming on for the shortest weather report. If the new people can get ride of these lengthy weather reports so often -- weather on the 6's -- this would be a good thing.
Emily, the discussion on Friday of the varied interests in murder trials failed to admit the most basic of elements in determining what is a "real" story. The Clark Rockefeller case was your subjuct
The missed element is the definition of what is news. You and the panelists danced around the definition, but had you started with the definition and fit the case to it, you would have seen the newsworthiness more clearly.
"News" is/are events that affect people's lives.
Rockefeller's connection to people's lives comes from the connection between the con artist and the average man.
The citizen is bombarded, day-in and day-out, with scams to separate him from his money. Rockefeller, a seemingly likable and demonstrably successful con man, illustrates how vulnerable each of us really, really are to someone of wit and charm and ulterior motives.
Only Calley Crossely seem to have made the connection, and then just barely in passing.
It would think that in your discussions of the media and it's performance, the "story" and an assessment viz a definition of news should play a key role .
Emily, I just came across the Beat the Press panel discussion on the issue of whether a person's transgender status should be disclosed when it is potentially relevant to a news story. It was a good discussion, albeit brief, with some good points made. Thank you for helping to raise people's awareness around the issues involved.
I would like to make a correction to a term you used to introduce this segment: A transgender identity is properly called a "gender identity," not a "sexual identity." Examples of sexual identities would be gay, lesbian, bisexual, and straight; gender identities would include transgender, transsexual, drag queen, crossdresser, transman, transwoman, man, and woman. Just so you know.
I also want to say that I'm hoping that future coverage by Beat the Press will include a more detailed discussion on the degree of "publicness" of public records, the circumstances under which increased exposure of a public record is likely to do harm, and the place of conjecture in assessing the relevance of information obtained from public records to a news story. To elaborate, the points I hope will be discussed in your program are the following:
1) The effective difference between a public record sitting in a database somewhere and that record being publicized by the media;
2) The likely and potential effects of media disclosure of a particular record on the person whose record it is and that person's friends, family, and colleagues, including
3) The nature and degree of these effects when that person is a member of a population that is vulnerable to discrimination and hate crimes; and
4) The extent to which unsupported claims of relevance to a story properly should factor into decisions about disseminating information gained from public records.
As you may have guessed by this point, I think it is simplistic and irresponsible to justify disclosure of a public record either purely on the grounds that it is a public record or by a claim of relevance based on hearsay. I think that the press, in general, needs a greater level of awareness of the potential negative impact of "outing" a transgender person leading a private life. I would like to know what your panel thinks.
Thanks again for covering this issue.
Peter
Sorry - I had to pick from 8 years worth of material and since on-going investigations were off the table, I skipped that one. Also, I got the impression that they were making progress with the Wilkerson witness, maybe he's changing his mind.
I was disappointed in your segment with Michael Sullivan last night. I was less interested in how the now less-than-cooperative witness in the Wilkerson and Turner cases can be bullied and more interested in why no further arrests have been made yet in the licensing board corruption investigation.