Community Perspective
A new but familiar correspondent
D.C. beat returns to the News-Miner
Published Sunday, January 25, 2009
Digg
delicious
Facebook
Mixx
Reddit
Stumble It!I’m a couple weeks late in writing this, but many readers probably have noticed by now that there’s a new name atop Daily News-Miner stories coming out of Washington, D.C.
Truth be told, it’s not really a new name.
Betty Mills, of the Griffin-Larrabee News Bureau, has returned to reporting on Alaska issues for the News-Miner following the departure late last year of longtime News-Miner reporter and correspondent R.A. Dillon, who took a job working for Sen. Lisa Murkowski.
Betty is no stranger to reporting on Alaska. Here’s a little bit of info about her, in her own words:
“I was hired as a reporter at Griffin-Larrabee in 1975 and was assigned the Alaska beat. At the time, our Alaska clients were the Anchorage Times and the Fairbanks Daily News-Miner. Over the years, the bureau added the Juneau Empire, the Ketchikan Daily News, the Sitka Sentinel and two weeklies — the Wrangell Sentinel and the Petersburg Pilot. The bureau lost the Anchorage Times and the Fairbanks News-Miner in 1982 when the two papers joined together to send David Ramseur to Washington to cover Washington news for them. We then picked up the Anchorage Daily News for about two years until McClatchy bought the paper and hired their own Washington correspondent. I continued to report for Alaska papers until 2000.”
Betty has owned Griffin-Larrabee, a small regional bureau founded in the 1940s, since 1978.
We’re happy to have her writing for us, especially with Alaska having a higher national profile these days.
Politically attuned readers might recognize David Ramseur’s name from the above history. After leaving the News-Miner, he worked for Govs. Steve Cowper and Tony Knowles and has just returned to Washington as Sen. Mark Begich’s chief of staff. Ramseur held the same title during Begich’s time as Anchorage mayor.
Commenting on comments
Call me “The Zapper.”
’Cause that’s what I do — zap comments from the Daily News-Miner’s Web site when I find them to be in violation of the user agreement that participants in the online community agree to abide by.
There’s subjectivity in the implementation of the agreement, of course. A handful of people at the News-Miner have the authority to remove comments, whether they are called to our attention by readers or users or not. And, being humans, we don’t always agree on what’s allowable and what’s not. Most times, though, it’s easy for us to see when a comment has crossed the line and needs to be deleted or when a person is being deliberately antagonistic just to bait people into reacting.
I suspect a lot of the offending comments wouldn’t get posted if people had to use their real names. The News-Miner, like lots of newspapers across the country, doesn’t require that people use their real names. It’s what the online public wants, we were told by the experts. We also were told by the experts that the online public would police itself — and to a small degree this is true.
The self-policing is inadequate, in my view. That’s why we step in once in a while. We can’t be everywhere, though, we don’t have time to be. I wish the self-policing were better on the Web.
Proponents out there in Userland make a fair point when they say that they wouldn’t be able to post some of the important information that they do if they had to use their real name. They fear that their employers or others might get upset at them, maybe punish them somehow, if they had to use their real name.
If information for the public good requires some anonymity, then that’s a point worth considering.
I will argue, however, that people who want anonymity for that reason should use anonymity only for that reason — because they have information that could benefit the public and that is legal to post and because they fear retribution if their name were to be public.
I challenge anyone out there in Userland to justify the use of anonymity to make hurtful, discourteous, snarky and rude comments about other users, about innocent people in the news, about people who have suffered some hurt that has been publicized, about the staff of the News-Miner and about people in any number of other situations. To me, that’s just people not having the courage to stand behind their words.
When I see those comments — and I don’t look online all the time, by the way — those comments get removed. Others have a different view; this is my view.
Yes, call me “The Zapper.”
Rod Boyce has been managing editor of the Daily News-Miner since August and has worked for the paper since 1994.
Community Discussion
Newsminer.com doesn't necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post. Read our full user's agreement.
“The Zapper” should perhaps consider that even libelous comments are sometimes left on the website for hours. It seems to me that the newspaper is leaving itself open to liability by not removing those comments immediately. Potentially, hundreds of people read them before they get deleted.
Rod, I have been here a little over 28yrs, and have met a good number of folks in the interior. There are a few times that I comment on something that I might have some concern over what my bosses might think, but that is rare. I think a person should be able to stand up to whatever they say. I have had people come up to me around town and say, "I never knew you felt like that about such and such, and we really disagree"! Well, I guess that is the problem that many on here do not want to face, but still, if a man (or woman) cannot stand up for what they said, then they should not say it.
John Greene
I agree with you up to a point John. I however, work for a government agency and therefore do not have "free" reign on voicing my opinions at times. While they still know who I am they have something called "plausible deniability" if I use a pseudonym. No I am not in State government but working in the Intelligence world you sometimes have to be discreet. I will never hide behind my pseudonym, anyone that wants to know who I am has just to give me their email address and I will email my ID to them. I don't forsee a need for that as I am not in the business of making inflammatory remarks, I just like to voice my opinion and maybe bring a different perspective to things once in a while.
(This comment was removed by the Newsminer.com staff. Please see our User Agreement for further information.)
{Just kidding! :}
Unfortunately, there are some employments where comments made in a blog or letter to the editor will lose you credibility, undermine your professionalism, or get you fired. There are also employers who do not believe in "free speech" if it opposes what they think, and they will fire you, whether private sector or govenmental. I've worked for both. I was laid off by a school district for expressing support of a group opposing what the general community thought was the best thing for the community to do; ultimately, that group was proven correct. I am currently in an employment connected to the legal community, where confidentiality concerns are enormous, and I wouldn't blame my employer for firing me if I violated that confidentiality. But, oh, I so want to comment sometimes on state agencies (Office of Child Snatchers, Office of Public Anarchy, DA's, PD's, AST and judges), as well as informing a mostly undereducated readership of how the rules and regulations really control events.
For now, I must remain anonymous. There are too many vindictive, mean, angry, illogical members of the general public willing to spew wrath and venom, who take themselves too seriously, and are too willing to cross the line into personal attacks for me to expose myself or my family to their insanity.
Zap on!
Like people can not figure a way to use a false name and e mail, if "real" names are required.
Dear Rod (or 'Zapper' if you prefer),
Yep, I agree with the necessity to 'zap' comments. I realize you cannot alway get them in a timely fassion but I do wish you would try harder. The couple of times I've been 'zapped' were because I responded in provacation to provacation that probably should have been zapped before I saw the comment that had been posted.
My identity is not really a secret; I will provide it to anyone who is curious (or too lazy to read back through my previous posts to find out who I am)...
Oops, fashion (not fassion)...
I think another problem is the creation of "bits." It's very easy to get an email address through yahoo, hotmail, etc. I have known people who create email addresses with the sole purpose of creating several identities to post comments on forums such as the News Miner's.
Who is going to be the new voice of Juneau?
Makes sense to me, though I'd advocate being as tolerant as you can w/the zapping. It's definetly necessary for the reasons you've listed. I also agree that anonymity is fine in other cases and improves the exchange of info. Otherwise we'd mostly have the local crackpots posting.
What's wrong with the local crackpot?
So...if you are "zapping" some comments before they even appear how do we common folk know if they really deserve to be zapped? Let's say someone puts in a really telling piece about a local car dealer and his constant interference with wildlife issues. Let's say it's true. And let's say that piece would make this same person who also buys quite a bit of advertising in the NM upset. Well, if it gets zapped we wouldn't know it, would we? In fact, how do we know what has been zapped that we'll never see? It's funny but some of the comments posted supporting this zapping practice are posted by the same folks ready to scream bloody murder about their First Amendment rights. Certainly, any AIP'er worth his or her salt would be raising bloody cane about such an infringement. Joe Vogler would be turning in his mouldy old grave at the mere thought of such a person allowing this to pass unremarked. Yet....we see these AIP'ers meekly fawning over such a practice and just about kissing your editorial hand for saving us from other's comments no matter how well-deserved they may be.
It must be a heavy burden to have to exercise such godlike powers and be able to discern what the rest of us get to read or not read.
Oh...since you are in just such a crusading state of mind, how about zapping ads that appear in the NM which are patently false? Or articles written by your own staff writers that are so skewed in accuracy as to be laughable? There are abundant examples of both. It's so obvious that any article dealing with the AOC is carefully filtered to present them in the best light without any criticism. As far as the NM is concerned, even God doesn't approch their level of perfection for there has never been anything written by Mowry or other staffers taking them to task for their numerous crimes against Alaskan wildlife. (When was the last time you read an article in the NM about the AOC's steadfast opposition to rural hunting preferences, for instance? The AOC is quick to justify some of the most brutal and unscientific practices such as aerial hunting with the old chestnut of being "concerned about rural subsistence needs"....yet let any proposal come up before the BOG that might give such hunting needs a preference and they are dead in the water. You never see an investigative article by the NM on that or other such topics.)
Before you start cleaning up the online comments you might want to poke a broom or two around the newsroom of your own offices, eh?
Zap them, your privilege!!
There will always be those that will be upset,,,,, unless the Newsminer goes totally liberal,, then it will be okay, as conservative views will never be printed anyway, that has been the norm in the majority of lower 48 news media.
Keep up the good work!!
Post a comment
Commenting requires registration.