I don’t really mean to harp on the N&R, but —- as a loyal subscriber who reads the print edition every day —– I just keep noticing things.
Let’s go back to yesterday’s post on editor John Robinson’s exchange with a commenter regarding the paper’s scant coverage of the federal lawsuit filed by Greensboro Police officer Scott Sanders and Sgt. Tom Fox against the City of Greensboro, Police Chief Tim Bellamy and former City Manager Mitchell Johnson, among others.
The commenter complained that an article about the lawsuit wasn’t online, although it did appear as a sidebar in the print edition. With that in mind, now turn to today’s story on calls from the black community for Mayor Bill Knight to apologize for statements he made about Bellamy during last fall’s campaign (italics mine):
On Wednesday night, Knight faxed a statement to the News & Record: “Last September, as a candidate for mayor and a private citizen, I responded to a question giving my opinion about how Greensboro police chiefs had been selected, or forced to retire.
“In November, I was elected mayor of Greensboro and took office in December. As mayor, I am an elected official of the city. In recent days, two white police officers filed a lawsuit against the city alleging discrimination. In view of these and other legal actions, I have been advised by the city’s attorney to refrain from further comment.”
You would think the reporter would elaborate on the lawsuit by at least identifying the parties. Yet there’s no further reference. Makes you wonder why.
By the way, John Robinson responds to yesterday’s post.
It seems, overtaxed, as if a few people in the Greensboro blogosphere are upset with my “you get what you pay for” remark. They seem to think it shows my arrogance and the mediocrity of our web site that we don’t put everything we publish in the paper online. (We don’t put everything we publish on the web site in the paper either.) I regret that because it means that I don’t articulate my responses very well. At least that’s the way I understand it. They haven’t discussed it with me directly.
There are people like you who don’t subscribe to the paper and chose to read the Web site instead. That’s cool. That’s what it’s here for. But we’ve never put everything online and feel no obligation to. I’m unsure why people who are paying nothing for the information we work hard to produce would think that they are entitled to it. But they seem to. Perhaps you can help me understand that.
Anyway, thanks for visiting the site, despite your disrespect for what we do and disbelief in what we produce.
