In its story about the so-called National Day of Truthtelling march in Durham on Saturday The News & Observer’s reporter lapses into the language of the demonstrators. These two sentences might just as well come from the event’s organizers trying to spin their event as not at all about the Duke lacrosse case:
Though the Duke lacrosse case was on the minds of many throughout the day, participants tried to avoid defining the protest by that one case.
Oh, really? Then how does one explain this? (Emphasis added):
Durham resident and Duke doctoral student Alexis Pauline Gumbs read an open letter called “Wishful Thinking” addressed to the university’s black women. In it, Gumbs spoke of the pain shared by sexual violence victims, along with some specifics of the Duke case. “No camera waits to amplify your pain,” she said. “There is no law anywhere that depends on your silence.”
In case the reader might be confused by these contradictory statements, the reporter adds at the end (emphasis added), just so you won’t be left with the wrong impression:
Even for groups such as Ubuntu, which was formed in March 2006 in the aftermath of the Duke lacrosse case, the event was about healing, speaking out and feeling safe.
Of course, as the march progressed only those who agreed with the marchers could be found to comment. The N&O estimated the marchers at 250, but Mike Kell, a regular poster at the LieStoppers forum (scroll to April 29, 8:52 a.m.), questions that:
The report said there were “250 for the event” that included the march, a rally, and an afternoon of educational activities. I’m not sure what they count as the event. Did 250 march? Did that include marchers in the street and one manic organizer who ran back and forth handing out fliers to patrons coming out of Elmo’s diner? Did it include the diners?
Some people who participated in “the event” didn’t march, as the organizers even planned this for participants with babies or elderly; so some people met at the courthouse, or at W.D. Hill. It would be nice to know where the “250” came from and what it refers to. I have several people checking now. I am not challenging the number in the report, but it may not be the number of people in the march. My other observers that I have heard from today (on-lookers, a participant, a DPD officer)put that number between 60 and 120.
This will be a good lesson for our “quantitative reasoning” class.
UPDATE: Mike Kell emailed the following regarding the above post. Seems 250 might be a reliable figure after all:
Sue Stock wrote me back and said the 250 came from her best estimate by counting the marching protesters as they passed her at her location in the march. She said she got to 100 before 1/2 the march went by, and estimated that would mean “about 250” would be in the whole march. Seems reasonable to me as an estimating effort. Better than most I have heard of!
