A disturbed young man, two handguns, a shooting spree on a school campus, and 32 innocent people are dead in what authorities are calling the worst shooting rampage in our nation's history.
Amid the chaos, law enforcement officials are trying to figure out why a 23-year-old college student at Virginia Tech became a mass murderer Monday. They're piecing together bits of information about who he was, what made him tick, and what was so terribly wrong.
It's not as if there aren't any clues. The depth of the man's psychological troubles was evident — to his roommates, to whom he barely spoke, to his classmates, who found him so "creepy" they dropped out of a class they shared, even to a teacher, who refused to continue to teach him, referred him for counseling and even reported him to the police.
Then there are the other "whys" about this horrific incident, the questions being asked of school and police officials: Why didn't the university administration take immediate action after two students in a dorm were shot dead at 7 a.m., hours before the rampage in an academic building? Why weren't students notified of a gunman on campus? Why didn't the administration implement a campus "lockdown"? People will continue to ask, especially the family members of the students who lost their lives — and inevitably, their lawyers. The university president's answer this week will not likely change very much: We did the best we could with the information we had available.
And they probably did. Which doesn't make the answer any more satisfying to the parents of children murdered in their classrooms Monday morning.
There are plenty of unanswered "whys" but the "how" is crystal clear. A 23-year-old man legally purchased two handguns in the last two months, according to police. He walked into a pawnshop and bought a .22 caliber pistol in February. In March, he bought a semiautomatic 9-mm Glock from a gun dealer — a gun similar to the handgun carried by police officers, capable of firing 15 rounds in rapid succession. He bought these guns pursuant to Virginia law. The dealers conducted the routine background check the law requires. He was clean. He walked out with the weapons — and ammo — in hand. In Virginia, you can buy one handgun every 30 days.
The ease with which people, even deeply disturbed people like Cho Seung-Hui, can legally purchase weapons in America is appalling. I don't understand the justification for selling semiautomatic and automatic handguns. These are not hunting guns. They are murder weapons, period. How could this even be a matter of debate?
How could anyone look at Monday's massacre and not think about gun control laws? Better still, how could anyone respond to what happened this week by accusing gun control advocates of "dancing in blood" and trying to politicize the massacre in an effort to "destroy the second amendment." That's exactly what Alan Gottleib, the founder of The Second Amendment Foundation, says in a press release e-mailed to me Tuesday. And Larry Pratt, executive director of Gun Owners of America, says in another press release, issued the same day as the attack, that gun bans are the problem, not the solution. He calls for an "immediate end to the gun-free zone law" in Virginia, which prohibits guns on school campuses. "[Criminals] don't like having their victims shoot back at them," says Mr. Pratt in the press release — sent to the media, offering him as a talk show guest. If other Virginia Tech students had been armed, they could have stopped the shooter, he says.
Give everyone a gun and we'll all be safer. Machine gun, anyone?
I doubt there's a parent in America this morning, still processing this week's events, and remembering Columbine, a similar tragedy that occurred eight years ago tomorrow, who doesn't have a heavy feeling in the pit of her or his stomach. It comes over me as I watch my daughters walk into Riverhead High School when I drop them off every morning. I think of the parents who said goodbye from behind the wheel of their car on April 20, 1999, unaware they'd never see their kids again, because of two deeply disturbed, heavily armed young men on a rampage. Most mornings, I whisper a little prayer. Keep them safe, Lord. Please keep them safe.
And that's the best I can do. Pray. Like the actions of administrators at Virginia Tech this week, it may not be enough. Only two things would stop a shooter like Cho: cure his sickness or keep a gun out of his hands. We can't seem to do either.
Thursday, April 19, 2007
Saturday, April 14, 2007
Good news, bad judgment
What's "news" is all too often bad. Political corruption, rising taxes, murders, fatal car accidents, suicides — you name it. At the editor's desk in the office of any community newspaper, you see it all. Sometimes, it's hard to decide what to do with some of the stuff that lands in your e-mail in-box or comes in across the fax machine. And contrary to popular opinion about modern-day media, we do give these things long, hard thought. Every story and picture we print can have an effect — sometimes a really big one — on somebody in our community, be it a neighbor, a member of our church congregation, the friend of a friend, or a total stranger. We recognize this and take very seriously our duty to be accurate and fair — and sensitive.
Last year, at the National Newspaper Association conference in Milwaukee, I picked up a copy of a book whose title intrigued me, "Bad News and Good Judgment: A Guide to Reporting on Sensitive Issues in a Small-Town Newspaper," by Jim Pumarlo. It's an instructive little handbook on best practices for small-town-newspaper editors faced with tough decisions about whether and/or how to report on difficult events and circumstances. I've read and reread it, taking away and putting into practice some key points about using good judgment when reporting bad news close to home.
Here are the basics. Establish clear policies about reporting this kind of news — including reporting suicides or suspensions of high school athletes, for example, or publishing photos of fatal car accidents. Be aware of the effect your news reporting may have on people's lives, and act with appropriate care in researching, reporting and writing sensitive stories. Explain your newsroom decisions to your paper's readers.
Mr. Pumarlo was a workshop presenter at the N.Y. Press Association convention two weeks ago — you know, the convention where the Sun was crowned top weekly newspaper in the state, something I was gloating about in this space last week? I eagerly took advantage of the opportunity to hear him speak about "bad news and good judgment."
Then I came home to SunLand and blew it. Big time.
In my zeal to show off how well the Sun did in the Press Association's 2006 Better Newspaper Contest, I violated some basic principles when I decided to reprint a photo of a fatal car crash originally published Sept. 15, 2006. The scene depicted in the photo — a very unusual single-car accident in which a car became airborne and crashed into the second story of a garden apartment building in Coram, killing the driver — was news when it happened, and, as such, we were correct to print it at the time.
We reprinted it last week just to show a photo that won a first place award for "spot news" in the contest. The scene it depicted was no longer news; reprinting it simply to show our readers what won the Sun a photography award in the contest was, in a word, wrong.
I soon heard from relatives of Vincent Pontillo, the crash victim, decrying my decision to reprint that photo. A letter from the sister of Mr. Pontillo, Laura Kraus-Johnson, appears on page 8. Ms. Kraus-Johnson wrote to me to express her dismay and disappointment; I asked her permission to print the letter, because I believe its message is important and I believe my action warrants a public apology to Ms. Kraus-Johnson and the rest of Mr. Pontillo's family.
Reprinting that photo demonstrated insensitivity and poor judgment on my part. I am, as I've expressed to Mr. Pontillo's family members, deeply sorry.
The photograph — a picture the contest judges called "amazing" and "spectacular" — depicted a horrific accident that took the life of a 43-year-old Mount Sinai man. He was a gentle, family-oriented guy with a great sense of humor, his sister told me this week. His tragic death was a life-altering event for his mother and four siblings, his longtime girlfriend, Cathy, his seven nieces and nephews, and large extended family. He was, Ms. Kraus-Johnson said, an all-around good guy, loved by many.
I'll never know Mr. Pontillo, of course. But I have a sense of what he was like from my brief encounter with his older sister — not just by her words, but by her behavior. She didn't want to berate or reprimand me; she only wanted me to understand how she felt. At the same time, she understood and accepted how badly I felt about it. She taught me a lesson in sensitivity — and forgiveness — hard to glean from any book, and one I'll not soon forget.
First printed in The North Shore Sun, April 13, 2007
Last year, at the National Newspaper Association conference in Milwaukee, I picked up a copy of a book whose title intrigued me, "Bad News and Good Judgment: A Guide to Reporting on Sensitive Issues in a Small-Town Newspaper," by Jim Pumarlo. It's an instructive little handbook on best practices for small-town-newspaper editors faced with tough decisions about whether and/or how to report on difficult events and circumstances. I've read and reread it, taking away and putting into practice some key points about using good judgment when reporting bad news close to home.
Here are the basics. Establish clear policies about reporting this kind of news — including reporting suicides or suspensions of high school athletes, for example, or publishing photos of fatal car accidents. Be aware of the effect your news reporting may have on people's lives, and act with appropriate care in researching, reporting and writing sensitive stories. Explain your newsroom decisions to your paper's readers.
Mr. Pumarlo was a workshop presenter at the N.Y. Press Association convention two weeks ago — you know, the convention where the Sun was crowned top weekly newspaper in the state, something I was gloating about in this space last week? I eagerly took advantage of the opportunity to hear him speak about "bad news and good judgment."
Then I came home to SunLand and blew it. Big time.
In my zeal to show off how well the Sun did in the Press Association's 2006 Better Newspaper Contest, I violated some basic principles when I decided to reprint a photo of a fatal car crash originally published Sept. 15, 2006. The scene depicted in the photo — a very unusual single-car accident in which a car became airborne and crashed into the second story of a garden apartment building in Coram, killing the driver — was news when it happened, and, as such, we were correct to print it at the time.
We reprinted it last week just to show a photo that won a first place award for "spot news" in the contest. The scene it depicted was no longer news; reprinting it simply to show our readers what won the Sun a photography award in the contest was, in a word, wrong.
I soon heard from relatives of Vincent Pontillo, the crash victim, decrying my decision to reprint that photo. A letter from the sister of Mr. Pontillo, Laura Kraus-Johnson, appears on page 8. Ms. Kraus-Johnson wrote to me to express her dismay and disappointment; I asked her permission to print the letter, because I believe its message is important and I believe my action warrants a public apology to Ms. Kraus-Johnson and the rest of Mr. Pontillo's family.
Reprinting that photo demonstrated insensitivity and poor judgment on my part. I am, as I've expressed to Mr. Pontillo's family members, deeply sorry.
The photograph — a picture the contest judges called "amazing" and "spectacular" — depicted a horrific accident that took the life of a 43-year-old Mount Sinai man. He was a gentle, family-oriented guy with a great sense of humor, his sister told me this week. His tragic death was a life-altering event for his mother and four siblings, his longtime girlfriend, Cathy, his seven nieces and nephews, and large extended family. He was, Ms. Kraus-Johnson said, an all-around good guy, loved by many.
I'll never know Mr. Pontillo, of course. But I have a sense of what he was like from my brief encounter with his older sister — not just by her words, but by her behavior. She didn't want to berate or reprimand me; she only wanted me to understand how she felt. At the same time, she understood and accepted how badly I felt about it. She taught me a lesson in sensitivity — and forgiveness — hard to glean from any book, and one I'll not soon forget.
First printed in The North Shore Sun, April 13, 2007
Thursday, April 05, 2007
Good plans run amok
Leave it to government to create chaos in an attempt to create efficiency.
That's exactly what's happened as a result of the state commission charged with improving health-care facilities. The Commission on Health Care Facilities in the 21st Century — colloquially known as the Berger Commission after its chairman, investment banker Stephen Berger — was created by Gov. George Pataki and the state Legislature in 2005 to come up with a plan to fix the state's ailing health-care system. It did. Now, in the initial steps of the process of implementing that plan, the state has thrown community health-care providers into chaos, as the page one story by Julie Lane this week shows.
A good idea: strengthen and improve acute and long-term health-care facilities, which are suffering many ills, not the least of which is their ongoing financial crisis — caused in large measure by government in the first place.
A good plan: consolidate some hospitals — including the three community hospitals on the East End — to create economies of scale and eliminate duplication of services. This was a good plan that our three local hospitals had already devised and begun to put in place, in fact — forging an alliance with each other and with the county's only tertiary care hospital, Stony Brook — before the commission recommended it.
A botched execution, so far: bureaucratic stupidity in the initial implementation of the plan. It's already cost Peconic Bay Medical Center $200,000 and will likely cost it much, much more before the hospital can get back on track with its renovation and expansion plans.
The chaos: PBMC's already-approved, designed, bid-out expansion and renovation project was abruptly halted by the state health department after the Berger Commission issued its report in December.
Like Joe Jitsu in the old Dick Tracy cartoons, shouting "Hold everything!" for a quick consult with the boss via his trusty wristwatch radio, the health department stopped PBMC's construction project in its tracks. Hold everything! Freeze frame. And stay that way for months. But in this cartoon universe, the freeze frame has dire consequences.
PBMC, acting in good faith on the health department's prior approvals, obtained construction financing. It's paying interest on the debt that isn't matched by interest earned on the money in the bank.
The hospital, having no indication that its approved project would be stopped in its tracks like this, purchased construction materials, including custom-made structural steel, and must now pay storage fees to warehouse the materials.
PBMC, acting in good faith on its four health department-approved certificates of need, bid the entire project out — and arranged its financing according to the contract prices it obtained in the bidding process. Anyone who's ever dealt with a construction project like this knows bids are not a forever kind of thing. Oh, no. They're good for a set period of time. Go beyond that time and you have to rebid the project, because labor and material costs change. And because they change, if you have to rebid, you can expect to pay more.
The hospital even had jeopardized by bureaucratic inanity an opportunity to replace a portion of its ordinary financing with tax-exempt financing through the Riverhead Industrial Development Agency — because of the health department's reluctance to approve a change in PBMC's already-approved financing arrangements, now in limbo thanks to the "Hold everything!" order. The new financing would save the hospital $100 million over the life of the new facility. $100 million in savings, just by replacing one kind of financing with another. And the state agency charged with implementing recommendations aimed at saving hospitals money — blinked. Go figure. Fortunately, Assemblyman Marc Alessi got the health department to come to its senses and at least allow PBMC to proceed with the substituted financing.
The hospital's air conditioning broke at the end of last summer. New equipment was purchased — again, with the health department's approval — and would have been installed and operational in time for warm weather. But — "Hold everything!" Now PBMC must rent a temporary chilling plant, which will run on a costly generator. And even though the health department has come to its senses and concluded that the new air conditioning system is an "emergency" and should be reapproved immediately, it won't be possible to install the new permanent system before the end of summer. PBMC's cost for the temporary set-up this year: $50,000 per month, for four months — another $200,000.
The Department of Health maintains it must reapprove the rest of PBMC's already-approved construction project. And, since the Berger Commission requires PBMC to join together with Eastern Long Island Hospital in Greenport and Southampton Hospital, the health department won't reapprove the project until the other two hospitals sign off on it. But here's another irony. They already did — twice. Now they're taking a third, closer look.
With the three entities jockeying for position in the East End's health-care delivery system, and with everything PBMC has riding on the — ahem — speedy reapproval of its project by the state, including, perhaps, its very survival, I'd say our local hospital is caught by the short hairs.
"Hold everything!" Somebody get Dick Tracy on the radio. We need help.
That's exactly what's happened as a result of the state commission charged with improving health-care facilities. The Commission on Health Care Facilities in the 21st Century — colloquially known as the Berger Commission after its chairman, investment banker Stephen Berger — was created by Gov. George Pataki and the state Legislature in 2005 to come up with a plan to fix the state's ailing health-care system. It did. Now, in the initial steps of the process of implementing that plan, the state has thrown community health-care providers into chaos, as the page one story by Julie Lane this week shows.
A good idea: strengthen and improve acute and long-term health-care facilities, which are suffering many ills, not the least of which is their ongoing financial crisis — caused in large measure by government in the first place.
A good plan: consolidate some hospitals — including the three community hospitals on the East End — to create economies of scale and eliminate duplication of services. This was a good plan that our three local hospitals had already devised and begun to put in place, in fact — forging an alliance with each other and with the county's only tertiary care hospital, Stony Brook — before the commission recommended it.
A botched execution, so far: bureaucratic stupidity in the initial implementation of the plan. It's already cost Peconic Bay Medical Center $200,000 and will likely cost it much, much more before the hospital can get back on track with its renovation and expansion plans.
The chaos: PBMC's already-approved, designed, bid-out expansion and renovation project was abruptly halted by the state health department after the Berger Commission issued its report in December.
Like Joe Jitsu in the old Dick Tracy cartoons, shouting "Hold everything!" for a quick consult with the boss via his trusty wristwatch radio, the health department stopped PBMC's construction project in its tracks. Hold everything! Freeze frame. And stay that way for months. But in this cartoon universe, the freeze frame has dire consequences.
PBMC, acting in good faith on the health department's prior approvals, obtained construction financing. It's paying interest on the debt that isn't matched by interest earned on the money in the bank.
The hospital, having no indication that its approved project would be stopped in its tracks like this, purchased construction materials, including custom-made structural steel, and must now pay storage fees to warehouse the materials.
PBMC, acting in good faith on its four health department-approved certificates of need, bid the entire project out — and arranged its financing according to the contract prices it obtained in the bidding process. Anyone who's ever dealt with a construction project like this knows bids are not a forever kind of thing. Oh, no. They're good for a set period of time. Go beyond that time and you have to rebid the project, because labor and material costs change. And because they change, if you have to rebid, you can expect to pay more.
The hospital even had jeopardized by bureaucratic inanity an opportunity to replace a portion of its ordinary financing with tax-exempt financing through the Riverhead Industrial Development Agency — because of the health department's reluctance to approve a change in PBMC's already-approved financing arrangements, now in limbo thanks to the "Hold everything!" order. The new financing would save the hospital $100 million over the life of the new facility. $100 million in savings, just by replacing one kind of financing with another. And the state agency charged with implementing recommendations aimed at saving hospitals money — blinked. Go figure. Fortunately, Assemblyman Marc Alessi got the health department to come to its senses and at least allow PBMC to proceed with the substituted financing.
The hospital's air conditioning broke at the end of last summer. New equipment was purchased — again, with the health department's approval — and would have been installed and operational in time for warm weather. But — "Hold everything!" Now PBMC must rent a temporary chilling plant, which will run on a costly generator. And even though the health department has come to its senses and concluded that the new air conditioning system is an "emergency" and should be reapproved immediately, it won't be possible to install the new permanent system before the end of summer. PBMC's cost for the temporary set-up this year: $50,000 per month, for four months — another $200,000.
The Department of Health maintains it must reapprove the rest of PBMC's already-approved construction project. And, since the Berger Commission requires PBMC to join together with Eastern Long Island Hospital in Greenport and Southampton Hospital, the health department won't reapprove the project until the other two hospitals sign off on it. But here's another irony. They already did — twice. Now they're taking a third, closer look.
With the three entities jockeying for position in the East End's health-care delivery system, and with everything PBMC has riding on the — ahem — speedy reapproval of its project by the state, including, perhaps, its very survival, I'd say our local hospital is caught by the short hairs.
"Hold everything!" Somebody get Dick Tracy on the radio. We need help.
Friday, March 30, 2007
Keep fire district scandal in context
There are always a few bad apples.
That's should be the take-away from the arrests last week of fire district officials in surrounding areas.
Because there are inevitably people motivated by self-interest and greed in every walk of life, there must be adequate safeguards to ensure that the bad apples don't have the opportunity to do what people like that will do if there aren't adequate safeguards: play the system for their own personal gain, or even steal.
The combination of a lack of safeguards and access to a lot of money is a very dangerous combination indeed. People who are so inclined can't resist temptation.
Every organization that, directly or indirectly, receives public funding or has nonprofit status and solicits contributions for civic or charitable purposes must adhere to rules that protect the public trust. And there must be adequate oversight by an independent entity to ensure that those rules are followed.
When those two elements are lacking, there's bound to be trouble. Because there are, after all, always a few bad apples. Witness the school district scandals. And now, according to District Attorney Thomas Spota, we've got similar problems in some of our volunteer fire departments.
What we should not do, however, is assume that all of the people running our local fire departments are up to no good and misusing public funds. And we should not make the burdens of oversight so onerous that we discourage volunteerism in local emergency services.
In other words, don't throw out the baby with the bath water.
It's tempting to do just that. But it's wrong.
Volunteer firefighters and EMTs are sacrificing their time and energy — sometimes their health and even their lives — to serve their communities. They are the people who run to, not away from, a catastrophe as it unfolds. They get up in the middle of the night to answer their neighbor's call for help. They rush into burning buildings, putting their own lives on the line, to rescue others. They put others ahead of themselves. They do it because they care.
Let's not forget that, in spite of the sensational headlines and TV-news hype surrounding the arrest of a handful of emergency services volunteers who allegedly abused the public trust.
I'm not a volunteer firefighter, nor is my husband. I used to think I'd someday volunteer for my local ambulance district. But life got in the way. I have young children. I work full-time. I have all I can do to keep up with my life as it is. I can't imagine finding time to complete all the training required of emergency service volunteers; there's lots of it — hours and hours worth of training. Never mind the meetings. And the calls — during dinner with your family, or in the middle of a blizzard, or at 2:30 in the morning.
So the passing thoughts I've had about serving my community as an emergency service volunteer have remained just that: passing thoughts. But because others find a way to make the time and the sacrifices, I can rest comfortably at night, knowing that if my family has an emergency, we can pick up the phone, dial 911, and within minutes, help will arrive.
That's a situation I've been in more than once. Time passes in excruciating slow motion from the moment you make that frantic call till the moment the ambulance pulls into your driveway. Those are the longest five or 10 minutes of your life, waiting for help to arrive to try to save the life of your father-in-law in cardiac arrest, or your mother, gasping for air because of a post-operative pulmonary embolism. The relief and gratitude you feel when the EMTs rush through the door and go to work — cool, calm, trained professionals — is something I can't quite find words to describe.
The men and women who answer those calls, the volunteers who serve our local fire departments and ambulance districts, deserve our gratitude, respect and support.
They are heroes. My heroes. Your heroes. Our community's heroes.
Let's not forget that.
Tuesday, March 06, 2007
"What do you make?"
A News-Review reader emailed this to me yesterday. There's been some debate on our commentary pages recently about whether public school teachers are paid too much.
WHAT TEACHERS MAKE
The dinner guests were sitting around the table discussing life. One man, a CEO, decided to explain the problem with education. He argued, "What's a kid going to learn from someone who decided his best option in life was to become a teacher?" He reminded the other dinner guests what they say about teachers: "Those who can, do. Those who can't, teach." To stress his point he said to another guest; "You're a teacher, Bonnie. Be honest. What do you make?"
Bonnie, who had a reputation for honesty and frankness replied, "You Want to know what I make? (She paused for a second, then began...)
"Well, I make kids work harder than they ever thought they could.
I make a C+ feel like the Congressional Medal of Honor.
I make kids sit through 40 minutes of class time when their parents can't make them sit for 5 without an I Pod, Game Cube or movie rental...
You want to know what I make?" (She paused again and looked at each and every person at the table.)
I make kids wonder.
I make them question.
I make them criticize.
I make them apologize and mean it.
I make them have respect and take responsibility for their actions.
I teach them to write and then I make them write.
I make them read, read, read.
I make them show all their work in math.
I make my students from other countries learn everything they need to know in English while preserving their unique cultural identity.
I make my classroom a place where all my students feel safe.
I make my students stand to say the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag, because we live in the United States of America.
Finally, I make them understand that if they use the gifts they were given, work hard, and follow their hearts, they can succeed in life. (Bonnie paused one last time and then continued.) "Then, when people try to judge me by what I make, I can hold my head up high and pay no attention because they are ignorant... You want to know what I make?
I MAKE A DIFFERENCE. What do you make?
WHAT TEACHERS MAKE
The dinner guests were sitting around the table discussing life. One man, a CEO, decided to explain the problem with education. He argued, "What's a kid going to learn from someone who decided his best option in life was to become a teacher?" He reminded the other dinner guests what they say about teachers: "Those who can, do. Those who can't, teach." To stress his point he said to another guest; "You're a teacher, Bonnie. Be honest. What do you make?"
Bonnie, who had a reputation for honesty and frankness replied, "You Want to know what I make? (She paused for a second, then began...)
"Well, I make kids work harder than they ever thought they could.
I make a C+ feel like the Congressional Medal of Honor.
I make kids sit through 40 minutes of class time when their parents can't make them sit for 5 without an I Pod, Game Cube or movie rental...
You want to know what I make?" (She paused again and looked at each and every person at the table.)
I make kids wonder.
I make them question.
I make them criticize.
I make them apologize and mean it.
I make them have respect and take responsibility for their actions.
I teach them to write and then I make them write.
I make them read, read, read.
I make them show all their work in math.
I make my students from other countries learn everything they need to know in English while preserving their unique cultural identity.
I make my classroom a place where all my students feel safe.
I make my students stand to say the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag, because we live in the United States of America.
Finally, I make them understand that if they use the gifts they were given, work hard, and follow their hearts, they can succeed in life. (Bonnie paused one last time and then continued.) "Then, when people try to judge me by what I make, I can hold my head up high and pay no attention because they are ignorant... You want to know what I make?
I MAKE A DIFFERENCE. What do you make?
Monday, March 05, 2007
From lemons to lemonade
You have to expect change. And roll with it.
When you run a company with more than 50 full-time employees, and an equal number of part-timers and independent contractors (our dedicated and talented cadre of freelance writers and photographers), things are always changing. The sands are constantly shifting.
I've learned to accept it. Deal with it. Even grow and benefit from it. Often, you find yourself in a better place as a result.
When North Shore Sun editor Drew Crouthamel came into my office a month ago today and said, "Listen, there's no good way to say this..." my heart literally sunk in my chest. I knew what was coming. I did my best to "take it like a man." I cursed him out. All right, not exactly. But I didn't dissolve into tears, either. Even though, if the truth be told, I felt like crying.
Drew was a phenomenal addition to Times/Review's staff — an aggressive, fair and insightful journalist. And, boy, can he write. Editing a community newspaper was a new challenge for him — and it's no easy task — but he proved himself up to it. And The Sun's got some prestigious journalism awards on the walls to show for it. Not to mention a growing audience of loyal readers who appreciate the intensely local, high-quality community journalism that is Times/Review's hallmark. Under Drew's stewardship, The Sun has made great strides, evidenced by our circulation growth, vibrant commentary pages, and a Web site featuring breaking news and podcasts.
So of course I felt like crying. (And cursing.)
But as my grandmother used to say, when life hands you lemons, you make lemonade. Count your blessings. Here they are:
The Sun, the "baby" of the Times/Review family at just 4 1/2 years old, is already a well-regarded, authoritative source for local news in Sun Land — our name for the communities we cover. It's a great community newspaper in the tradition of its older sisters, two of which date back to the 19th century. (The other one is almost as old as I am.) We're serious about community journalism, and the papers we put out every week demonstrate it, from cover to cover.
We've assembled an awesome editorial staff at The Sun. In the past year and a half, we hired sports editor Grant Parpan, who was an editor at a California daily before returning to Ridge, where he grew up; Frank Petrignani, a hardworking, nose-to-the-grindstone journalist; and Tom Burke, who (like me) found journalism as a second career in life and has been, well, born again; Joe Werkmeister, an award-winning collegiate sportswriter covers local sports with flair; and photographer Peter Blasl captures images of the people, events and beauty of Sun Land for us every week. Beyond our regular staff, we've got a growing network of citizen journalists who contribute to the lively, informative read you get when you pick up The Sun each week.
Our commitment to The Sun and its mission is deep. For that reason, I'm taking the helm to guide The Sun through its next phase of growth. I'm not "just" a publisher. I served as editor of The News-Review for nearly four years. During that time, the paper won a host of awards for its hard-hitting coverage of Riverhead Town, including the top award in community journalism in the state. I earned a reputation as a gutsy investigative journalist and I'm proud of it. That's what it's all about.
Our company is family-owned by people who take journalism — and its role in a democracy — seriously. We don't mix editorial and business. We even have two publishers, one to oversee each "side" of the company. Andrew Olsen runs sales, circulation and finance, and I oversee editorial and production. We don't make editorial decisions based on economic decisions. We don't cover events or issues — or look the other way — because advertisers want us to.
And we never, ever shy away from a fight if a fight is what it takes to get to the truth. Times/Review president, former co-publisher Troy Gustavson, wrote a short manifesto called "What We Stand For" in his first editorial after he and his wife, Joan, bought The Suffolk Times and The News-Review 30 years ago. "We stand for truth," he wrote. "We stand for excellence ... We stand for fairness ... We stand for self-determination ... We stand for non-partisanship." I've got that editorial taped up next to my desk for inspiration, when I need a reminder of why we do what we do and how important it is.
Those are the things we stand for today: truth, excellence, fairness, self-determination and non-partisanship.
And we've got the people and the gumption to carry it out.
-
When you run a company with more than 50 full-time employees, and an equal number of part-timers and independent contractors (our dedicated and talented cadre of freelance writers and photographers), things are always changing. The sands are constantly shifting.
I've learned to accept it. Deal with it. Even grow and benefit from it. Often, you find yourself in a better place as a result.
When North Shore Sun editor Drew Crouthamel came into my office a month ago today and said, "Listen, there's no good way to say this..." my heart literally sunk in my chest. I knew what was coming. I did my best to "take it like a man." I cursed him out. All right, not exactly. But I didn't dissolve into tears, either. Even though, if the truth be told, I felt like crying.
Drew was a phenomenal addition to Times/Review's staff — an aggressive, fair and insightful journalist. And, boy, can he write. Editing a community newspaper was a new challenge for him — and it's no easy task — but he proved himself up to it. And The Sun's got some prestigious journalism awards on the walls to show for it. Not to mention a growing audience of loyal readers who appreciate the intensely local, high-quality community journalism that is Times/Review's hallmark. Under Drew's stewardship, The Sun has made great strides, evidenced by our circulation growth, vibrant commentary pages, and a Web site featuring breaking news and podcasts.
So of course I felt like crying. (And cursing.)
But as my grandmother used to say, when life hands you lemons, you make lemonade. Count your blessings. Here they are:
The Sun, the "baby" of the Times/Review family at just 4 1/2 years old, is already a well-regarded, authoritative source for local news in Sun Land — our name for the communities we cover. It's a great community newspaper in the tradition of its older sisters, two of which date back to the 19th century. (The other one is almost as old as I am.) We're serious about community journalism, and the papers we put out every week demonstrate it, from cover to cover.
We've assembled an awesome editorial staff at The Sun. In the past year and a half, we hired sports editor Grant Parpan, who was an editor at a California daily before returning to Ridge, where he grew up; Frank Petrignani, a hardworking, nose-to-the-grindstone journalist; and Tom Burke, who (like me) found journalism as a second career in life and has been, well, born again; Joe Werkmeister, an award-winning collegiate sportswriter covers local sports with flair; and photographer Peter Blasl captures images of the people, events and beauty of Sun Land for us every week. Beyond our regular staff, we've got a growing network of citizen journalists who contribute to the lively, informative read you get when you pick up The Sun each week.
Our commitment to The Sun and its mission is deep. For that reason, I'm taking the helm to guide The Sun through its next phase of growth. I'm not "just" a publisher. I served as editor of The News-Review for nearly four years. During that time, the paper won a host of awards for its hard-hitting coverage of Riverhead Town, including the top award in community journalism in the state. I earned a reputation as a gutsy investigative journalist and I'm proud of it. That's what it's all about.
Our company is family-owned by people who take journalism — and its role in a democracy — seriously. We don't mix editorial and business. We even have two publishers, one to oversee each "side" of the company. Andrew Olsen runs sales, circulation and finance, and I oversee editorial and production. We don't make editorial decisions based on economic decisions. We don't cover events or issues — or look the other way — because advertisers want us to.
And we never, ever shy away from a fight if a fight is what it takes to get to the truth. Times/Review president, former co-publisher Troy Gustavson, wrote a short manifesto called "What We Stand For" in his first editorial after he and his wife, Joan, bought The Suffolk Times and The News-Review 30 years ago. "We stand for truth," he wrote. "We stand for excellence ... We stand for fairness ... We stand for self-determination ... We stand for non-partisanship." I've got that editorial taped up next to my desk for inspiration, when I need a reminder of why we do what we do and how important it is.
Those are the things we stand for today: truth, excellence, fairness, self-determination and non-partisanship.
And we've got the people and the gumption to carry it out.
-
Thursday, March 01, 2007
Community journalism evolves
If you’re reading this column on the printed page, you’re a member of a shrinking minority of people who read newspapers today. A generation ago, 70 percent of adults read a newspaper every day. Today, that number is just over 30 percent. Among young people — the under-30 set — the numbers are sharply lower than that.
But this isn’t news. Daily newspaper circulation has been declining for years. The troubles newspapers are facing today, from Main Street to Wall Street, are old news.
Technology has changed everything, turning the newspaper industry (among others) upside down. Fifty years ago, newspapers were your source to find out what was going on around the world or down the road. Today, anything you want to learn about, any piece of information, is just a click or two away, delivered to your desktop or to your mobile device, wherever you are. More than that, you can customize the news and information you want, so that you don’t have to waste your time sorting through information that someone else — an editor — has decided is important.
Daily papers rushed to jump on the information superhighway, putting all their content on their Web sites, without first figuring out how to reap advertising revenues in the new medium. They lost circulation and advertising revenues as a result and their profit margins slipped. Investors in publicly traded newspaper companies started to panic, resulting in the gloom-and-doom headlines we’ve all grown accustomed to reading: sell-offs, layoffs, buyouts, cutbacks.
That’s what prompted one of our loyal readers to ask me, during a Q&A at a recent speaking engagement, whether “his” community newspaper was in trouble, too. Is The Suffolk Times Is the News-Review going to be here 10 years from now? “How else will I find out what’s going on in my community?” he asked.
I was touched both by the man’s concern and by the reminder of the important role newspapers like The Suffolk Times the News-Review play in the community we serve.
We’re not going anywhere. Community journalism is alive and well and community newspapers like ours are, in fact, thriving. That’s because community newspapers provide people with news and information they really can’t get anywhere else — at least not yet. The daily papers have begun to notice this, and the new mantra among newspaper industry executives struggling and experts is now “local, local, local.” One of the most popular buzz words you hear in the industry now is “hyper-local.”
That describes what we do, and what we’ve been doing for 150 years, for 139 years, to a T. And it also describes what we’ll continue to do, and do better than anyone else, in the future.
But how we do it in the future will inevitably change — just as the look and feel of newspapers have changed, with better reproduction, color photographs and more graphics. We’ve adapted, retooled and improved. And we’ll continue to adapt, retool and improve.
The Web will continue to grow in importance as a means by which people access and consume news, including “hyper-local” news. As a result, the way news is packaged and presented will continue to change. News consumption is increasingly becoming a multimedia experience — it’s much more than words on a page, accompanied by a photo or two. Consumers now expect to be able to access photo slideshows, videos, audio interviews and podcasts as part of their online news experience. Even the label we use to describe the people we work for — you — has changed. You’re no longer readers; now you’re consumers and users.
The Web will also play an ever-larger role in news gathering and reporting, too. It has revolutionized the way reporters research their stories and even the way they find sources and leads.
Technology has also increased our ability to spend more time in the communities we cover. We can report, write a story on our laptop, take photos and videos with our digital cameras and file them all by e-mail from anywhere, completing our job without ever stepping foot in the newsroom.
Unless you’re a technophobe or averse to change, this is a really exciting time to be a journalist. The opportunities are nearly endless, and they are as accessible to small community publications like ours as they are to the bigger daily papers — because technology is inexpensive, easy to use and available to everyone.
We are embarking upon a major overhaul of our existing Web sites this year. Our goal is to make them more dynamic, interactive and user-friendly, and provide you with a rich, multimedia experience.
Soon, we’ll be publishing breaking local news on our Web site as it happens every day. You won’t have to wait till Thursday anymore. But you can still look forward to in-depth comprehensive coverage and analysis of the events and issues that matter most to you every Thursday in print.
We’ll have videos and podcasts and the ability to send the news and sports feeds you want to your computer or your Blackberry.
There will be blogs about neighborhoods and topics that hit home, as well as message boards where you can discuss what’s important to you with others who share your concerns.
We’ve got a long way to go, but we’re on our way. And we’d love to hear from you about what functions and features you’d like to see on our Web site. Until we get our message board up and running, we’ll have to communicate the old-fashioned way: Send me an e-mail at denise@timesreview.com. Or comment on my blog at civiletti.blogspot.com. I look forward to hearing from you.
But this isn’t news. Daily newspaper circulation has been declining for years. The troubles newspapers are facing today, from Main Street to Wall Street, are old news.
Technology has changed everything, turning the newspaper industry (among others) upside down. Fifty years ago, newspapers were your source to find out what was going on around the world or down the road. Today, anything you want to learn about, any piece of information, is just a click or two away, delivered to your desktop or to your mobile device, wherever you are. More than that, you can customize the news and information you want, so that you don’t have to waste your time sorting through information that someone else — an editor — has decided is important.
Daily papers rushed to jump on the information superhighway, putting all their content on their Web sites, without first figuring out how to reap advertising revenues in the new medium. They lost circulation and advertising revenues as a result and their profit margins slipped. Investors in publicly traded newspaper companies started to panic, resulting in the gloom-and-doom headlines we’ve all grown accustomed to reading: sell-offs, layoffs, buyouts, cutbacks.
That’s what prompted one of our loyal readers to ask me, during a Q&A at a recent speaking engagement, whether “his” community newspaper was in trouble, too. Is The Suffolk Times Is the News-Review going to be here 10 years from now? “How else will I find out what’s going on in my community?” he asked.
I was touched both by the man’s concern and by the reminder of the important role newspapers like The Suffolk Times the News-Review play in the community we serve.
We’re not going anywhere. Community journalism is alive and well and community newspapers like ours are, in fact, thriving. That’s because community newspapers provide people with news and information they really can’t get anywhere else — at least not yet. The daily papers have begun to notice this, and the new mantra among newspaper industry executives struggling and experts is now “local, local, local.” One of the most popular buzz words you hear in the industry now is “hyper-local.”
That describes what we do, and what we’ve been doing for 150 years, for 139 years, to a T. And it also describes what we’ll continue to do, and do better than anyone else, in the future.
But how we do it in the future will inevitably change — just as the look and feel of newspapers have changed, with better reproduction, color photographs and more graphics. We’ve adapted, retooled and improved. And we’ll continue to adapt, retool and improve.
The Web will continue to grow in importance as a means by which people access and consume news, including “hyper-local” news. As a result, the way news is packaged and presented will continue to change. News consumption is increasingly becoming a multimedia experience — it’s much more than words on a page, accompanied by a photo or two. Consumers now expect to be able to access photo slideshows, videos, audio interviews and podcasts as part of their online news experience. Even the label we use to describe the people we work for — you — has changed. You’re no longer readers; now you’re consumers and users.
The Web will also play an ever-larger role in news gathering and reporting, too. It has revolutionized the way reporters research their stories and even the way they find sources and leads.
Technology has also increased our ability to spend more time in the communities we cover. We can report, write a story on our laptop, take photos and videos with our digital cameras and file them all by e-mail from anywhere, completing our job without ever stepping foot in the newsroom.
Unless you’re a technophobe or averse to change, this is a really exciting time to be a journalist. The opportunities are nearly endless, and they are as accessible to small community publications like ours as they are to the bigger daily papers — because technology is inexpensive, easy to use and available to everyone.
We are embarking upon a major overhaul of our existing Web sites this year. Our goal is to make them more dynamic, interactive and user-friendly, and provide you with a rich, multimedia experience.
Soon, we’ll be publishing breaking local news on our Web site as it happens every day. You won’t have to wait till Thursday anymore. But you can still look forward to in-depth comprehensive coverage and analysis of the events and issues that matter most to you every Thursday in print.
We’ll have videos and podcasts and the ability to send the news and sports feeds you want to your computer or your Blackberry.
There will be blogs about neighborhoods and topics that hit home, as well as message boards where you can discuss what’s important to you with others who share your concerns.
We’ve got a long way to go, but we’re on our way. And we’d love to hear from you about what functions and features you’d like to see on our Web site. Until we get our message board up and running, we’ll have to communicate the old-fashioned way: Send me an e-mail at denise@timesreview.com. Or comment on my blog at civiletti.blogspot.com. I look forward to hearing from you.
Saturday, February 17, 2007
Smart growth
I spent this week in Reston, Virginia, attending an American Press Institute seminar called "Leading the 24/7 Newsroom." The hotel where the 50 or so seminar attendees stayed was located in Reston Town Center. While we didn't have a lot of free time to explore (API seminars are pretty intense) I was struck by how Reston Town Center was laid out. It seemed to me to be a very well planned, modern, suburban "downtown." There is a central plaza, with an ice skating rink and fountains, surrounded by a rich mix of residential and commercial uses — the Hyatt Regency (where we stayed), street level retail shops and restaurants, a 13-screen multiplex movie theater, with offices, apartments and condominiums rising above these ground level uses. There's also a multi-level parking garage (but no huge paved parking lot to serve the stores and hotel).
It occurred to me that I was staying in a built-out planned development district that exemplifies what we talk about here on the East End — a very walkable, pedestrian-friendly, well-planned mixed-use suburban "downtown." We talk about this sort of thing an awful lot around here lately. But nobody's even come close to attempting to build such a thing. And whether anyone will ever succeed in doing so (on a smaller scale, with multi-level buildings that are not so tall, of course) remainst to be seen.
Curious about where I'd just spent the past week, I did a little searching on the Web this morning and found some interesting stuff about Reston.
Turns out, Reston was the first post-war planned community in the U.S. It was founded by Robert E. Simon, who bought some 7,000 acres of land outside of Washington, D.C. in the 1960s, between the capital district and a planned airport (now Dulles International). The town is named for Simon; its name is his initials (RES) plus -ton, the English suffix for "town." He was interested in planned communities and had "an aversion to the automobile," so he wanted to establish a community that would be very walkable. Interesting note: He'd lived on Long Island, in a house on a five-acre lot, and felt that the sprawling suburban landscape was isolating for his family.
The Reston Association has a history of the community on its Web site. And I also came across a podcast of an interview with Bob Simon, at age 92, in which he speaks about what motivated him to establish the community and what his goals were. (The podcast interview was done by Planetizen, a planning and development network whose Web site looks pretty interesting, too.)
One key quote from the Simon interview: "Zoning ordinances all over the country made mixed use virtually impossible." Why? Zoning codes establish separate districts for residential, shopping, office and other commercial uses. How true. And the familiar sprawling suburban landscape we live in is the result.
The notion of "mixed use" is relatively new, Simon being a pioneer in the field and Reston being the result. Simon also employed lots of other principles that other communities, like ours, are just starting to implement in pursuit of open space and energy conservation, such as clustered development and zero lot line homes. In addition to housing, retail, commercial and high-tech industrial uses (businesses that employ more than 30,000 people), Reston has 1,300 acres of open space forever preserved, plus miles of walking, jogging and bike trails, parks, 14 community pools, tennis courts, golf courses, and, as mentioned, an ice rink. The residential uses are mixed as well, from typical suburban single-family homes on substantial lots, to high rise and garden apartments, townhouses and condos, with the denser development concentrated around the downtown, much like the "halo" zones currently under consideration for hamlet areas in Southold Town.
I'd be interested to know how these concepts work with re-development plans such as what Riverhead is aiming for with its downtown "master developer" idea, and whether other communities have successfully used them to do what Riverhead is hoping to accomplish downtown. Anybody out there know of such a place or places? Maybe the Planetizen site has more info.
It occurred to me that I was staying in a built-out planned development district that exemplifies what we talk about here on the East End — a very walkable, pedestrian-friendly, well-planned mixed-use suburban "downtown." We talk about this sort of thing an awful lot around here lately. But nobody's even come close to attempting to build such a thing. And whether anyone will ever succeed in doing so (on a smaller scale, with multi-level buildings that are not so tall, of course) remainst to be seen.
Curious about where I'd just spent the past week, I did a little searching on the Web this morning and found some interesting stuff about Reston.
Turns out, Reston was the first post-war planned community in the U.S. It was founded by Robert E. Simon, who bought some 7,000 acres of land outside of Washington, D.C. in the 1960s, between the capital district and a planned airport (now Dulles International). The town is named for Simon; its name is his initials (RES) plus -ton, the English suffix for "town." He was interested in planned communities and had "an aversion to the automobile," so he wanted to establish a community that would be very walkable. Interesting note: He'd lived on Long Island, in a house on a five-acre lot, and felt that the sprawling suburban landscape was isolating for his family.
The Reston Association has a history of the community on its Web site. And I also came across a podcast of an interview with Bob Simon, at age 92, in which he speaks about what motivated him to establish the community and what his goals were. (The podcast interview was done by Planetizen, a planning and development network whose Web site looks pretty interesting, too.)
One key quote from the Simon interview: "Zoning ordinances all over the country made mixed use virtually impossible." Why? Zoning codes establish separate districts for residential, shopping, office and other commercial uses. How true. And the familiar sprawling suburban landscape we live in is the result.
The notion of "mixed use" is relatively new, Simon being a pioneer in the field and Reston being the result. Simon also employed lots of other principles that other communities, like ours, are just starting to implement in pursuit of open space and energy conservation, such as clustered development and zero lot line homes. In addition to housing, retail, commercial and high-tech industrial uses (businesses that employ more than 30,000 people), Reston has 1,300 acres of open space forever preserved, plus miles of walking, jogging and bike trails, parks, 14 community pools, tennis courts, golf courses, and, as mentioned, an ice rink. The residential uses are mixed as well, from typical suburban single-family homes on substantial lots, to high rise and garden apartments, townhouses and condos, with the denser development concentrated around the downtown, much like the "halo" zones currently under consideration for hamlet areas in Southold Town.
I'd be interested to know how these concepts work with re-development plans such as what Riverhead is aiming for with its downtown "master developer" idea, and whether other communities have successfully used them to do what Riverhead is hoping to accomplish downtown. Anybody out there know of such a place or places? Maybe the Planetizen site has more info.
Thursday, February 15, 2007
Asking help for Bryan
Those of us lucky enough not to know what it's like, well, we really have no idea.
We can only imagine, if we can even let our minds wander there. I don't know about you, but I can't do it. The thought of one of my children being stricken by a serious, potentially fatal, illness is too much. When I try to imagine what that might be like, my chest tightens, my body shivers and my mind just won't go there. I guess that what the saying means: I can't wrap my mind around it.
The only reason I've tried to imagine it is, like most of the other lucky parents, I sometimes try to put myself in the shoes of those who've found themselves confronted with a child's illness or even death. The unthinkable. The unspeakable.
"I don't know how you deal with this," I said once to an acquaintance of mine, Mary Lou Tressler. A former owner of Jet Set Printing in Riverhead, our children were in nursery school together.
"I don't have any choice," she answered. "What else can I do?"
Her words stay with me. What else can she do, indeed?
Her son, Bryan, was diagnosed with neuroblastoma, a rare, generally fatal, childhood cancer, when he was just 5 years old. Doctors told his parents, Mary Lou and her husband, Bob, that there was no hope. But Bob and Mary Lou refused to give up. They searched high and low until they found doctors willing to treat Bryan with new, cutting-edge therapies that were then still in development. Thanks to such aggressive treatment — some of it classified as experimental — Bryan has survived. He's now going on 14. But it hasn't been easy, and the future, even after all he's been through, is still bleak.
Bryan is a brave young man. He was brave before he understood the meaning of the word "courage." He's instinctively fought a battle he didn't even know he was engaged in at first — he was too young to understand. Maybe that worked to his advantage. He wasn't mentally or emotionally dragged down by the horrible disease trying to steal his life away because he was too young to understand his affliction. So he lived a kid's life, typical of so many little boys. He played baseball. He went sailing with his dad on the family boat. He scraped his knees, collected bugs, played video games.
Now he's old enough to understand the concept of courage. He's also old enough to understand his illness, old enough to ask "Why?" Old enough to be mad as hell at the unfairness of it all.
But he's still brave. Maybe more so, because now he understands. And he still fights.
A few years back, at the Riverhead Relay for Life, Bryan told the crowd how important it is to fight, to soldier on. "We'll find a cure one day," he said. He was maybe 10 or 11. Everyone marveled at his strength, including me. I wrote a column about it, in fact.
Bryan's battle continues. His cancer has come back with a vengeance, yet again. Bryan is a fighter and endures the physical pain of both the disease and its treatments. His parents and siblings are coping. But the cancer and the treatments are now taking a major financial toll on the family and they are in need of help.
The Tresslers moved upstate a few years back. Bryan's father, Bob, sold his printing business, and the family relocated to a rural area, where there would be less pressure and where Mary Lou and Bob would be able to spend less time working and more time with Bryan and his siblings, Robert and Jennifer.
Bryan now has to make a 180-mile round-trip journey for treatment four to six times each month from his home in Granville, N.Y., to Children's Specialty Center in Burlington, Vt. He also has to travel to Albany five times each week for transfusions, radiation and blood tests.
Mary Lou wrote to me last week asking for help, seeking gas card donations to help them pay for travel to and from treatments. Asking for help certainly wasn't easy for her to do, but it's nothing compared with the reality she has to deal with every day.
I know many people in Riverhead knew Bryan and his family before they moved, and many folks would want to know if they are in need of assistance now. If you can help, with either a check or a gas card, mail it to Friends of Bryan Tressler, P.O. Box 92, Granville, NY 12832.
I would love to organize a fundraiser for Bryan. If you have any ideas for how we might raise some money, or want to help with the effort, please e-mail me at denise@timesreview.com.
Ms. Civiletti invites you to join a discussion of this topic at civiletti.blogspot.com. Her e-mail address is denise@timesreview.com.
Monday, February 12, 2007
When we get it wrong
Nobody said it was going to be easy.
That's true. Nobody said this was an easy job. In fact, it's pretty tough sometimes.
Reporting, writing, editing and publishing a community newspaper — they all present many challenges, each step of the way.
I don't mind people carrying on and calling me names for expressing my opinion in an editorial or in a column on the op-ed page. I expect it. Especially when I write about a subject as sensitive as the war. I've developed thick skin over the years. I can take it.
Sometimes, reporters make mistakes. Hey, we're only human. But when reporters for community newspapers make errors, it affects our neighbors — or people we do business with, or acquaintances, or friends. No matter what, it's tough. Unlike reporters at a huge daily, working out of some distant office, we live and work in the community we write about.
When we err, we print corrections. We print them on the inside front cover, page 2. But they're never enough to satisfy the person who was affected by something we got wrong. I realize that, but there's not much else I can do.
I'm dwelling on this tonight because we made a mistake in this week's police report in the Suffolk Times. The reporter got her "vehicle 1" and "vehicle 2" mixed up as she wrote up the report of an accident involving a school bus on Route 48 last week. We reported that the bus struck the other vehicle. In fact, acccording to the police report, it was the other way around. The other vehicle struck the bus, the report said.
That may make it seem that the driver of the school bus was at fault, and that's how she took it. To say she was unhappy when she showed up at our office Thursday morning would be an understatement along the lines of saying The Beatles were "popular." She tore me a new one, and there was no placating her.
The driver's dispatcher called me, too — at about 8 am Thursday morning. In an email subsequent to our conversation, she said that the people of Southold view The Suffolk Times "as law." That got me thinking even harder about the awesome responsibility we have. We take our responsibility seriously, all the time. There is a certain amount of power in what we do. We know we must never abuse it, or abuse the trust of the people who rely on our papers each week to understand what's going on in their communities.
Everyone at all of our publications works really hard and cares very deeply about what we do and the communities we cover. Accuracy and fairness are our top priorities. But, yes, sometimes we make mistakes. And when we do, it hurts — and we're sorry. This is one of those times.
That's true. Nobody said this was an easy job. In fact, it's pretty tough sometimes.
Reporting, writing, editing and publishing a community newspaper — they all present many challenges, each step of the way.
I don't mind people carrying on and calling me names for expressing my opinion in an editorial or in a column on the op-ed page. I expect it. Especially when I write about a subject as sensitive as the war. I've developed thick skin over the years. I can take it.
Sometimes, reporters make mistakes. Hey, we're only human. But when reporters for community newspapers make errors, it affects our neighbors — or people we do business with, or acquaintances, or friends. No matter what, it's tough. Unlike reporters at a huge daily, working out of some distant office, we live and work in the community we write about.
When we err, we print corrections. We print them on the inside front cover, page 2. But they're never enough to satisfy the person who was affected by something we got wrong. I realize that, but there's not much else I can do.
I'm dwelling on this tonight because we made a mistake in this week's police report in the Suffolk Times. The reporter got her "vehicle 1" and "vehicle 2" mixed up as she wrote up the report of an accident involving a school bus on Route 48 last week. We reported that the bus struck the other vehicle. In fact, acccording to the police report, it was the other way around. The other vehicle struck the bus, the report said.
That may make it seem that the driver of the school bus was at fault, and that's how she took it. To say she was unhappy when she showed up at our office Thursday morning would be an understatement along the lines of saying The Beatles were "popular." She tore me a new one, and there was no placating her.
The driver's dispatcher called me, too — at about 8 am Thursday morning. In an email subsequent to our conversation, she said that the people of Southold view The Suffolk Times "as law." That got me thinking even harder about the awesome responsibility we have. We take our responsibility seriously, all the time. There is a certain amount of power in what we do. We know we must never abuse it, or abuse the trust of the people who rely on our papers each week to understand what's going on in their communities.
Everyone at all of our publications works really hard and cares very deeply about what we do and the communities we cover. Accuracy and fairness are our top priorities. But, yes, sometimes we make mistakes. And when we do, it hurts — and we're sorry. This is one of those times.
Tuesday, February 06, 2007
Negative reactions
Here's a sampling of the negative reactions to my previous post, which was also published as an op-ed column in three of the Times/Review newspapers last week. Some of them are taken from letters to the editor, which will be printed in this week's papers. Others were from notes sent to me directly, some anonymously.
"To suggest this President, or any President would take this country to war for some kind of political or personal gain, to state as fact this President knowingly lied to enter into a war without any certainty is journalist criminality. Document your evidence so we the people can bring it to Congress so they can take action under our laws and constitution. Without such evidence - stop bloviating."
"How can anyone possibly quote (Hanoi) Jane Fonda as a reputable source of anything outside of Hollywood acting? Here is a person who collaborated with the enemy, who should've been charged with treason, perhaps aided in the deaths of American soldiers in Vietnam and I'm suppose to listen to what she has to say about this war?"
"I am truly disgusted by the lack of backbone displayed by all too many Americans as displayed in recent editorials & letters to the editor in the Suffolk Times. Seem like we have plenty of sunshine patriots who don't have the fortitude to withstand someone else picking up a rifle and fighting for them. Must be a rough life sitting on the sidelines sacrificing nothing while giving all that sound Monday morning quarterback advise to those who make tough decisions based on the real world we actually live in."
"Just like Mrs. Civiletti, I find it very difficult to read letters and columns each week that continually slam our president and keep silent. His decscion to go to war was not only based on WMD and a terrorist connection but also because the UN passed many resolutions that were ignored by Saddam and the UN didn't have the backbone to enforce them. Thank God president Bush did. Also the US congress almost unamiously voted for the war. Most of the people of Iraq are glad we are there. Most ot the soldiers who actually are doing the fighting think we are doing good there. As far as hundreds of thousands dead, how many did Saddam kill???"
"What shall we do in Iran?? In the 1930's the world ignored Hitler and millions lost their lives because they refused to deal with him. The president of Iran has stated his intention to wipe out Israel. Should we stand by and let him attain and use nuclear weapons and then try to deal with him or shall we just roll over and submit to Shariah law because his ultimate goal is that all the world be muslim."
"It’s been several years now and my memory is a bit fogged but I don't recall this administration citing evidence to Congress, the United Nations (UN), or to the American people linking Iraq with the attacks of September 11."
"I usually enjoy your column until I saw that you quoted Jane Fonda...I guess you forget howmany american prisoners were tortured because of her. She openly declared she was for North Vietnam. There is a big difference being anti war and being anti american. No one likes war and in one way or another we are all effected. You better check out these groups you are involved with whether they are anti war or anti american."
"Once again you showed either your ignorance or your dishonesty in you latest article in the North Shore Sun. "My daughters soon-to-be-draft-age teens." Last time I checked there was not a draft in this country and only males over the age of 18 are required to register with the Selective Service."
Sunday, January 28, 2007
"I want dumb bombs and a smart president."
J27 march on Washington
One hundred people from the North Fork joined tens of thousands from across the country at a massive anti-war demonstration in Washington, D.C. Saturday. North Fork People of Conscience coordinated the trip to the nation's capital for the march organized by United for Peace and Justice.
Click the image above to see pictures of the protest.
I signed myself and my two teenage daughters up for the trip because I just can't take it any more. The news every day of the bloodshed in Iraq, the chaos in Baghdad, hundreds of thousands of lives lost — to what end? There will be no good resolution of this mess, no "victory." (For how many years — and how many deaths — did the U.S. pursue "victory" in Vietnam?) The pointlessness of our continued occupation of Iraq seems perfectly clear to everyone but the Bush administration. Even Congress is catching on. Saturday's rally was intended to send the message to Congress that it must no longer fund Bush's war. As one speaker put it, you can't be opposed to the war and at the same time vote to fund it. Legislators are in a pickle. What happens if they refuse funding when the "surge" troops are already on the ground? Congressman Tim Bishop told me that by the time Congress votes on the funding, some of those 21,000 "surge" troops will already be over there. It's an ugly choice, but they have to make it.
We boarded two charter buses shortly after 5 a.m. on First Street in Riverhead. Gwen Schroeder and Pat Hovey of NFPOC checked everybody in on our bus, gathering cell phone numbers and providing information about where and when we'd meet up for the return trip home. It's a long ride to D.C. All the kids — I was heartened to see there was a good sized contingent of high school and college kids — slept most of the way down. We arrived at the Greenbelt Metro Station around 11 a.m. There were hundreds of charter buses in the lot and much excitement in the air. The train to the downtown Capital district was jammed.
So were the streets when we got there. And so was the National Mall, the staging area for the demonstration. The entire mall area for the length of three football fields (my rough "eyeball" estimate) was filled with people. Plus there were people scattered all around the periphery. The D.C. police, who have apparently discontinued their practice of giving official estimates of crowds, told the media "privately" that they thought fewer than 100,000 people attended. To borrow the vice president's favorite word, HOGWASH. It's unfortunate that there was no good place from which to take a good shot of the assembled masses. A couple of photographers climbed trees on the sidelines and took photos, but from where they were perched, they could shoot the crowd just in front of the stage. The masses of people jammed into the mall behind them weren't in their photos. The police or the federal government had a helicopter circling overhead the entire day. I bet they got some good crowd shots. And I bet we never get to see them.
I have a suggestion for protest organizers, if they are really interested in documenting attendance at these demonstrations. They should rent a bucket, or cherry-picker, the kind utilities use to access overhead lines. They can put a photographer/videographer up in the bucket just behind the stage and have an excellent vantage point for shooting the crowd — the whole crowd — as it assembles and marches. It's a relatively inexpensive and readily available piece of equipment to rent. And it would provide excellent documentation for refuting the typically ridiculously low official attendance estimates (private or otherwise.)
The sights and sounds at events like this are always pretty interesting. An "Uncle Sam" on stilts. People sporting "Buck Fush" t-shirts. Anarchists against the war. Republicans against the war. Veterans for Peace. Quakers. Socialists. People assembled in groups according to religious beliefs, political affiliations and sexual orientation. People hawking literature ranging advocating beliefs ranging from Christian pacifism to Communism. One guy who stood, simply, for "Free Hugs."
And signs, lots and lots of signs, with so many clever sayings and slogans. My favorite: "I want dumb bombs and a smart president."
My kids were wide-eyed, never having seen anything like this before.
We pushed as far forward toward the stage as we could get. We got to hear speeches by the Rev. Jesse Jackson and Jane Fonda. She said this was her first anti-war protest in 34 years. She has been reluctant to speak out against the war in Iraq, she said, because she was such a lightning rod for controversy during the Vietnam war (I had to explain to my daughters about "Hanoi Jane"). But, she told the crowd, "Silence is no longer an option." Fonda brought her daughter and two grandchildren on stage, noting that her daughter was just a baby at the last anti-war protest she attended.
My daughters had never been to Washington before, and I was determined that they should see both the Lincoln Memorial and the Vietnam War memorial while we were there. Both of those monuments provide rich historical context for what's going on right now in America. So we didn't stay with the march for its entire route. Instead, as marchers slowly made their way toward the Capitol, we bolted and hoofed toward the Lincoln Memorial. We stopped briefly at the Washington Monument and the World War Two Memorial, walked past a drained reflecting pool, and (not without some complaint from my teenagers) climbed the stairs of our temple of American democracy, dedicated to the memory of one of our nation's greatest leaders, Abraham Lincoln. I am always moved to tears inside that space, reflecting on the immortal words of President Lincoln dedicating the battlefield at Gettysburg. Yesterday, the tears flowed more than they ever had before, with the backdrop of the protest, Iraq, the diminishment of our great nation on the world stage thanks to the failed foreign policy of the Bush administration. My kids thought I was nuts. Maybe I am. They read the words of the Gettysburg Address with me. It's familiar to them. I've read it to them and with them many times before. But they didn't share my emotion. They were more interested in how the words were carved in granite. We went to the small museum in the memorial and looked at a set of tools used by an Italian immigrant (the inscriptions were hand-carved by Italian immigrants — I allowed myself a moment of ethnic pride): a wooden mallet, four metal chisels and a pair of calipers. "No machines?" my daughter asked. Nope, all done by hand, painstakingly, perfectly. "Wow."
Yes, the Lincoln Memorial is a definite "wow" on many levels. And so is the Vietnam war memorial, with the nearly endless sea of names inscribed in marble, commemorating the 58,000+ American war dead. It is moving and a chilling reminder of how history really can repeat itself. There are so many parallels to Iraq.
We lingered at the wall, looking at the names inscribed in it, the laminated sheets depicting photos and brief bios of the soldiers "killed 40 years ago this weekend," the flowers and other memorials, including POW/MIA bracelets, placed at the foot of the wall by family, friends and comrades who have not forgotten the dead — men and women who really did die in vain, defending a failed foreign policy, fighting a war fought under false pretenses, sacrificing their lives in a war that could not be won.
One hundred people from the North Fork joined tens of thousands from across the country at a massive anti-war demonstration in Washington, D.C. Saturday. North Fork People of Conscience coordinated the trip to the nation's capital for the march organized by United for Peace and Justice.
Click the image above to see pictures of the protest.
I signed myself and my two teenage daughters up for the trip because I just can't take it any more. The news every day of the bloodshed in Iraq, the chaos in Baghdad, hundreds of thousands of lives lost — to what end? There will be no good resolution of this mess, no "victory." (For how many years — and how many deaths — did the U.S. pursue "victory" in Vietnam?) The pointlessness of our continued occupation of Iraq seems perfectly clear to everyone but the Bush administration. Even Congress is catching on. Saturday's rally was intended to send the message to Congress that it must no longer fund Bush's war. As one speaker put it, you can't be opposed to the war and at the same time vote to fund it. Legislators are in a pickle. What happens if they refuse funding when the "surge" troops are already on the ground? Congressman Tim Bishop told me that by the time Congress votes on the funding, some of those 21,000 "surge" troops will already be over there. It's an ugly choice, but they have to make it.
We boarded two charter buses shortly after 5 a.m. on First Street in Riverhead. Gwen Schroeder and Pat Hovey of NFPOC checked everybody in on our bus, gathering cell phone numbers and providing information about where and when we'd meet up for the return trip home. It's a long ride to D.C. All the kids — I was heartened to see there was a good sized contingent of high school and college kids — slept most of the way down. We arrived at the Greenbelt Metro Station around 11 a.m. There were hundreds of charter buses in the lot and much excitement in the air. The train to the downtown Capital district was jammed.
So were the streets when we got there. And so was the National Mall, the staging area for the demonstration. The entire mall area for the length of three football fields (my rough "eyeball" estimate) was filled with people. Plus there were people scattered all around the periphery. The D.C. police, who have apparently discontinued their practice of giving official estimates of crowds, told the media "privately" that they thought fewer than 100,000 people attended. To borrow the vice president's favorite word, HOGWASH. It's unfortunate that there was no good place from which to take a good shot of the assembled masses. A couple of photographers climbed trees on the sidelines and took photos, but from where they were perched, they could shoot the crowd just in front of the stage. The masses of people jammed into the mall behind them weren't in their photos. The police or the federal government had a helicopter circling overhead the entire day. I bet they got some good crowd shots. And I bet we never get to see them.
I have a suggestion for protest organizers, if they are really interested in documenting attendance at these demonstrations. They should rent a bucket, or cherry-picker, the kind utilities use to access overhead lines. They can put a photographer/videographer up in the bucket just behind the stage and have an excellent vantage point for shooting the crowd — the whole crowd — as it assembles and marches. It's a relatively inexpensive and readily available piece of equipment to rent. And it would provide excellent documentation for refuting the typically ridiculously low official attendance estimates (private or otherwise.)
The sights and sounds at events like this are always pretty interesting. An "Uncle Sam" on stilts. People sporting "Buck Fush" t-shirts. Anarchists against the war. Republicans against the war. Veterans for Peace. Quakers. Socialists. People assembled in groups according to religious beliefs, political affiliations and sexual orientation. People hawking literature ranging advocating beliefs ranging from Christian pacifism to Communism. One guy who stood, simply, for "Free Hugs."
And signs, lots and lots of signs, with so many clever sayings and slogans. My favorite: "I want dumb bombs and a smart president."
My kids were wide-eyed, never having seen anything like this before.
We pushed as far forward toward the stage as we could get. We got to hear speeches by the Rev. Jesse Jackson and Jane Fonda. She said this was her first anti-war protest in 34 years. She has been reluctant to speak out against the war in Iraq, she said, because she was such a lightning rod for controversy during the Vietnam war (I had to explain to my daughters about "Hanoi Jane"). But, she told the crowd, "Silence is no longer an option." Fonda brought her daughter and two grandchildren on stage, noting that her daughter was just a baby at the last anti-war protest she attended.
My daughters had never been to Washington before, and I was determined that they should see both the Lincoln Memorial and the Vietnam War memorial while we were there. Both of those monuments provide rich historical context for what's going on right now in America. So we didn't stay with the march for its entire route. Instead, as marchers slowly made their way toward the Capitol, we bolted and hoofed toward the Lincoln Memorial. We stopped briefly at the Washington Monument and the World War Two Memorial, walked past a drained reflecting pool, and (not without some complaint from my teenagers) climbed the stairs of our temple of American democracy, dedicated to the memory of one of our nation's greatest leaders, Abraham Lincoln. I am always moved to tears inside that space, reflecting on the immortal words of President Lincoln dedicating the battlefield at Gettysburg. Yesterday, the tears flowed more than they ever had before, with the backdrop of the protest, Iraq, the diminishment of our great nation on the world stage thanks to the failed foreign policy of the Bush administration. My kids thought I was nuts. Maybe I am. They read the words of the Gettysburg Address with me. It's familiar to them. I've read it to them and with them many times before. But they didn't share my emotion. They were more interested in how the words were carved in granite. We went to the small museum in the memorial and looked at a set of tools used by an Italian immigrant (the inscriptions were hand-carved by Italian immigrants — I allowed myself a moment of ethnic pride): a wooden mallet, four metal chisels and a pair of calipers. "No machines?" my daughter asked. Nope, all done by hand, painstakingly, perfectly. "Wow."
Yes, the Lincoln Memorial is a definite "wow" on many levels. And so is the Vietnam war memorial, with the nearly endless sea of names inscribed in marble, commemorating the 58,000+ American war dead. It is moving and a chilling reminder of how history really can repeat itself. There are so many parallels to Iraq.
We lingered at the wall, looking at the names inscribed in it, the laminated sheets depicting photos and brief bios of the soldiers "killed 40 years ago this weekend," the flowers and other memorials, including POW/MIA bracelets, placed at the foot of the wall by family, friends and comrades who have not forgotten the dead — men and women who really did die in vain, defending a failed foreign policy, fighting a war fought under false pretenses, sacrificing their lives in a war that could not be won.
Friday, January 26, 2007
What price silence?
Tomorrow morning before dawn, three busloads of people from the North Fork will depart Riverhead for Washington, D.C. to attend a march for peace. I will be one of them.
The trip from the North Fork is being organized by North Fork People of Conscience. The group has been surprised by the response. Originally planning one bus, they hired a second when the first filled up in just a day. Now they've got three going.
People from every state in the union will be attending the rally and march, whose purpose is to send a message to Congress that American involvement in the war in Iraq must end.
It's been a very long time since I participated in any kind of a demonstration. The last time was, I think, at the U.N., in the early 1980s. I feel foolish to admit that I can't quite remember what it was about. El Salvador, I think. The debacle in the Middle East has inspired me. What a terrible mess. With no easy solutions. Perhaps no solutions at all. It's really very depressing. Hundreds of thousands of lives lost, a country in ruins, America disgraced. Our troops being used as pawns, not only in military warfare in an Iraqi civil war, but in political warfare at home. But, boy, does this sound familiar, as I'm old enough to remember Vietnam. Such a similar scenario. Except this one is actually far more dangerous, because of the powder keg that is the Middle East, and the potential for mass destruction.
Another 20,000 troops? Is that the answer? Not likely. As one of al-Qaeda's top commanders said this week, echoing the arrogant bravado of our own leader a few years back, "bring 'em on." He said we could send the whole army. It wouldn't matter. I think we should heed his warning. There are millions of people there who hate each other, but hate America even more. There is no "winning" this war. Bush, like Nixon decades ago, is casting "victory" as a matter of "honor," characterizing "supporting our troops" as supporting his war, painting people opposition to his war as unpatriotic.
Will this march accomplish anything? Who knows? But I feel compelled to attend, to stand up and join the chorus of Americans in protesting this administration's failed foreign policy and disastrous military initiatives in the Middle East. I can't, in good conscience, remain silent.
The trip from the North Fork is being organized by North Fork People of Conscience. The group has been surprised by the response. Originally planning one bus, they hired a second when the first filled up in just a day. Now they've got three going.
People from every state in the union will be attending the rally and march, whose purpose is to send a message to Congress that American involvement in the war in Iraq must end.
It's been a very long time since I participated in any kind of a demonstration. The last time was, I think, at the U.N., in the early 1980s. I feel foolish to admit that I can't quite remember what it was about. El Salvador, I think. The debacle in the Middle East has inspired me. What a terrible mess. With no easy solutions. Perhaps no solutions at all. It's really very depressing. Hundreds of thousands of lives lost, a country in ruins, America disgraced. Our troops being used as pawns, not only in military warfare in an Iraqi civil war, but in political warfare at home. But, boy, does this sound familiar, as I'm old enough to remember Vietnam. Such a similar scenario. Except this one is actually far more dangerous, because of the powder keg that is the Middle East, and the potential for mass destruction.
Another 20,000 troops? Is that the answer? Not likely. As one of al-Qaeda's top commanders said this week, echoing the arrogant bravado of our own leader a few years back, "bring 'em on." He said we could send the whole army. It wouldn't matter. I think we should heed his warning. There are millions of people there who hate each other, but hate America even more. There is no "winning" this war. Bush, like Nixon decades ago, is casting "victory" as a matter of "honor," characterizing "supporting our troops" as supporting his war, painting people opposition to his war as unpatriotic.
Will this march accomplish anything? Who knows? But I feel compelled to attend, to stand up and join the chorus of Americans in protesting this administration's failed foreign policy and disastrous military initiatives in the Middle East. I can't, in good conscience, remain silent.
Tuesday, January 23, 2007
Looking forward to our day in court
Well, after much fanfare — press releases flying around for more than 10 days — I was finally served with a summons and complaint from Mike Cholowsky late on Friday afternoon.
In the complaint, he says the statement in our story that he pled guilty to a conspiracy to defraud the United States is "completely false. Mr. Cholowsky never pled guilty nor was convicted of any felony involving an attempt to defraud the United States." Well the criminal docket in US. v. Cholowsky shows otherwise. He also labels "completely false" the statement that federal investigators charged Cholowsky's buddy, Joe Provenzano, with using Cholowsky's hauling permit to illegally dump hazardous waste in the Brookhaven landfill. Well, the federal indictment against Joe Provenzano says just that. And Provenzano, by the way, pled guilty to all 17 counts in that indictment. Then the complaint calls "false" the statement that Cholowsky "testified in 1999 that he paid bribes totalling $20,000 to Republican party leader John Powell for the right to dump at the town landfill in Yaphank." Well, the transcript of Cholowsky's testimony in mid-November 1999 at the criminal trial of John Powell says exactly that. And besides, Newsday reported all of these facts (numerous times) in its coverage of the Powell trial in 1999. Did Cholowsky sue Newsday?
Then the complaint accuses us of recklessness, malice and intent to harm, and claims damages of $2 million. It also seeks $10 million in punitive damages.
The complaint is "verified" not by the plaintiff, but by his attorney. Somebody's got to swear to the court that the allegations in the complaint are true, you know.
I can hardly wait to have this matter before a judge, so the plaintiff and his attorney can both explain how they can file a document with the court containing statements which so clearly controvert the public record.
If this isn't an attempt to shut me up, I don't know what is. But it isn't going to work. And our attorneys have been instructed to prepare a counterclaim alleging violation of our right to report this matter, as protected by Article 7 of the New York State Civil Rights Law. We will seek remedies to the fullest extent allowed by law, because this sort of action, known as a "SLAPP" suit, goes to the very heart of the role and function of the press in a free society. And we won't take that lying down.
In the complaint, he says the statement in our story that he pled guilty to a conspiracy to defraud the United States is "completely false. Mr. Cholowsky never pled guilty nor was convicted of any felony involving an attempt to defraud the United States." Well the criminal docket in US. v. Cholowsky shows otherwise. He also labels "completely false" the statement that federal investigators charged Cholowsky's buddy, Joe Provenzano, with using Cholowsky's hauling permit to illegally dump hazardous waste in the Brookhaven landfill. Well, the federal indictment against Joe Provenzano says just that. And Provenzano, by the way, pled guilty to all 17 counts in that indictment. Then the complaint calls "false" the statement that Cholowsky "testified in 1999 that he paid bribes totalling $20,000 to Republican party leader John Powell for the right to dump at the town landfill in Yaphank." Well, the transcript of Cholowsky's testimony in mid-November 1999 at the criminal trial of John Powell says exactly that. And besides, Newsday reported all of these facts (numerous times) in its coverage of the Powell trial in 1999. Did Cholowsky sue Newsday?
Then the complaint accuses us of recklessness, malice and intent to harm, and claims damages of $2 million. It also seeks $10 million in punitive damages.
The complaint is "verified" not by the plaintiff, but by his attorney. Somebody's got to swear to the court that the allegations in the complaint are true, you know.
I can hardly wait to have this matter before a judge, so the plaintiff and his attorney can both explain how they can file a document with the court containing statements which so clearly controvert the public record.
If this isn't an attempt to shut me up, I don't know what is. But it isn't going to work. And our attorneys have been instructed to prepare a counterclaim alleging violation of our right to report this matter, as protected by Article 7 of the New York State Civil Rights Law. We will seek remedies to the fullest extent allowed by law, because this sort of action, known as a "SLAPP" suit, goes to the very heart of the role and function of the press in a free society. And we won't take that lying down.
Thursday, January 18, 2007
A line drawn in the sand
On Jan. 9, the New York City law firm of Sullivan and Gardner issued a press release announcing that Calverton Industries and Michael Cholowsky "have sued" The News-Review and yours truly for libel.
We were made aware of this action not by service of the complaint, nor even by receipt of the press release. I got a phone call from Bruce Tria, the station manager at WRIV, asking for comment on the lawsuit.
On Monday this week, I got a similar call from Lisa Finn, a reporter at the Independent-Traveler Watchman. I told her what I told Tria: I haven't seen the lawsuit so I can't comment on what it says. The Independent published a story this week anyway, under the headline "News-Review, Civiletti sued for libel."
We still haven't been served with any lawsuit. But ever curious — as all good reporters are — I checked the records at the county center yesterday and found that Mr. Cholowsky's attorneys had indeed filed a summons and complaint against Times/Review Newspapers and yours truly on Jan. 9. I guess they just haven't gotten around to serving us.
The complaint alleges that just about everything we reported in our Dec. 14 issue about Mr. Cholowsky's criminal conviction and his role and testimony in the John Powell trial was "completely false." And it alleges that we knew what we published to be false when we "recklessly" published it.
First, we stand by the accuracy of the facts we reported in our coverage. In libel law, truth is an absolute defense to an action. We have truth on our side. If this lawsuit is served, I'm confident that we'll prevail.
Second, we will not be cowed into silence with lawsuits or threats of lawsuits. We've reported on this because it's important and in the public interest. And for no other reason.
The state DEC allowed Cholowsky to dig a 41-acre, 40-foot-deep hole in a special groundwater protection area and fill it up with waste material s. It allowed this without even doing an environmental impact study. It conditioned the mining permit on Cholowsky's staying out of the solid waste industry because of Cholowsky's admitted — on the record, under oath, in open court — payment of bribes to a Brookhaven official and the county Republican leader to gain access to the Brookhaven landfill. Then the DEC turned around and gave the same guy a permit to build and operate a solid waste facility elsewhere.
That's what we reported. And those are facts, in the public record. Just like the plea Mr. Cholowsky entered in federal court — which his lawsuit says never happened. Just like his testimony in federal court that sent John Powell to jail — something else the lawsuit says we fabricated.
But Mr. Cholowsky, in the press release, says we wrote the story "in retribution for my criticism of the most significant policy error facing the Riverhead taxpayer: the $40 million landfill catastrophe." And his attorney, Mr. Sullivan, is quoted in the Independent as saying: "And we are taking further steps to ensure that the avoidance of the $40 million reclamation disaster by issuing untrue statements about our client stops, and the community begins to ask the questions: What happened to the $40 million and where do we go from here?"
Huh?
Obviously Mr. Sullivan hasn't been reading The News-Review. We broke the story of the landfill reclamation mess in this newspaper and have diligently reported on new developments week after week on page 1 over the past year. We even editorialized about the mess many times, asking the very questions Mr. Cholowsky's attorney claims the community should "begin" to ask.
It's nothing short of bizarre that Mr. Cholowsky would link our reporting on his permit issues to the landfill reclamation debacle. We have no stake whatsoever in the town's failed reclamation project, or in its "avoidance." Maybe he's accusing me of carrying water for Barbara Blass, who's been an opponent of the sand mine and a proponent of the landfill reclamation.
The only connection I can see between Calverton Industries and the town's landfill reclamation is sand. And lots of it.
A couple years back, the town was selling its landfill sand cheap to a guy who was making asphalt at the town dump as part of the reclamation project. The asphalt guys were not happy about that. Cheap sand, cheap asphalt. Not a good thing in the mind of the "asphalt cartel" — description courtesy of the U.S. attorney's office. In Nov. 2005, five members of the "asphalt cartel" were indicted in federal court in a bid-rigging scheme aimed at keeping the price of asphalt high, according to federal law enforcement authorities. Among them was a partner in Calverton Industries, John Montecalvo.
Four of the "cartel" boys have since pled guilty under an agreement with the federal prosecutor. No word yet on any plea deal for the remaining "cartel" member, Montecalvo.
There's plenty of speculation about why Montecalvo hasn't taken a plea, and what might be coming next. I'll leave that one to the rumor mill for now. But who was it that once said, "All roads lead to Riverhead?"
Wednesday, January 10, 2007
Res ipsa loquitur
The News-Review was the lead news item on Riverhead radio station WRIV all day today. The newspaper — and its co-publisher Denise Civiletti — "have been sued" by Michael Cholowsky, according to the news report.
But we still haven't seen any lawsuit.
Cholowsky's lawyer yesterday sent out a press release (to WRIV, but not to The News-Review) announcing the lawsuit. In the press release (I got a copy from WRIV when the station called me for comment) he misrepresents what we printed in our coverage last month of the Cholowsky saga and the state DEC — and then says we got it wrong! Clever, ain't it?
I called the lawyer today and asked what's up with the lawsuit I've heard rumors about.
He didn't know. "Um, uh, that's being handled by my associates," he told me today. Punt!
Similarly, on Dec. 20 he admitted he didn't know what was inaccurate in my story when he faxed me a letter that day accusing me of printing inaccurate information and warning me against going to press with a follow-up story and editorial he said he believed I was working on. (I was.) I called him then, too, demanding to know what error I'd made. Absolute accuracy is important to me, and I take care to correct mistakes when I make them, quickly and fully. But he couldn't tell me. When pressed, all he came up with was, "I've only had the file one day." A couple weeks later and he's still short on substance, instead accusing us of printing things we didn't print and then crying foul.
Accuracy, like fairness, is a journalist's stock in trade. Accusing a journalist of being intentionally inaccurate is in itself libelous, and I take it seriously.
So I'm very interested in what this lawsuit is going to say, assuming it gets served. I'm curious to see whether an attorney, an officer of the court, will have the audacity to misstate in court papers what our newspaper printed and then complain that, as miscast, it is libelous.
But Cholowsky's attorney has had a lot of other things on his plate in the last couple of days.
His client was served Tuesday with an appearance ticket, initiating a felony prosecution for filing a false instrument (the Emjay application in which he answered "no" to a question about prior criminal convictions). He's scheduled to be arraigned next month in county district court in Islip.
Cholowsky was also served Tuesday with a revocation notice by the DEC informing him that Calverton Industries' operating permit is revoked, effective immediately.
And he was served at the same time with a notice that the DEC intends to revoke his Emjay operating permit too, because of statements in the Emjay permit application that the DEC now says were false.
So Cholowsky's attorney is one busy dude. The man has a history of keeping lawyers busy though. He's a litigious guy -- Riverhead town has been in almost constant litigation with him for almost a decade now.
Frankly, we fully expected to be on the receiving end of a lawsuit after publishing Cholowsky's permit history in the paper last month. So be it. The thing about libel law is this: TRUTH is an absolute defense.
Check out our story in the Jan. 11 edition of The News-Review at www.riverheadnewsreview.com. We've also posted on our Web site several pertinent documents, including Cholowsky's criminal docket from 2000, his Emjay application "record of compliance," his Calverton Industries permit, and the April 2000 affidavit he gave the DEC swearing he wasn't and wouldn't become involved in the solid waste industry.
As they taught us in law school: res ipsa loquitur. The thing speaks for itself.
But we still haven't seen any lawsuit.
Cholowsky's lawyer yesterday sent out a press release (to WRIV, but not to The News-Review) announcing the lawsuit. In the press release (I got a copy from WRIV when the station called me for comment) he misrepresents what we printed in our coverage last month of the Cholowsky saga and the state DEC — and then says we got it wrong! Clever, ain't it?
I called the lawyer today and asked what's up with the lawsuit I've heard rumors about.
He didn't know. "Um, uh, that's being handled by my associates," he told me today. Punt!
Similarly, on Dec. 20 he admitted he didn't know what was inaccurate in my story when he faxed me a letter that day accusing me of printing inaccurate information and warning me against going to press with a follow-up story and editorial he said he believed I was working on. (I was.) I called him then, too, demanding to know what error I'd made. Absolute accuracy is important to me, and I take care to correct mistakes when I make them, quickly and fully. But he couldn't tell me. When pressed, all he came up with was, "I've only had the file one day." A couple weeks later and he's still short on substance, instead accusing us of printing things we didn't print and then crying foul.
Accuracy, like fairness, is a journalist's stock in trade. Accusing a journalist of being intentionally inaccurate is in itself libelous, and I take it seriously.
So I'm very interested in what this lawsuit is going to say, assuming it gets served. I'm curious to see whether an attorney, an officer of the court, will have the audacity to misstate in court papers what our newspaper printed and then complain that, as miscast, it is libelous.
But Cholowsky's attorney has had a lot of other things on his plate in the last couple of days.
His client was served Tuesday with an appearance ticket, initiating a felony prosecution for filing a false instrument (the Emjay application in which he answered "no" to a question about prior criminal convictions). He's scheduled to be arraigned next month in county district court in Islip.
Cholowsky was also served Tuesday with a revocation notice by the DEC informing him that Calverton Industries' operating permit is revoked, effective immediately.
And he was served at the same time with a notice that the DEC intends to revoke his Emjay operating permit too, because of statements in the Emjay permit application that the DEC now says were false.
So Cholowsky's attorney is one busy dude. The man has a history of keeping lawyers busy though. He's a litigious guy -- Riverhead town has been in almost constant litigation with him for almost a decade now.
Frankly, we fully expected to be on the receiving end of a lawsuit after publishing Cholowsky's permit history in the paper last month. So be it. The thing about libel law is this: TRUTH is an absolute defense.
Check out our story in the Jan. 11 edition of The News-Review at www.riverheadnewsreview.com. We've also posted on our Web site several pertinent documents, including Cholowsky's criminal docket from 2000, his Emjay application "record of compliance," his Calverton Industries permit, and the April 2000 affidavit he gave the DEC swearing he wasn't and wouldn't become involved in the solid waste industry.
As they taught us in law school: res ipsa loquitur. The thing speaks for itself.
Thursday, January 04, 2007
Oh, the things I'll do (before 50)
A ride on the magic carpet
Some things you’d best try to learn when you have youth on your side. Skiing, I’m now convinced, is one of them.
Against my better judgment, I had my first ski experience this weekend. My husband, a veteran skier, was delighted I’d finally given in to his pleas to try it. We rented the necessary equipment and the girls and I signed up for a “level one” (beginner’s) lesson. We were in a group of about eight people. Seven of us were “promoted” at the end of the lesson to “level three.” One of us didn’t make it. Can you guess who that was?
Common sense would have dictated retiring my rented skis, poles and boots after that first session, especially after the instructor broke the news to me that I wouldn’t be joining my kids in “level three” the following day. But no-o-o-o. I’m nothing if not determined. I’d take my “level two” lesson the next morning and, I hoped, reach “level three” in the afternoon.
Little did I know that my humiliation had only just begun.
The “level two” class entailed a ride on “the magic carpet,” a conveyor belt that takes you up a long, gently sloped hillside that serves as a learning trail.
I was scared witless.
“Relax,” the instructor, a saint of a guy named Mike, assured me. “This is a piece of cake. You inch your skis onto the conveyor belt,” he explained. “And then it just takes you.”
I did as instructed, inching my skis onto the belt. And then it took me, all right. I fell backwards in a heap of tangled skis and poles. They had to stop the conveyor belt and haul me up, all before an audience of some 20-odd snickering people, mostly kids. They actually applauded when I was finally righted and set upon the magic carpet once more (this time Mike holding me up so I wouldn’t lose my balance).
Not a quitter, I made several more trips up the “slope” on the magic carpet ride, guided down by Saint Mike, who skied backwards in front of me each time, to prevent me from falling or crashing. I still managed to crash and fall a couple of times anyway.
The whole experience got me thinking. There are so many things I haven’t done yet. And time is running out. I mean, I’ll be 50 this year. My window of opportunity for trying new things is closing — especially if they involve the potential for breaking bones.
The expectations of my youth had me climbing mountains in Tibet, hang-gliding, piloting a plane, writing a book and running for office. OK, I did that last one. But what of the rest of it? Any day now, my AARP welcome kit will arrive in my mailbox, the thought of which sends shivers of panic up and down my spine.
If I’m going to have a mid-life crisis, I may as well do it publicly. And I’d like some help. So here’s a challenge for you, Gentle Reader: What should I do before I turn 50? Send me your suggestions. I’ll try anything within reason. That is, it can’t be illegal, involve marital infidelity or be too expensive; in other words, forget Tibet. Then I’ll write about it. Hopefully not from a hospital bed.
Send me an e-mail: denise@timesreivew.com or post to my blog at civiletti.blogspot.com.
01-04-2007
Wednesday, January 03, 2007
I'm baaaack
Hey, it's been a while and I apologize. We at Times/Review had our annual Christmas holiday week, and I actually forced myself to relax.
Back from our break, things are, of course, nuts here at the newspaper, especially since we came back to a Tuesday, which is crunch day in any week — never mind the week after a week off!
But miracles do happen (they happen every week in fact) and we managed to get the papers done and out to the printer on time.
I don't have any big news to report this week on the Calverton Industries matter. I have had some interesting conversations with people — both in "officialdom" and otherwise — which were, unfortunately, off the record. I expect some things will be happening soon and that this story will certainly be continued. I also expect it to take some pretty interesting turns as the weeks go by.
This week's papers contain our annual "People of the Year" awards. I am always blown away by the amazing people who live and work in our community. It's an honor to be able to recognize them in this way, to show our appreciation for all that they do. It's also always fun to surprise some of these folks like this.
Tomorrow you can read all about exploits on the ski slopes of Vermont. Let's just say for now that I'm not competing in the next Winter Olympics.
Back from our break, things are, of course, nuts here at the newspaper, especially since we came back to a Tuesday, which is crunch day in any week — never mind the week after a week off!
But miracles do happen (they happen every week in fact) and we managed to get the papers done and out to the printer on time.
I don't have any big news to report this week on the Calverton Industries matter. I have had some interesting conversations with people — both in "officialdom" and otherwise — which were, unfortunately, off the record. I expect some things will be happening soon and that this story will certainly be continued. I also expect it to take some pretty interesting turns as the weeks go by.
This week's papers contain our annual "People of the Year" awards. I am always blown away by the amazing people who live and work in our community. It's an honor to be able to recognize them in this way, to show our appreciation for all that they do. It's also always fun to surprise some of these folks like this.
Tomorrow you can read all about exploits on the ski slopes of Vermont. Let's just say for now that I'm not competing in the next Winter Olympics.
Sunday, December 24, 2006
Where's Montecalvo?
It's interesting that Calverton sand mine operator John Montecalvo, co-owner of Calverton Industries, did not participate in the plea negotiations between the U.S. attorney and the other four members of the "asphalt cartel." Their trial on bid-rigging charges was supposed to begin in early January. On Friday, three of the other four defendants pled guilty to conspiracy to commit mail fraud in the bid-rigging scheme, according to a Newsday report. The fourth was supposed to plea, but was ill. Only Montecalvo remains. Will he go to trial or is there some other plea being worked out?
Asphalt, sand, garbage... There's a lot of overlap in terms of who owns the various companies, and some interesting connections to goings-on in the Town of Riverhead.
To be continued...
Asphalt, sand, garbage... There's a lot of overlap in terms of who owns the various companies, and some interesting connections to goings-on in the Town of Riverhead.
To be continued...
Sunday, December 17, 2006
My interview wtih Mike Cholowsky
In reporting the story ("Who's minding the mine?") for last week's News-Review, I called Mike Cholowsky for comment. He called me back late Wednesday, past deadline, and I plan to report on that in the upcoming edition.
He didn't appreciate my questions, to say the least. He accused me of attacking him. Referring to his Brentwood facility, which uses rail to ship garbage (something the DEC really likes because it keeps trucks off the roads, helping to limit air pollution — now that they're forcing LI towns to long-haul thousands of tons of trash off-island!).
"I'm just trying to do a good thing," Cholowsky told me. "Why do you have to put a negative spin on this? Why do you want to attack me?"
He said his mining permit condition (prohibiting involvement in the solid waste industry, as per his affidavit) was intended to apply to the operation of East End Recycling only; it wasn't a general prohibition. I pointed out that the language of his affidavit and the special condition of the permit were both very general and made no mention of East End Recycling.
He said:
"The documents I signed with DEC regarding solid waste pertained to the overlap in East End Recycling's permit at the time. That was going to be a waste facility on Calverton Industries site. As it pertained to that and that site. It was not a general prohibition."
So why was it worded to read like a general prohibition?
"That was, those permits and requirements were, uh, you know, through the DEC. We walked through both applications, both permits."
Cholowsky explained his apparently false answers to DEC application questions this way:
"I just answered the way my lawyer told me to."
I have a copy of the criminal court docket from the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York indicating that Michael Cholowsky III pled guilty to one count of "conspiracy to defraud the United States" in 2000.
Why, I asked Cholowsky, did he answer "no" to the question on the DEC application asking if he'd ever been convicted of a crime involving fraud? (The actual language of the application states "crime involving fraud, bribery, perjury, theft or an offense against public administration."
His answer:
"I pled guilty to conspiracy to make extortion payments. That application was reviewed by my attorney, by DEC attorneys, by everybody involved. I answered them as directed."
What he says he pled guilty to doesn't match the criminal court docket. But even so, how could "conspiracy to make extortion payments" not come within the language on the application?
No answer.
Of course, I also asked him how he knew Barbara Blass had been at the DEC reviewing the Calverton Industries file on the morning of Oct. 2? (As I reported in the News-Review this week, the councilwoman FOILed the CI file, spent the morning of Oct. 2 reviewing it, and got a call from Cholowsky within an hour of her return to Riverhead Town Hall that day, in which he told her she needn't FOIL his DEC records if she wanted to know anything about his business. All she had to do was ask him." Ms. Blass told me she felt the purpose of his call was to intimidate her.
When I asked him this question ("How did you know BB had been at DEC looking at his records...") he laughed for quite a while — too long, it seemed. Then he asked me, "How do you know that I knew?" And then he laughed some more. Then he told me that he really didn't know. I asked, "So what are you, psychic?" More laughter. "No, I wouldn't say I'm psychic." Then the laughter stopped and his voice just got sort of cold, and he said: "But I'm not stupid, either."
OK, then.
He called me back again within 10 minutes to make the following comments (this is how I typed what he said as he spoke, cut and pasted from my notes):
"im a little upset
my emjay project is something that im really proud of
a good concept
i got shot down in calverton
found another location
i really went out on a limb
spent a lot of money
it's unchartered territory
the trouble that i got into in 99
that was the most difficult time of my life
the worst 2 yrs of my life
im not trying to do anything wrong
im trying to do good things
i feel like anything i try to do i get attacked
i think i did a good thing
a good service
if we're going to move a million yards of waste off LI
it should be by rail
i think im doing a good thing
im not trying to hurt anybody
i don't see why i have to be dragged thru the mud & beat up
i made a mistake
i paid dearly for it
i feel like i should have a right to move on"
He didn't appreciate my questions, to say the least. He accused me of attacking him. Referring to his Brentwood facility, which uses rail to ship garbage (something the DEC really likes because it keeps trucks off the roads, helping to limit air pollution — now that they're forcing LI towns to long-haul thousands of tons of trash off-island!).
"I'm just trying to do a good thing," Cholowsky told me. "Why do you have to put a negative spin on this? Why do you want to attack me?"
He said his mining permit condition (prohibiting involvement in the solid waste industry, as per his affidavit) was intended to apply to the operation of East End Recycling only; it wasn't a general prohibition. I pointed out that the language of his affidavit and the special condition of the permit were both very general and made no mention of East End Recycling.
He said:
"The documents I signed with DEC regarding solid waste pertained to the overlap in East End Recycling's permit at the time. That was going to be a waste facility on Calverton Industries site. As it pertained to that and that site. It was not a general prohibition."
So why was it worded to read like a general prohibition?
"That was, those permits and requirements were, uh, you know, through the DEC. We walked through both applications, both permits."
Cholowsky explained his apparently false answers to DEC application questions this way:
"I just answered the way my lawyer told me to."
I have a copy of the criminal court docket from the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York indicating that Michael Cholowsky III pled guilty to one count of "conspiracy to defraud the United States" in 2000.
Why, I asked Cholowsky, did he answer "no" to the question on the DEC application asking if he'd ever been convicted of a crime involving fraud? (The actual language of the application states "crime involving fraud, bribery, perjury, theft or an offense against public administration."
His answer:
"I pled guilty to conspiracy to make extortion payments. That application was reviewed by my attorney, by DEC attorneys, by everybody involved. I answered them as directed."
What he says he pled guilty to doesn't match the criminal court docket. But even so, how could "conspiracy to make extortion payments" not come within the language on the application?
No answer.
Of course, I also asked him how he knew Barbara Blass had been at the DEC reviewing the Calverton Industries file on the morning of Oct. 2? (As I reported in the News-Review this week, the councilwoman FOILed the CI file, spent the morning of Oct. 2 reviewing it, and got a call from Cholowsky within an hour of her return to Riverhead Town Hall that day, in which he told her she needn't FOIL his DEC records if she wanted to know anything about his business. All she had to do was ask him." Ms. Blass told me she felt the purpose of his call was to intimidate her.
When I asked him this question ("How did you know BB had been at DEC looking at his records...") he laughed for quite a while — too long, it seemed. Then he asked me, "How do you know that I knew?" And then he laughed some more. Then he told me that he really didn't know. I asked, "So what are you, psychic?" More laughter. "No, I wouldn't say I'm psychic." Then the laughter stopped and his voice just got sort of cold, and he said: "But I'm not stupid, either."
OK, then.
He called me back again within 10 minutes to make the following comments (this is how I typed what he said as he spoke, cut and pasted from my notes):
"im a little upset
my emjay project is something that im really proud of
a good concept
i got shot down in calverton
found another location
i really went out on a limb
spent a lot of money
it's unchartered territory
the trouble that i got into in 99
that was the most difficult time of my life
the worst 2 yrs of my life
im not trying to do anything wrong
im trying to do good things
i feel like anything i try to do i get attacked
i think i did a good thing
a good service
if we're going to move a million yards of waste off LI
it should be by rail
i think im doing a good thing
im not trying to hurt anybody
i don't see why i have to be dragged thru the mud & beat up
i made a mistake
i paid dearly for it
i feel like i should have a right to move on"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
