Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

ACCURACY IN MEDIA REQUESTED


  • Please log in to reply
26 replies to this topic

#1 S. Ray DeRusse

S. Ray DeRusse

    Newcomer

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 12 posts

Posted 29 October 2007 - 09:12 PM

Several weeks ago, as I am sure many of you did, I read where Kay Granger was organizing a pro-war rally in Washington D. C. to counter the anti-war demonstrators. The fact that this was being openly touted as a pro-war rally was astounding enough. She was joined in this demonstration-news conference by Kay Bailey and John Cornyn. Which is what you would expect of individuals subsidized by the military machine. A newspaper article by Maria Recio (9-19-07, page 10A), quoted Ms. Granger as saying,

" Rep. Kay Granger, R-Fort Worth, a primary organizer of the event, said she was motivated by her visits to the nearly 50 families in her district who had lost sons in the war. "Every family without a single exception, told me "he believed in what we were doing," she said. Granger said it was important to show the nation and Congress that there is support for U.S. policy in Iraq. "

So I did little fact checking and informed Ms. Recio thusly ;

There is absolutely no way Ms. Granger could have contacted nearly 50 families from her District, with casualties in Iraq because the numbers don't add up.

A close look at her district boundaries for Fort Worth shows her boundary ends in the middle of the densely populated city at I-35. Given that, we can attribute 50 percent of the FW casualties to her district and the
other 50 percent to the adjoining district. So of the listed 17 casualties for Fort Worth we can give her 9 casualties.

The other major towns or cities in her District report the following.

Benbrook, TX Springer II, Lance C. Specialist 23-Mar-2007 (1 death)
Haltom City, TX (0)
Watauga, TX (0)
Weatherford, TX (0)
White Settlement, TX (0)

Subtotal, including from Fort Worth at her boundary (10)
Margin of error at ~10% 1
Plus another ~10% for rural casualties, 1

Grand Total-------------------------------------------------- 12

CONCLUSION.

Ms. Granger exaggerated the numbers in an emotional appeal to the lowest common denominator for the purpose of whipping up a lynch mob mentality. Even if you give her all FW casualties (outside of her District) it comes to 12+8=20. The numbers don't add up to anywhere near 50 for her district.

Cordially,
S. Ray DeRusse
www.bccmeteorites.com






#2 safly

safly

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,069 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:ALAMO!
  • Interests:Restaurants. Golf. Garlic. FIESTA. Beer ME.

Posted 29 October 2007 - 11:29 PM

I'll give her credit for saying NEARLY.

Most politicians do that just to say that they were in approx. with or to. Little fib here and there, to YES paint quite a picture.

Kuddos on the effort, and NO ONE should ever doubt or take for granted the call of duty by our service MEN and WOMEN.

But one can assume she was going for our fallen heroes' first and second families, possible step-families too. Possible. But still would not ad up to 50, possibly NEARLY though.

Lack of research and oversight here by the press is becoming the norm. When yo gotta run a story, the details often get CLUSTER #@$%*. So it makes little difference that a politician is OVER EXAGGERATING in making a point. It's a shame, but it sells.

Bottomline is that both the paper and Rep. Granger do owe some sort of apology if the families of the fallen request so. IMO, the paper does owe the public an apology. This is beyond a fact error, misprint or typo.

Ms. Recio just got OWNED.
COWTOWN! Get your TIP ON!
www.iheartfw.com

#3 Buck

Buck

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 397 posts

Posted 01 November 2007 - 06:57 AM

Some people always wish they were editors.

I think it's reasonable that Kay has 50 family members in her district. Maybe she said family members, or maybe she said families. Either way, it's an innocent oversight.


#4 Tony

Tony

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 57 posts
  • Location:Ryan Place neighborhood - Central FW

Posted 01 November 2007 - 07:58 AM


(Imagine this statement in President Clinton's raspy voice)

It all depends on what you mean by the word "families." Do you mean families as in everyone on every side related to the service member, or do you mean families as in my immediate family, my parents and siblings, my inlaws, my paternal grandparent's family, my maternal grandparent's family, my step-parent's family, my skip-family (a term we use in my family for the branch that is no blood relation, but nontheless family because us siblings share a bond but are separated by a divorce, a remarriage and new kids from a "skip" couple)?

It is conceivable to say one service member who dies in combat could have as many as seven or more families who are affected, maybe more if you count families who are simply close friends or even families of a church congregation who were very close to that service member.

So I would challenge you to call each of those service members' families in one day, no, say about three hours, and find out exactly how many "families" were affected by each service members' death. (Then in that process would have to play God and decide whether if someone was truthful when they told you they were close to the service member who died. Because if you knew (by what means I don't know) they were lying you couldn't count them in the number of families.) Clearly, there are some things that are unreasonable to truth-test in such a short news cycle.

But I certainly applaud your critical thinking. And we should never take at face value anything anyone says. If your momma tells you she loves you, you should check it out.

#5 pelligrini

pelligrini

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 370 posts

Posted 01 November 2007 - 09:18 AM

I thought the same as Tony at first. Family could mean all sorts of family members.

But the quote was "she was motivated by her visits to the nearly 50 families in her district who had lost sons in the war." That's pretty specific.

Erik France


#6 jmilam

jmilam

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 99 posts

Posted 01 November 2007 - 09:36 AM

You have to remember, that many of the service men actually have their home town listed as some other town than their parents, as they may be national guard, reserves, etc, but their parents live in the metroplex.

#7 safly

safly

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,069 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:ALAMO!
  • Interests:Restaurants. Golf. Garlic. FIESTA. Beer ME.

Posted 01 November 2007 - 01:01 PM

All you Johnny Come Lately's I already made those points last month.

The real story SHOULD BE what will Granger promise for those who served and are wounded from battle, upon their return HOME. It's gonna be a pretty MONUMENTALLY sobering picture when they do return, but I will be proud of each and every one of them none the less, and celebrate their call to duty.

I say we push for an important memorial to be placed in Gen. Worth Square or near the TC Courthouse in DTFW. It's about time we honor our service men and women from wars past in a manner that we can all be proud to share with the world. Granger should be spearheading an effort to POSSIBLY convert all or most of our FWCCenter into a military honor hall or museum. I say why not with LHM, Raytheon, Textron and Bell as our backyard defense buddies.

Your thoughts???
COWTOWN! Get your TIP ON!
www.iheartfw.com

#8 S. Ray DeRusse

S. Ray DeRusse

    Newcomer

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 12 posts

Posted 02 November 2007 - 07:21 PM

QUOTE(safly @ Nov 1 2007, 01:01 PM) View Post

All you Johnny Come Lately's I already made those points last month.

The real story SHOULD BE what will Granger promise for those who served and are wounded from battle, upon their return HOME. It's gonna be a pretty MONUMENTALLY sobering picture when they do return, but I will be proud of each and every one of them none the less, and celebrate their call to duty.

I say we push for an important memorial to be placed in Gen. Worth Square or near the TC Courthouse in DTFW. It's about time we honor our service men and women from wars past in a manner that we can all be proud to share with the world. Granger should be spearheading an effort to POSSIBLY convert all or most of our FWCCenter into a military honor hall or museum. I say why not with LHM, Raytheon, Textron and Bell as our backyard defense buddies.

Your thoughts???



Hi.

While I consider this suggestion to be a laudable and noble gesture, it's not going to happen the way you laid it out. It doesn't make political or economic sense for the MilDef Contractors to enter into such a venture. They're in the business of making weapons for chaos, murder, and mayhem. A contractor funded memorial would be tantamount to admitting defeat and you can see the Veterans coming out with T-shirts, " I lost my left leg and four fingers in Iraq and all I got was this memorial and this lousy T-shirt".
Furthermore, since this is "national participant conflict" it should be located on federal property?

Honestly, this suggestion makes about as much sense as telling Kay Granger, "If you're really interested in the economic vitality of Fort Worth and quality of life for all, then you should have no trouble locating the Trinity River Development in a depressed area with vacant land, buildings, and shopping centers.......like..... say.....East Berry St. and Riverside Drive? Correct?

Cordially,
S. Ray DeRusse
www.bccmeteorites.com






#9 AndyN

AndyN

    Skyscraper Member

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,279 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Downtown Fort Worth

Posted 03 November 2007 - 12:06 AM

You know, this website has always seemed to me to be more about local level politics and architecture than national or international affairs. It seems to me that the whole right vs. left, anti-war vs. pro-war things have been better left to other websites and are beyond what the owner of this website intended for this board. I have participated on other forums where partisan politics were allowed, in spite of the fact that it had nothing to do with the purpose of the board, and it did nothing but degrade the level of conversation and chase off people of all political persuasions to the detriment of the forum as a whole. If I'm wrong in thinking this, the moderators or forum owner are welcome to send me an email to shut up. It is a crazy thing where people are so jaded they think of the world in absolutes. Black or white. Right and left. Surely there is a political forum where this topic is better suited.

My $0.02.
Www.fortwortharchitecture.com

#10 safly

safly

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,069 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:ALAMO!
  • Interests:Restaurants. Golf. Garlic. FIESTA. Beer ME.

Posted 03 November 2007 - 03:00 PM

QUOTE(S. Ray DeRusse @ Nov 2 2007, 08:21 PM) View Post

QUOTE(safly @ Nov 1 2007, 01:01 PM) View Post

All you Johnny Come Lately's I already made those points last month.

The real story SHOULD BE what will Granger promise for those who served and are wounded from battle, upon their return HOME. It's gonna be a pretty MONUMENTALLY sobering picture when they do return, but I will be proud of each and every one of them none the less, and celebrate their call to duty.

I say we push for an important memorial to be placed in Gen. Worth Square or near the TC Courthouse in DTFW. It's about time we honor our service men and women from wars past in a manner that we can all be proud to share with the world. Granger should be spearheading an effort to POSSIBLY convert all or most of our FWCCenter into a military honor hall or museum. I say why not with LHM, Raytheon, Textron and Bell as our backyard defense buddies.

Your thoughts???



Hi.

While I consider this suggestion to be a laudable and noble gesture, it's not going to happen the way you laid it out. It doesn't make political or economic sense for the MilDef Contractors to enter into such a venture. They're in the business of making weapons for chaos, murder, and mayhem. A contractor funded memorial would be tantamount to admitting defeat and you can see the Veterans coming out with T-shirts, " I lost my left leg and four fingers in Iraq and all I got was this memorial and this lousy T-shirt".
Furthermore, since this is "national participant conflict" it should be located on federal property?

Honestly, this suggestion makes about as much sense as telling Kay Granger, "If you're really interested in the economic vitality of Fort Worth and quality of life for all, then you should have no trouble locating the Trinity River Development in a depressed area with vacant land, buildings, and shopping centers.......like..... say.....East Berry St. and Riverside Drive? Correct?

Cordially,
S. Ray DeRusse
www.bccmeteorites.com



Well from looking back at those old B&W's, their USED to be some very noble servicemen parades along our very streets of DTFW. This has no political or partisan merit, it's just a MEMORIAL for those who dedicated their lives through service to protect our FREEDOMS both locally and nationally.

My suggestions were intended as a wonderful solution to your Granger misreporting or misrepresentation. This is how she and her party would correct themselves IF NEEDED. And as a resident of FW, I feel the need of such a MEMORIAL to be PROMINENTLY DISPLAYED in the DTFW district for all those RESIDING AND VISITING to see just how important the service of those MEN and WOMEN mean to our community. That's all.

This and several other battles and conflicts were a matter of both a local and national scale affiliation or participation. As in it hits our towns DIRECTLY. A memorial would be a wonderful start to funding or raising awareness of the very tragedies and misfortunes associated with many of our veterans returning HOME. Perhaps a VETERAN'S MEMORIAL fundraiser concert or festival can be planned near the site every year.

Good discussion, welcome to move this topic elsewhere or just refuse to view or participate in it. How very democratic.

My 2 pesos.
COWTOWN! Get your TIP ON!
www.iheartfw.com

#11 S. Ray DeRusse

S. Ray DeRusse

    Newcomer

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 12 posts

Posted 15 November 2007 - 10:14 PM

QUOTE(AndyN @ Nov 3 2007, 12:06 AM) View Post

You know, this website has always seemed to me to be more about local level politics and architecture than national or international affairs. It seems to me that the whole right vs. left, anti-war vs. pro-war things have been better left to other websites and are beyond what the owner of this website intended for this board. I have participated on other forums where partisan politics were allowed, in spite of the fact that it had nothing to do with the purpose of the board, and it did nothing but degrade the level of conversation and chase off people of all political persuasions to the detriment of the forum as a whole. If I'm wrong in thinking this, the moderators or forum owner are welcome to send me an email to shut up. It is a crazy thing where people are so jaded they think of the world in absolutes. Black or white. Right and left. Surely there is a political forum where this topic is better suited.

My $0.02.



Hi Andy. May I call you Andy? You may call me Ray if you like. Well, I must say I was going to post on the pot holes on our streets and public spaces but I didn't know if I should do that on the city issues or transportation section? There is a large pot hole that desperately needs filling in near the Convention Center. It is a Texas size pothole and some people mistake it for and call it a water garden. But the hideous thing is nothing more than a really large pothole with broken plumbing. Along with my classmates, I remember studying this monstrosity during my Architecture classes at UT, prior to obtaining my BSARCH with an emphasis in CIRP-URBD. I wish I could be excited about Architecture and I am to some degree but unfortunately we live in a time where really bad things are happening out there. Here we have a Vietnam Veteran named David Antoon, who writes at this link:

http://www.truthdig....er_from_within/

"In April of 2004, my son, after receiving a coveted appointment to the United States Air Force Academy, asked me to accompany him to the orientation for new appointees. This 24-hour visceral event changed my life forever, and crushed my son’s lifelong dream of following in my footsteps.

The orientation began with a one-hour “warrior” rant to appointees and parents by the commandant of cadets, Brig. Gen. Johnny Weida. The fact that the word warrior had replaced leadership was a signal of what was to follow. I later learned that cadets, to determine when a new record was established, had created a game in which warrior was counted in each speech Weida gave.

My son and I then made our way to the modernist aluminum chapel, where I expected to hear a welcome from one or two Air Force chaplains offering counsel, support and an open-door policy for any spiritual or pastoral needs of these future cadets. In 1966, the academy had six gray-haired chaplains: three mainline Protestants, two priests and one rabbi. Any cadet, regardless of religious affiliation, was welcome to see any one of these chaplains, who were reminiscent of Father Francis Mulcahy of “MASH” fame.

Instead, my son’s orientation became an opportunity for the academy to aggressively proselytize this next crop of cadets. Maj. Warren Watties led a group of 10 young, exclusively evangelical chaplains who stood shoulder to shoulder. He proudly stated that half of the cadets attended Bible studies on Monday nights in the dormitories and he hoped to increase this number from those in his audience who were about to join their ranks. This “invitation” was followed with hallelujahs and amens by the evangelical clergy. I later learned from Air Force Academy chaplain MeLinda Morton, a Lutheran who was forced to observe from the choir loft, that no priest, rabbi or mainline Protestant had been permitted to participate.

........................
...................................

In the following weeks, a uniformed Army Maj. Gen. William Boykin began sharing his Christian supremacist views from church pulpits around the country, declaring that he was “God’s Warrior” and that “America is a Christian nation.” He demeaned the entire Muslim world by stating that his God was bigger than a Muslim warlord’s god and that the Muslim’s god “was an idol.” He received little more than a token slap on the wrist. At the time, Joseph Schmitz, then the Department of Defense inspector general (Schmitz is currently the chief operating officer of Blackwater International), found that Boykin had committed no ethics violations.
.......................

So you see Andy, and if you read the entire article, we have big big problems. We are in a big mess with our overseas aggression to the extent that I personally cannot even concentrate on such trvialities as design, as many others cannot. The greedy racist frauds have us in a huge mess. And they know who they are. You should do what I did. As a Texan, I recently issued a worldwide apology on TRUTHDIG for this nutty administration while simultaneously indicating I did not vote for these GRF's and I have no idea how they got there.


Cordially,
S. Ray DeRusse
www.bccmeteorites.com







#12 AndyN

AndyN

    Skyscraper Member

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,279 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Downtown Fort Worth

Posted 15 November 2007 - 11:37 PM

I appreciate the fact that you are passionate about your beliefs and I certainly appreciate the fact that you were civil in your reply. I can't say I agree with you on everything and I can't say I disagree with you on everything. I am also passionate in my beliefs and I ask for the avoidance here of these weighty national issues that we have thrust upon us because I have seen other forums on which the focus was irrelevant to national politics fall apart because of all the passionate opinions.

It's not my forum so I have no control over the content. I can only stop participating if the level of discussion lowers to the rhetorical sparring level of Rush Limbaugh, James Carville, Carl Rove, and Al Franken.

It is more about me than you because I can restrain myself only so much letting contrary political ideology go unanswered before I start responding in kind to your posts and befoul what has heretofore been a local issues kind of place. I find it hard to believe that we will convince each other of the merits of our respective arguments and it can do nothing but poison the atmoshpere.

Just a simple request, nothing else.
Www.fortwortharchitecture.com

#13 safly

safly

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,069 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:ALAMO!
  • Interests:Restaurants. Golf. Garlic. FIESTA. Beer ME.

Posted 15 November 2007 - 11:44 PM

WOAH!

I didn't think that this was going into THAT direction, but I feel for anyone having to be subjected to such inhospitable acts. I just thought that THE CITY could help LEAD private investors and corp. businesses into a wonderful opportunity to encase the very VALUES of PATRIOTISM into what would amount to an everlasting MEMORIAL for those who answered the call to DUTY. This does not need to be federally funded or AUTHORIZED, but rather importantly it would make a wonderful GIFT and statement of how much FORT WORTH cares about those service MEN and WOMEN. And one would hope that the likes of LHM, BELL,BNSF, XTO and countless other corp. representatives would foster such a noble cause and LEAD THE WAY.

I too fear the worst overseas and down in C.America, but we cannot forget those who NEVER forgot us. Who knows, maybe an annual homegrown memorial concert will help benefit our local VA system for medical care, hospitals, jobs and homes that are so greatly needed. Could easily be 10 times bigger than the Arts Festival. Easily. This inspiration comes from what Denzel Washington did in SA at the Veteran's Hospital down there. Amazing, Hopeful and Inspiring.
COWTOWN! Get your TIP ON!
www.iheartfw.com

#14 John T Roberts

John T Roberts

    Administrator

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,363 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Fort Worth
  • Interests:Architecture, Photography, Bicycling, Historic Preservation

Posted 16 November 2007 - 09:01 AM

I didn't speak up before because I thought that the thread would quieten down on its own. Now, I feel the need to respond. Although there are no official rules against posting these types of issues on the board, this is the Fort Worth Forum. I would prefer that we keep our topics away from national issues and only focus on things that affect us here locally. Other than Andy, I don't know how the others feel, but this is a local board, with the emphasis on local architecture, planning, and urban design.

I actually prefer politics to stay off of this board, as well, but I decided to let the last District 9 Election topic have its place on the forum because a City Council Member resigned in the middle of the term, and two of the six people that ran for the office are active members of this forum.

#15 Tony

Tony

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 57 posts
  • Location:Ryan Place neighborhood - Central FW

Posted 16 November 2007 - 10:05 AM


John: I think the original poster of this thread raised a valid public concern about the media being diligent in vetting statements made by our political representatives. As a news reporter (I cover FW City Hall for the Star-T), I know there is always quite a bit that goes into pulling together a news story on deadline for the rapid cycle that is the news day. And to be honest, sometimes the sources who we quote limit their availability and are not fond of follow-up questions. Sometimes it can take days, weeks to straighten out a misstatement.

It's all a big game for politicos who constantly try to use the media, and in subsequent breaths criticize the media. I think the Barry Bonds story is a great example of how the "spin doctors" fire off at the media. Bonds himself accused Bob Costas (who has an HBO sports show) of practicing "irresponsible journalism" for bringing a BALCO chemist on his show. That chemist said Bonds and Gary Sheffield took Steroids. So, as you can see, Bonds didn't attack what the chemist said but instead tried to shoot the messenger. It's the same thing I witnessed in years of covering criminal courts. Trial attorneys would counter a witness' damaging testimony by attacking that witness' credibilty, not necessarily the testimony.

Anyway, gonna wrap this rant up ... a lot of media experts suggest that corporate ownership of newspapers, shrinking newsrooms, and alternative news formats such as blogs will diminish the power of the media so that, one day, no one will have the clout to hold our officeholders accountable for statements they make. Good luck then trying to get a U.S. Representative or Senator to call you, John Doe, back with real answers.



#16 Fort Worthology

Fort Worthology

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,126 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Portland, OR

Posted 16 November 2007 - 11:47 AM

QUOTE(S. Ray DeRusse @ Nov 15 2007, 10:14 PM) View Post

There is a large pot hole that desperately needs filling in near the Convention Center. It is a Texas size pothole and some people mistake it for and call it a water garden. But the hideous thing is nothing more than a really large pothole with broken plumbing.


This has nothing at all to do with the weird political stuff (for the record, I'd like to see national-type political stuff not appear on the FWF), but I just have to respond...

I can't agree on that. Despite being from the '70s (an era when most things in the world turned to "suck," particularly in architecture and urban design), the Water Gardens are a remarkable, beautiful work of public art, thanks to Phillip Johnson's talent rising above the Hee-Haw hippie concrete crap of that decade. There is nothing else quite like them in the world, and I would hope that most citizens of the Panther City are like me and are proud to have them in our city.

--

Kara B.

 


#17 bhudson

bhudson

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 230 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 16 November 2007 - 12:24 PM

I think the best response in this case, as John intoned, is none.

#18 safly

safly

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,069 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:ALAMO!
  • Interests:Restaurants. Golf. Garlic. FIESTA. Beer ME.

Posted 16 November 2007 - 01:32 PM

QUOTE(Tony @ Nov 16 2007, 10:05 AM) View Post

John: I think the original poster of this thread raised a valid public concern about the media being diligent in vetting statements made by our political representatives. As a news reporter (I cover FW City Hall for the Star-T), I know there is always quite a bit that goes into pulling together a news story on deadline for the rapid cycle that is the news day. And to be honest, sometimes the sources who we quote limit their availability and are not fond of follow-up questions. Sometimes it can take days, weeks to straighten out a misstatement.

It's all a big game for politicos who constantly try to use the media, and .........

Anyway, gonna wrap this rant up ... a lot of media experts suggest that corporate ownership of newspapers, shrinking newsrooms, and alternative news formats such as blogs will diminish the power of the media so that, one day, no one will have the clout to hold our officeholders accountable for statements they make. Good luck then trying to get a U.S. Representative or Senator to call you, John Doe, back with real answers.


I say politicians should embrace the power of the internet and have a blogging site, and not one campaign site that is monitored or auto-replied by some official (this or that) within their group. I get tired of Barack Obama's OFFICIAL replier sending me more crap every day from them to my email address. I want to speak or communicate with Barack, not some unknown, and not make a $25 political contribution.

Political /personal blogging or WEB-inars or WEB-isodes is the BEST way to create great rapport with your constituents or prospect voters. Then they can answer those comments DIRECTLY. Not have some stupid CNN FRAMED politcal debate SELECT discussion/promo in Las Vegas to shove down our throats, brought to you by GMC.

I PERSONALLY (SAFLY) INVITE any and all political candidates to speak their mind and truth RIGHT HERE on the FWForum!

COWTOWN! Get your TIP ON!
www.iheartfw.com

#19 AndyN

AndyN

    Skyscraper Member

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,279 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Downtown Fort Worth

Posted 17 November 2007 - 02:52 AM

I really don't have a problem with the core of S. Ray's premise, but it just seemed phrased a little too partisan for calm discussion.

Safly, I would hazard to guess (and Tony can correct me if I'm wrong) that Tony's mere presence here is evidence of the StarTelegram's acknowledgement of the "new media"/internet. I imagine if I had a paper and didn't want my employees out and about on local forums, I would definitely have a policy about it and require the likes of Bud Kennedy and J.R. Labbe to skulk around in anonymity. I think the very fact that Tony acknowledges who he is reflects a loosening of McClatchy policy and an attempt on their part to grab hold of the changing world of reporting/news.

As for the forum owner's desire for limited political discourse, I will certainly take it into consideration in future posts where I may be inclined to push it too far. If I am so shaken up by national political events, why would I be here posting about it on an architectural and planning website?
Www.fortwortharchitecture.com

#20 safly

safly

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,069 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:ALAMO!
  • Interests:Restaurants. Golf. Garlic. FIESTA. Beer ME.

Posted 17 November 2007 - 04:09 PM

In case you hadn't noticed Andy. This is the FW Forum, a mere web portal from the existing Fort Worth Architecture.Com domain. This is a community site and it has grown exponentially as a community site, thanks in part to the originators independent direction and valuable interpretation toward an open discussion policy, with multiple categories to suffice just about any visitor. THAT is the beauty of this site and if you care not to participate in this discussion or that, then simply do not or do so. How democratic.

This topic in particular does have local merit in dealing with a very LOCAL political representative. Then there is the issue with press, and thanks in part to Tony, the FWST has now been included as an added layer of discussion. Lots of layering going on, and that is wonderful for debate and archives sake.

By having Tony include himself into these talks, DOES NOT FULLY capture the sense that the FWST (as a whole) will include or has embraced our discussions here as a tool for FREE and OPEN SPEECH, any more evident than I as a young hispanic contributor with this web portal, creates an atmosphere that ALL hispanics are embracing this FORUM as well. But to include oneself is definitely a STEP TOWARDS THAT PROGRESS.

Now I applaud Tony and other FWST editors and writers for their involvement with this site, but it does not create IMO a full inclusion by FWST as a whole. What EXACTLY has Tony included to this FORUM (exception of post #15) other than a review or RELEASE of his news articles or to just state that he is Tony and works for or contributes to the FWST??? Especially with upper to mid level management at FWST who are focused on the bottomline, it is more evident that the newspaper business is just that, BUSINESS. And many consider FW a one newspaper kinda town. In conclusion, the FWST as an example has their version of online "FORUM" discussion and we have ours. I prefer this one.
COWTOWN! Get your TIP ON!
www.iheartfw.com

#21 JBB

JBB

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,420 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Dirty suburbs

Posted 17 November 2007 - 10:40 PM

I think that's an incredibly unfair characterization of Tony's posts. Not everyone has time to light the forum on fire with barely readable, off-topic diatribes.

#22 safly

safly

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,069 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:ALAMO!
  • Interests:Restaurants. Golf. Garlic. FIESTA. Beer ME.

Posted 18 November 2007 - 12:41 AM

QUOTE

Now I applaud Tony and other FWST editors and writers for their involvement with this site, but it does not create IMO a full inclusion by FWST as a whole.


Apology if I offend, but what incredibly unfair characterization???

Ok, I'll include post #4, there.
COWTOWN! Get your TIP ON!
www.iheartfw.com

#23 JBB

JBB

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,420 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Dirty suburbs

Posted 18 November 2007 - 05:49 PM

QUOTE
other than a review or RELEASE of his news articles or to just state that he is Tony and works for or contributes to the FWST???


Okay, what should he be contributing to the forum other than that?

It could be worse. At least he's not posting the false information about the D9 election that I keep finding a way to post. smile.gif

#24 Tony

Tony

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 57 posts
  • Location:Ryan Place neighborhood - Central FW

Posted 19 November 2007 - 11:36 AM

SAFLY: I think what I like most about this site is that it provides well-informed, insightful dialogue (well, mostly) among my fellow FW residents, who care deeply about the community in which they live. I am a homeowner (Ryan Place) and have my first child on the way. I think I have as much at stake in our community as any other poster. Your observations about my posts are actually quite accurate. I don't inject as much opinion here as most of y'all, and that's because of what I do. If that makes me a second-class contributor here, I can live with that, because I really take pride in my profession (and like the paycheck) and would hate for anyone in the publics with which I work to view me as biased. Sure, I have my own personal opinions and observations, but I probably will keep many to myself on forums such as this. There has been some opportunity to interact with y'all beyond just posting stories relevant to the discussion at hand. I just enjoy reading the discussion and participating whenever I can, in whatever capacity I can allow myself. rolleyes.gif

#25 safly

safly

    Skyscraper Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,069 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:ALAMO!
  • Interests:Restaurants. Golf. Garlic. FIESTA. Beer ME.

Posted 19 November 2007 - 01:44 PM

Well put TONY, and I have COMPLETELY understood that exact position taken by you from the beginning. Though the approach that FWST is engaged with our FWForum talks on our level is in IMO quite out of touch with the reality. I ALWAYS encourage others to partake in the process.

Advice if I my: Anonymity can have it's "advantages" too. wink.gif


COWTOWN! Get your TIP ON!
www.iheartfw.com

#26 Birdland in Handley

Birdland in Handley

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 276 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:birdland in handley
  • Interests:Architecture (deco, love that we still have a lot! endangered googie, all other historic) FTW's good photography reputation (Blessed Carter Collection) city parks, local history, vegetarian options, green living.

Posted 22 March 2008 - 03:30 AM

Oh dear. . . there are zilliions of political sites around. Fort Worth Forurmer's --you're so net savvy, you know you can habituate other forums to do your political insights. Huffpo rules! I'm lefty, so I reply/comment there. If I want to preach to converted liberal buddies, I go to Fanatical Apathy and a couple of other sites.
There's no reason to object to brief injections of politics here, especially when they touch on what's really happening in FW. But people who want to write in-depth stuff should stick to FW Forum topics.
"twill become more difficult, as this is an election year eek.gif eek.gif

#27 ghughes

ghughes

    Senior Member

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 314 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:University West

Posted 27 March 2008 - 05:54 AM

Birdland: Good point. I moved the two posts to which you refer off to the miscellaneous section where I created an "election" section: http://www.fortworth...?showtopic=2954




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users