elsa

Rapist

Plenty of sex offenders live in the area where The Post and Courier circulates. As a rule, the paper reports on them if there is a problem.

Thursday's and Friday's papers both had front-page stories about a convicted rapist and murderer who moved to Charleston after serving 15 years in a German prison. The former soldier confessed to striking a 17-year-old woman over the head with a hammer and raping her. He also was convicted of attacking and raping three other women.

The first story told readers who he was, what crimes he committed and where he was living. The second story told readers that he had been evicted from the address published Thursday, but the paper was not able to get information about where he had moved.

Editors debated the appropriateness of a third story telling readers where he lives. The paper isn't in the business of dogging someone like this. But readers probably want to know where he is living.
This is an unusual case. In this country, someone with his record would likely remain in jail. Since the paper published the first two stories, I think readers deserve a brief third one telling them his location.

Victims

A brief crime story ("Cab driver pursues man after robbery") in Tuesday's paper has raised an ethical question for the paper.

The story reported that a cab driver in North Charleston who was robbed at gunpoint pursued his assailant and caught him. The assailant has been arrested. The story named the suspect and the victim.

Ordinarily, stories do not name the victim in routine crimes. This time, editors thought it made sense. The cab driver was more than a victim. In some people's eyes, he became heroic by pursuing his assailant.

When he saw his name in the paper, the cab driver was dismayed. He fears retribution by the assailant or his  friends. 

The information came from a police report. The cab driver could  not be reached for comment. Had he been, and if he had requested his name be withheld, the reporter would have agreed. That conversation didn't take place.

This morning, I was invited to meet with a group of men who get together for coffee and converation at  Alhambra Hall in Mount Pleasant . I asked them what they thought. Several said the paper should not have published the man's name. We should have known that doing so could cause him problems.

One, however, had a different view. He said the paper did the right thing. For one thing, the suspect and his buddies are probably  not newspaper readers. For another, the assailant, in all likelihood, knew the cab driver's name as it is posted in his cab. And finally, the information is easily accessible to the public. Someone who wants that information can find it out.

Saying "goodbye"

Herb Frazier resigned from The Post and Courier to pursue new interests after working here 18 years. His leaving has sparked a debate among some staffers. The question? Should the newspaper write a story about his resignation?

Running columnist David Quick talked about Herb in a column this week. That worked nicely because Herb was, in addition to a journalist, a running enthusiast, and a column reflects the writer's personal interests and perspectives.

But one staff writer was unhappy that the paper didn't write a news story about Herb's leaving. He is an award-winning journalist and he is a heck of a nice fellow. He contended that Herb deserved a story.

I'm a Herb Frazier fan, but I disagree. If Herb had been a regular columnist with a public persona, I'd agree that readers would need to know why his column had disappeared. He was not. The paper does not write about routine resignations in other businesses. Why should it treat The Post and Courier staff differently?

When the paper's staffers win awards, they are reported in the paper with more prominence than many other professional awards won by real estate salespeople or design firms. Double standard? I don't think so. It is helpful to readers of the paper to know about these awards so they can assess the professionalism of the paper.

Swim meet

The big-hearted folks in the Sports Department of The Post and Courier were feeling warm and fuzzy. They had published photos and a story about the city swim meet at the Jewish Community Center. They were envisioning how happy thousands of parents and children would be to have the event covered. They are even setting aside extra space to publish full results in upcoming Sunday editions of the paper.

Then came the email. The paper should be "ashamed." It needed "a little journalism." Its coverage was "a proverbial belly flop." The story should have reported on inadequacies in the execution of the meet instead of the winning swimmers.

Huh? Really?

Let's be honest. The paper covers the swim meet not because it is a sports event on par with the ACC Tournament or the Family Circle tennis championship. It is a community event involving almost a thousand children and probably twice that number of parents. Readers like to see photos of children they know and see swimmers' names. I doubt they expect to see an analysis of how smoothly the event was managed. And I really don't know how you can report on a swim meet without reporting on who won.

Am I (sorry about this) all wet here?

Expletive not deleted

In the context of world crises, a dilemma facing news media this week seems more amusing than anything else. But it is a dilemma nevertheless.

At lunch Monday during the Group of Eight conference in St. Petersburg, Russia, President Bush told British Prime Minister Tony Blair, "What they need to do is get Syria to get Hezbollah to stop doing this s--- and it's over." Bush did not know a microphone at the table was turned on.

The question was not whether to report the story. It was a seemingly frank exchange between two world powers on a subject of grave importance.

The question was how to report his salty language. The Post and Courier handled it as you see it here. According to USA Today, different media handled it differently: CNN broadcast and posted the unedited video. The New York Times and The Washington Post reported the word in the paper and in Web stories. On CBS, NBC, ABC, Fox News and MSNBC the word was excised in videos and Web stories. USA Today, however, removed the word in stories, but posted the audio clip along with a warning on its Website.

Two schools of thought: One says this word is part of everyday language, like it or not. It's not going to shock many. The other says it was not necessary to use the offensive word to get the information to readers, so why do so?

In the print media, I think it worked just fine using "s---." What about you?

Metro columnist

Several times in recent weeks, The Post and Courier has been criticized by readers saying 1A stories have been handled too playfully. They say the treatment has cheapened the story. They also say the stories should have been presented as columns, not news stories. The difference is that a columnist often injects himself or his perspective in his writing.  Generally, a news reporter does not.

The comments have raised an issue for me: Does The Post and Courier need a metro columnist? If so, what would you want to see in one?

Crime reporting

An indignant reader contacted The Post and Courier Monday morning. He wanted to know why the paper had not published an account of a shooting that occurred early Saturday morning. Was it a coverup by the paper? Was it a coverup by the police? Was it a coverup by nearby businesses? The victim was an acquaintance of the reader's, and the reader wanted the paper to come clean.

It turns out that the shooting occurred Saturday morning at 1:30 a.m. -- after Saturday's paper had been put to bed. It turns out the incident report was filed late, so the paper's police reporters didn't know about the incident to report on it in Sunday's or Monday's paper. But thanks to this reader, they were able to track down the information and publish it in Tuesday's paper.

The irony here is that the story didn't turn out the way the reader had expected it would. The victim was with a friend who told police he had been trying to buy some marijuana when the attack occurred. Later, he recanted that statement saying he buys marijuana in safer neighborhoods. The paper's story cited that report.

The reader who provided the paper with the tip? He was gracious enough to credit the newspaper for pursuing the story, but he was kicking himself for the outcome. His acquaintances didn't look like the Boy Scouts he had believed them to be.

To laugh or not to laugh

Brian Hicks is a funny man, and he has a way of finding the humor in the world around him. Last week, he was asked by an editor to go to Rock Hill, SC, and write a story for The Post and Courier about why Gregg Marshall would opt to stay there instead of accepting a job as basketball coach at the College of Charleston. Rock Hill? Really?

Brian did what he was asked. He reported on the Catawba Indian bingo parlor. He reported on Rock Hill's statues touting Rock Hill as a "functional city." He compared Rock Hill's "Come See Me" festival with Charleston's Spoleto Festival. He did it tongue-in-cheek, thinking he was making as much fun of Charleston's haughtiness as he was of Rock Hill's foibles.

When the story appeared on the front page, the outcry was loud and strident. People thought it was unkind, arrogant and inappropriate. They wrote me. They wrote Brian. They wrote the editor.

The editor of The Herald in Rock Hill saw a good controversy and published Brian's story along with his own response taking a few swipes at Charleston. The Post and Courier saw a good controversy and published his response for Lowcountry readers to see.

After the initial outcry, I've heard from readers that they really enjoyed the exchange. One man said, "It's just good, clean fun."

Here's my question: Is it appropriate, once in a while, to use some 1A space for some humor -- particularly when it has a link to something in the news? I think some variety is a good thing, and I know I need a reason to laugh. But I recognize that people who are accustomed to finding substantive news on 1A can be confused by it.