Comments on: Ypsi Township on Bus, DDA TIF Settled

By: Rod Johnson

Rod Johnson — Fri, 06 Dec 2013 01:33:25 +0000

I was confused by the quotation marks thing too, and thought exactly what Jack thought, until I realized that they represented Sandi quoting the article and not the article quoting Sandi.

By: Alan Goldsmith

Alan Goldsmith — Thu, 05 Dec 2013 15:41:12 +0000

*news

By: Alan Goldsmith

Alan Goldsmith — Thu, 05 Dec 2013 15:40:44 +0000

@9 If a politician is complaining about new coverage, it means a journalist is doing something right. Thank you.

By: Vivienne Armentrout

Vivienne Armentrout — Thu, 05 Dec 2013 00:19:33 +0000

Isn’t it a great comment about the readership of the Chronicle that it comes down to typographical details?

My earlier comment was meant to suggest that sending an electronic copy of a comment to the press is useful to keep such things a matter of public record. I have done this several times, or transmitted a copy later to be included in a comment. It’s good to have all the information before the public when evaluating these issues.

By: Dave Askins

Dave Askins — Wed, 04 Dec 2013 22:49:56 +0000

“… she thought you should have closed the quote of her statement before you started the bracketed comment.”

The section immediately preceding the bracketed comment is not a direct quote, so doesn’t include quotation marks. So I’m not sure what you mean by closing the quote – unless you mean that the bracketed quote could have started its own paragraph.

By: Jack Eaton

Jack Eaton — Wed, 04 Dec 2013 22:43:06 +0000

In comment #4, Sandi Smith said:

“The section within the brackets is editorial. We obviously have a different point of view. You chose to insert your point of view within my statement. I take exception to that.”

I understood that comment to mean that she thought you should have closed the quote of her statement before you started the bracketed comment. If that is what she meant, I agree. It would help separate her statement from your comment.

If she meant that you should not have included your bracketed statement in the article at all, then I disagree. Good journalism includes healthy fact checking.

By: Tom Brandt

Tom Brandt — Wed, 04 Dec 2013 22:12:21 +0000

Re: #7: “The new world of journalism can be confusing for someone conditioned to looking for ‘just the facts.’”

If someone asserts that something is factual when it is not, the reporter knows it is not, the reporter has an obligation to their readers to point that out. “Objectivity” does not serve a journal’s audience if it means mere stenography.

By: Dave Askins

Dave Askins — Wed, 04 Dec 2013 20:38:38 +0000

Sandi Smith writes: “The section within the brackets is editorial.”

The section within square brackets is factually accurate and – by any rational, objective standard – provides important missing context that your remarks at the podium omitted (an omission that worked to the detriment of a naive reader’s fair understanding of the issue). Inclusion of such bracketed material is standard practice here at The Chronicle, as regular readers will be aware.

Sandi Smith writes: “I had 50 copies of both my prepared statement and documentation which I passed out before, during and after my commentary.”

Next time, try including the locally-owned press in your handing-out activity. Or try email. If your complaint is that an important part of your statement was elided in the report, then an easy way to include it would be to paste the text into the comment box.

By: Steve Bean

Steve Bean — Wed, 04 Dec 2013 20:36:20 +0000

Sandi, would you clarify for us how your perspective differs beyond the obvious aspect that Dave noted in his editorial comment? (Yes, it was an editorial comment. That much was clear.)

By: Libby Hunter

Libby Hunter — Wed, 04 Dec 2013 20:36:01 +0000

This is an interesting problem. Because the reporters I’ve known (4 in my own family) felt so strongly about objectivity, I tend to side with Sandi Smith here. I’m very sensitive when I think reporters have “crossed the line.” Maybe too sensitive. Especially now that blogs have changed the way we gather information, and online “papers” such as mlive have paid reporters giving opinions in the comment sections. The new world of journalism can be confusing for someone conditioned to looking for “just the facts.”