Monday, March 26, 2007

NewsBusters on Selena Roberts

A thorough-going critique of Selena Roberts' Sunday screed in NewsBusters, which notes that Roberts is "apparently angling to become the Amanda Marcotte of the New York Times."

Hat tip: G.I.

56 comments:

Deklan Singh said...

Selena Roberts' nonsense is being rerun in hack rags all over the country. Read it myself, last night in the San Diego Tribune.

Ms. Roberts is the seriously selfrighteous incarnation of Stephen Colbert. All of her views must be true because she feels them to be true. According to her, we treat the "black basketball players and football behemoths" different from the lacrosse pipeline to Wall Street. Of course, she offers no example of when we faulted any basketball or football players for having a party with a couple of strippers, who they subsequently taunted for putting on a poor performance. However, she feels like something akin to that has happened. So, it is right to assert it (instert rolling-eye emoticon here). Of course, she offers no explanation for why we should fault the lax players for doing absolutely nothing that was illegal. She feels like we should fault the players because they are white.

Maybe Selena should go on wikipedia and put her opinions and misperceptions where everyone else's facts are.

What a fraud!

Anonymous said...

There are no words to describle how despicable this women and her opinions are. That is also true of the 88, Duff, Lester and the rest. Why do these people still have a job? If it is true that many of the Duke students come from the Northeast, I hope future students are reviewing their school choices.

Anonymous said...

Carolyn says:

As a woman, I assure you the phrase "Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned" isn't a truism for nothing. For sure, Selena was once scorned by one of those damned good looking, smart, Ivy League guys whose representatives she now attacks with such fury.

Psst, Selena. Word of caution. The only thing more furious than a woman scorned is a Duke MOM whose innocent child was libeled by the likes of you for a rape that never happened. Trust me, the hole angry emailers burned in your in-box will be nothing like the hole those mommas will burn in your wallet and reputation once the civil suits start.

Gary Packwood said...

The Rehabilitation of Nifong's Reputation and Image has begun.

Selena has a pretty good idea of what Nifong knows and would like for him to play Burr Rabbit ...Lie low and practice quietude.

God only knows what would happen if Nifong starts telling folks what he knows about the Loopy Life in Durham.

I for one, expect to hear more soothing statements about Nifong...as this legal lynching in slow motion moves forward.

GP

rod allison, detroit said...

Good God. It got even worse. I must have read a condensed version in the San Diego Tribune. I missed the inevitable, really trite, charge of racism.

This column looks like a pre-emptive defense against the criticism of her and the Times that's sure to mount when the charges are dropped. A defensive cover-your-ass piece.

When the AG drops the charges, you can expect him to thoroughly demonstrate their baselessness, and this will leave Selena, Duff, and the gang, looking incredibly stupid.

They have to be concerned about this at the Times, and so they dispatched little miss smarty-pants to do a pre-emptive CYA, using the "best defense is a good offense" strategy.

And offensive it was. Everything about it is so typical of people of her political stripe that the column was a cliche. Her three points seem to be:

The actual facts of the case never really mattered anyway (even though she used erroneous ones to question the Duke 3's status as human beings), only the deeper, greater truths mattered.

Fox News sucks.

Those who don't see it her way are racists, and she's not.

This column was too late for KC's March Madness list, but it is easily the worst opinion piece to date. Combined with Duff Wilson's worst news story, it gives the New York Times the hands down winners in two categories.

Barf me out, man.

All they have left at W. 47th is an outdated reputation and heaps of moral conceit.

Anonymous said...

From Roberts' column:
But if you take on the athlete culture that was exposed, not the alleged crime, there can be one healthy legacy to a scandal.

A rather direct statement that the "correct" reaction to the case has nothing to do with whether the rape/assault/kidnapping charges had any basis in fact.

Anonymous said...

I bailed out on the NYTs about 10 years ago. I recall two articles that pretty much sent me over the edge.

The first was about a former marine who determined that he was gay at the age of about 30. He decided to make it his mission to make up for lost time and get all the sex he could. Then he got AIDS. The NYT described him as a victim and chastised society for his self-inflicted plight.

The second was a story about bored kids from little towns in the upper New England states who moved to NYC with the intention of adopting a junkie lifestyle. The kids indeed became heroin addicts and expressed dismay that they were not seen as having the same "street cred" as the "real junkies." The NYT determined that their boring New England lives had driven them to this inane situation and chastised society for their self-inflicted plight.

Our society can't be too bad if the NYT has to go to such bizarre lengths to dig up "victims."

Anonymous said...

K.C.--I have never posted a comment although I have been a "lurker" on this site for about 8 months. My husband and I attended a function at our child's university in Virginia this past weekend. I thought you would be interested to know your blog was a topic of conversation among more than one group of parents.

The Dean of Students addressed the topic in her address to the parents--"How the University intended to avoid a Duke". A parent asked the Dean of the Faculty if he anticipated a reaction from the faculty like the Group of 88. It was an interesting conversation. I believe your blog has been of service to more than just the Duke 3.

Anonymous said...

I doubt any of us have any idea what Roberts personal history of love and longing is. I have no doubt that she is a mean spirited bigot who for whatever reason hates white folk, Looks like including herself.

Richard Aubrey said...

Some of you may recall the old singing group, The Lettermen. Their specialty was slow-dancing love songs and they sold huger than huge on campus where, counting all their appearances, they probably totaled enough hours for several PhDs.
They set the stage for the dream of the perfect college experience. Indeed, one of their album covers had them walking down a street behind some cute co-eds, dressed as upper-class guys did on campus in those days, autumn leaves on the ground, and carrying lacrosse sticks. The wooden kind.

Well, we all have our dream of the perfect college experience and the one commonality is that we didn't have it. But we wish we did.

So when losers see upper-class guys--no worry about affording a new pair of shoes--who are good looking--no acne--and in shape--jocks--and notable for being BMOC--not anonymous nerds--who play a sport which is socially above basketball and football, and more macho than soccer, and consider them rutting their way through shoals of adoring, upper-class WASP beauties--not being told to get lost, and not being too scared to ask the homecoming queen for a date....
It is not to be stood. They must be destroyed.

Anonymous said...

Anyone know her e-mail please...



Duke Lax Mom AND SO VERY PROUD OF IT!!!

Harry Eagar said...

I don't read the Times' sports section, but after reading the fisking, just on a hunch, I did a search for 'selena roberts martha burk.'

Bingo!

She's got a tiny ax, but she's grinding it for all it's worth.

After getting burned so badly in Augusta, you'd think the brain trust at the Times might start editing the spunky young lady.

bill anderson said...

It is hard to believe that Selena Roberts is a graduate of Auburn University. I emailed her a while back and told her she was a disgrace to her alma mater. Of course, I did not receive a reply.

Once again, we see that the NY Times still wishes to follow the path of Walter Duranty and Jayson Blair. We can add Duff Wilson and Selena Roberts to the list.

Anonymous said...

There were two well-written editorials by the NY Times on the Duke LAX Hoax. One was by David Brooks on May 28, 2006. Here is an abstract of that article:

“David Brooks Op-Ed column says Duke University faculty panel has convincingly shown that members of school's lacrosse team are not dumb jocks and amoral goons they have been portrayed as in media reports and commentary, including his own, about rape allegations against several members; says panel, led by Prof James E Coleman, has also shown that players are neither racist or sexist; says that evidence that rape took place on night of March 13 appears weak, but that if it did occur, it did not grow out of culture of depravity”


The other was by NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF on June 11, 2006. Here is an abstract of that article:

“Nicholas D Kristof Op-Ed column contends that Duke lacrosse scandal has not been finest hour of either news media or academia: holds that too many rushed to make Duke case part of 300-year-old narrative of white men brutalizing black women; maintains that any incident needs to be examined on its own merits rather than simply glimpsed through prisms of race and class; holds that Dist Atty Mike Nifong may be real culprit; says he may have had motive for prosecuting case that would not otherwise merit it: using it as campaign tool”


It seems when the Times get in trouble in this case is when they have people out of their depth (sports writers) writing about things they have no expertise in. Personally I blame the editor as much as the writers who are clearly out of their leagues.

Anonymous said...

I only hope that all the paying customers from Up North are paying attention to what has hapened in the Bull City, Duke and NYTimes. That money can be spent anywhere and on would hope for more graditude to the payees.

Bakerman said...

Selena Roberts is a rain maker, one of many. This is the inherent problem with regard to dropping the charges without a full public hearing.

The rainmaker's cloud has been created, and will hang over the accused like the Gang-of-88. A permanent cloud of furious - if not factual - guilt.

Cedarford said...

Roberts writing frequently reflects her feminist predilictions. General theme is males and especially male athletes treat women badly. Back in 2003, Roberts was one of the pack of NYTimes that were went like baying wolves by Pinch Sulzberger to validate his good buddy Martha Burk's crusade to force the Augusta Golf Club to accept well-heeled women as members.

Social justice, don'tcha just know!

In her piece, she says it may seem like an isolated small thing to some, but "reflects on larger, more important issues".

Yet, symbolism is important, not for what it says about Hootie, Augusta National or golf, but for what it reveals about us.

She had this precious quote on the propriety of men hanging together and doing their own thing...omitting of course the many "woman-only" organizations, societies, and clubs:

There is an aversion to racism by club members, and then there is sex discrimination that is as acceptable as ogling at a strip joint.

In Hootie's secret society of the biased, equality is based on location, location, location. In Janice Mathis's life - "48 years old and a black woman all that time," she jokes - there is no place for one "ism" over another "ism."


I think we can guess what she feels about *spit*....mennnnn, mennnn with their purient ways.... ogling at a strip joint. (Nice that she managed not to degrade the courageous women forced to do jobs as sex workers due to society's oppression...)

Chairman Hootie as he stated, "I do have a reputation for fighting against discrimination," before he reduced women to the size of a thimble on Wednesday.

That....*spit* male bastard! Coming up with a new one - thimblizing women. I guess you have to be a feminist who likes to sew to get what she meant...

The whole piece is riddled with feminist crap and male-bashing. You can link to the full article, but may have to register (its free though, not NYTimes "premium")

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/11/sports/golf/y11roberts.html?ex=1175054400&en=f3b3d3631a35db09&ei=5070

Of course, Roberts has been on this theme a long time. Blackathlete.net has frequently denounced her for regular attacks on "misogynist" athletes and their seedy sex lives. This is about Kobe:

Selena Roberts a senior sports reporter at The New York Times at the very top of Thursday's sports section presents a Venom filled tirade against Kobe Bryant. She basically accuses him of getting away with "rape" after charges against him were dismissed. And making a point of continuing to refer to his accuser over and over again as his "victim."

Selena just sees the Lacrosse case as another shot at the sort on men she dislikes, and Kobe and the Lacrosse players were not the only cases where she attacked innocent athletes and later did the usual "writing for the NYTimes means never having to apologize to lesser mortals."

I have a rhetorical question for the NY Times.

Why do you hire people that hate a good deal of the people they cover? Does that somehow tie into your business strategy to get more readers from the denounced races, classes, and gender??

And a rhetorical question for Selena.

Why are unmarried quasi or open bull dykes so prevalent in female athete and female sportswriting circles?

Anonymous said...

In case anyone wants to e-mail the N.C Attorney General, go here for his email form: http://www.ncdoj.com/default_contactus_form.jsp?sectionid=ag&subsectionid=general

All I asked were these questions:
(1) Have the charges against the three former Dule lacrosse players been dropped. (2) If not, why not?

Howard said...

Does anyone in their right mind read the NY Times Sports section? It has been a Left Wing watering hole for at least the last five years. It is unreadable. And it's never right.

Anonymous said...

Selena Roberts seems to have a vendatta against Duke and/or its lacrosse players. It colors her writing to the point that she misrepresents the story.

"Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned," quoted in an earlier post, may well be the answer to the extreme animosity displayed by Roberts. Was she jilted by an elite sports player, or was she denied admission to Duke as an undergraduate? In her display of anger and sarcasm, she misses the larger stories of a corrupt criminal justice system and of the main stream media and faculty rush to judgment, and focuses on such crimes as public urination.

I laugh as she disapprovingly and sarcastically refers to the lacrosse players as white "privileged players of fine pedigree"--she, who lives in the tony white enclave of Westport, Connecticut, on Connecticut's Gold Coast. From her privileged perch, she expresses concern about "class and race divides that have existed within the radius of Duke long before a lacrosse party." Instant expert and hypocrite, she.

She strains to be the Maureen Dowd of the Times' sports page, with her clever alliterations--"privileged players of fine pedigree" and "the flapping carrier pigeon of froth, Fox news." Oh, if only her content could match her literary style!

How sad that a reporter would make intentionally false and misleading comparisons. Roberts notes: "Just last week, Syracuse suspended two lacrosse players after they were arrested outside a bar. A month earlier, the team suspended another player for two games after an assault charge. No one has yet been known to wear an "Innocent" wristband at the Syracuse campus. Soon, that accessory may die as a trend at Duke. Soon, the case may be over."

It doesn't matter to Selena that in the Duke case, unlike the Syracuse examples, the accused were falsely charged with rape and are still, a year later, charged with sexual assault and kidnapping in spite of the known corruption of the police and district attorney in handling the case and covering up exculpatory evidence.

And she predicts the trend of wearing an Innocence bracelet, disparagingly characterized by her as "a wardrobe accessory" and a "bangle," will die. What does she mean, that the legal trend of innocent until proven guilty will die? Clearly, for Selena, truth and the presumption of innocence means nothing if it gets in the way of her agenda.

In this article, Selena implies-no states-- that the lacrosse players' whiteness and privilege is their major offense. She, like some of the 88, seems sad that it is quite possible that the lacrosse players will not be convicted for a crime they did not commit.

Her article is an excellent example of intentionally missing the forest for the trees, and K.C.'s Top Ten list of most outrageous news stories needs to be revised or expanded.

Is The New York Times, out of desperation, publishing stories like this one to increase its shrinking circulation by stealing the readers that Durham's Herald-Sun has appealed to with its misleading and biased stories on this case?

Richard Lipsky said...

Should we ask Serena to resurrect Tawany Brawley-just as the despicable Bill Kuntsler did-as the symbol of white male sexual privilege, in spite of the fact that her entire story was a fabrication? The whole idea behind this kind of deconstruction is to relegate "facts" to a secondary status, behind the truth of the meta-narrative of the oppressed group. All of which leaves the oppressed group, no longer protected by the due process rights designed to guard against the abuse of power, defenseless; something that Professor Coleman really understands. It is why I have stopped buying the Times on weekends and, if this continues, will stop buying it altogether. Certainly, the "Select" offerings are no enticement to purchase, either in print or online.

Anonymous said...

Selena Roberts is a nat, to ignorant to even understand the garbage that comes out of her mouth.

scott said...

Roberts joins a long list of people in the Nifong Scandal Case that can't wait to dish it out, but consistently prove they can't take the feedback.

How many of these hoax enablers from the media and the G88 have we had to endure when they come back as such crybabies about the emails they receive? Their whining makes me puke. There's a Delete button on your PC for a reason.

Don't want to deal with people that have an alternative point of view? Hit Delete and stay all warm and cuddly with your world-view that it's OK to think that charging innocent people with rape and sexual assault is valid if it exposes a culture of young white men who pay for strippers (a perfectly legal activity for both the strippers and those who watch, BTW), drink beer, and urinate off the back porch for the utter parasites these whiners think they are.

Roberts, the crap you write is a lot more toxic than the urine of any 10 Duke Lacrosse players.

Cedarford said...

Selana Roberts has milked the themes of white privilege and "male athlete privilege" for years.

Here's another gem about *spit* men, this time in her much-ridiculed 2004 piece about NASCAR:

A racial undertone has yet to develop into an unspoken tension between the stars of Nascar and their racing audience because many of the drivers and their fans share a conservative ideology, evangelical roots and white privilege.

Yeah, that unspoken tension between the black, white, hispanic, male and female NASCAR crowd and the drivers - One that only make us non-NASCAR fans uncomfortable because it is the tension between fans that consider themselves mere mortals compared to their demigod driver. Who they are not worthy of. Not worthy!

Anyone from Roberts habitue`s of Manhattan cocktail parties and swank Westport soirees just knows, knows! All those banners of "Go White Privilege!!" at the racetracks. Surely there are white aryan symbols buried in all those car decals if one looks closely. And the rednecks! Ugh! The rednecks. You know how THEY are...

Roberts is also big on male athlete homophobia. One of society's greatest problems, dontcha know. Her piece on that was laughably called:

Homophobia Is Alive in Men's Locker Rooms

Times Select Link: http://select.nytimes.com/gst/tsc.html?URI=http://select.nytimes.com/2005/10/28/sports/basketball/28roberts.html&OQ=_rQ3D1Q26nQ3DTopQ252fNewsQ252fSportsQ252fColumnsQ252fSelenaQ2520Roberts&OP=2dde53feQ2FS(bpSmcQ20jjmSeQ2AQ2A!S.Q2ASeOSc1jQ20mcSp_cgbmp_YYSeOQ20jpbQ20mc9GmnY

Ignoring, according to one of her critics, that in gay circles, the locker room fantasy of buffed up studs is the gay equivalent of the hetero male fantasy of a squad of drunken cheerleaders on Spring Break. Stumbling into a wishful guys hotel room and stripping for all-night action.

Georgia Girl said...

KC, obviously you've banned me from your site.

Can you possibly understand WHY the "other side" (the extreme liberals)are making headway? It's partly because they continue their crusade quietly without anger and name-calling.

They also "listen" to adverse opinions without the rudeness that your comments seem to generate.

Anonymous said...

Selena Roberts spews pure garbage. Write away Selena you worthless hack. Lets see how it plays in civil court.

Anonymous said...

Damn, I was hoping Ga girl was right and you HAD banned her. Do you think if they increased her meds she might understand the concept of logic?

Kemp

bill anderson said...

Can you possibly understand WHY the "other side" (the extreme liberals)are making headway? It's partly because they continue their crusade quietly without anger and name-calling.

They also "listen" to adverse opinions without the rudeness that your comments seem to generate.

Mar 26, 2007 7:14:00 PM


This post is funny. Really funny. We are talking about Salena Roberts, who is an extreme, pathetic leftist who definitely exudes "rudeness" with every word.

We also have people Amanda Marcotte who -- if I may say it -- are rude as hell.

Keep in mind that this is the NY Times today. Once the standard of journalism, it now is a leftist rag. Yes, there are some good people on that staff, but they are being driven out by the people like Salena Roberts.

My guess is that when Roberts was at Auburn University, she considered herself to be far superior to the other students, who no doubt were "beneath" her intellect and whatever.

In a post elsewhere, a woman who knew Amanda Marcotte when Marcotte was in high school said she was the same way, a total snob who considered everyone else to be beneath her.

And, no, neither person would ever think of being rude or anything like that. Oh, no.

Anonymous said...

The fundamental problem here is that Ms. Roberts has chosen one of the least viable teams, at one of the least viable Division 1 schools, to make the point of athletic privilege. The Duke lacrosse team dwarfs every other squad in the ACC in terms of the number of All ACC Academic awardees - as does the school, leading for 18 straight years in the number of all such awardees. And the ACC is one of the better academic Division 1 conferences - with excellent and select schools such as Boston College, Wake Forest, UNC and UVa and Georgia Tech in the mix. The ACC is no SEC, which is made up of mostly mediocre academic institutions that do indeed indulge athletic privilege - to an extent and a degree unimagined or unknown by Ms. Roberts. Given the state of college athletics today, how Ms. Roberts could choose Duke as the poster child for athletic privilege is beyond me. Duke's athletes are real students - yes - they do here and there receive a bump in terms of admission but they actually do real school work - in real academic majors. No Family Studies, Recreation, or PE at Duke. As one who attended Duke on athletic scholarship, yet graduated magna cum laude on my own merit, and went on to graduate success that a ideologue hack like Roberts only could dream about, well, let's just say that I am being polite in pointing out that she is profoundly, dead spot on, wrong. And yes, she evinces almost no knowledge of college athletics.

Witness the New York Times a few years back - who ran a feature on University of South Florida - one of the many schools seeking to upgrade their image by enrolling incredibly marginal, indeed in many cases unqualified students to build their football program. The article related the incredible degree of privilege granted these students - from the army of tutors to the staffing of faculty for the influx of parks and recreation majors (few of whom graduated), to the massive day care center (yes, many players at USF were black, poor, and had kids out of wedlock - reflecting problems at large in the community), to the constant scrapes with the law that were minimized or somehow taken care of. And I am not picking on USF - choose your average football factory - be it LSU - or Florida State - and one would find a similar phenomena. These programs, and not the Dukes of the world, personify athletic privilege.

So at heart I am not sure what point she intends to make. Perhaps she really just doesn't like Duke team because: 1) they are white; 2) they are good student athletes; and 3) they remind of the type she could never date or socialize with when she was younger. I have a suggestion for Ms. Roberts, however, - one that most adults would ascribe to - "Get Over It". And in so doing, refer to data rather than engage in conclusory thinking designed to support the most fashionable ism of her moment.

Anonymous said...

The NY Times has been going downhill for a long time now. Their journalistic standard are in the toilet, and so is their reputation.

Used to be the "newspaper of record". Now its bird-cage liner.

Anonymous said...

Carolyn says:

Georgia Girl asks KC: "Can you possibly understand WHY the "other side" (the extreme liberals)are making headway? It's partly because they continue their crusade quietly without anger and name-calling!"

Carolyn asks KC: "Can you recommend a good doctor? I just hurt myself laughing."

Georgia Girl said...

Quote from the Roberts' article:

" ..... later on, Roberts tried to conflate the false rape charges with what she considers athletic misbehavior on campus (as if non-athlete students have never done similar things).

Did you all GET that???

"AS IF NON-ATHLETE STUDENTS HAVE NEVER DONE SIMILAR THINGS"

Like yeah, it's perfectly okay cuz everybody else does it?!

Geeze, I rest my case!

bill anderson said...

One other thing. I wear my blue wristband. If Roberts does not like that, too bad.

I think we need a movement at Auburn to make her into an honorary University of Alabama graduate.

Anonymous said...

To me, the most striking revelation of this bizarre fraud is the number of liberal extremists who hate institutions like Duke, hate whites, hate males, and hate athletes in general. Many of these Duke-haters are the bottom feeders of the mainstream media. Some are Durham voters, some are Duke professors, and a handful are self-nominated national champions of a misguided agenda sadly distilled in a legacy of hatred. The facts scream the truth about what actually happened here. Yet these extremists remain deaf. We see a brazen, conspiratorial deceit by the Durham DA and police, a clear abrogation of the civil rights of the accused, and a shameless exploitation of a self-servingly proclaimed clash of "sex, race, and privilege." All of this means nothing to the media parasites that live by selling papers at 35 cents a copy; they feed off those who want to believe the worst in humanity and those who want "fantastic lies" to be "true" because it sanctifies some personal agenda. They are wrong, but they will never know it. They are racist but they will never admit it. They are the newly empowered perpetrators of poison and hate; they will shout you down, cloaked in righteousness, condemn you for the unspeakable acts of your long-dead ancestors, and accuse you of sins you did not and would never commit. Their message is familiar. "Dead man walking." White, Duke, athletes should be punished "...whether it happened or not. It would be justice for things that happened in the past." They are "...shouting and whispering about what happened to this woman... regardless of the results of the police investigation..." This is their contribution to our future. Make no mistake about it; this is not the traditional voice of justice. This is the new face of politically correct racism.

jamil hussein said...

What a surprise. Latest New York al-Times propaganda piece:

New York al-Times (once they got busted by military and conservative bloggers):
Editors' Note: March 25, 2007, cover article in The Times Magazine on March 18 reported on women who served in Iraq, the sexual abuse that some of them endured and the struggle for all of them to reclaim their prewar lives... it is now clear that Ms. Randall did not serve in Iraq, but may have become convinced she did

This must the worst propaganda machine in this country. All news that support (or help) terrorists will be printed. I cannot understand how anybody have ever believed anything this paper printed. Even smart people (KC??) thought this was a quality paper until Duke hoax. It is especially funny to see how NYT/G88 ilk hate and blame Fox News while it is clearly the best and most reliable major news organisation in the US.
Thank god we have blogs (at least until the next admin, some major candidates have hinted they will ban Fox News and shut down talk radio and blogs).

Gary Packwood said...

Legal Insurance for Campus Athletes

Anonymous 4:05 said...

...K.C.- I have never posted a comment although I have been a "lurker" on this site for about 8 months. My husband and I attended a function at our child's university in Virginia this past weekend. I thought you would be interested to know your blog was a topic of conversation among more than one group of parents.

The Dean of Students addressed the topic in her address to the parents--"How the University intended to avoid a Duke". A parent asked the Dean of the Faculty if he anticipated a reaction from the faculty like the Group of 88. It was an interesting conversation. I believe your blog has been of service to more than just the Duke 3.

...

Great comment. I absolutely agree.

I have talked with three groups of parents who are asking if they should have some form of legal insurance for their student athlete while on campus...at a Top Tier University.

They have been reading this blog also.

My response? Read the campus publications on the web and make your own determination if the campus atmosphere is blatantly hostile. If so, and your family actually wants to attend that university, call your attorney and set up a plan whereby your student can call ...24/7...and then pay for your student to meet with your attorney before your child leaves for campus.

One Mom asked if a Safe Haven on campus was a indicator that more investigation was necessary. Before I could answer, two Moms in the room said ...Ahhhh, YEAH!

Anonymous said...

Georgia Girl:

FYI KC seems to be censoring out any messages other than right-wing liberal bashing and NYTimes bashing.

Three mild comments requesting that this not be all liberal bashing all the time never made onto their threads.

Way to go, KC.

rod allison, detroit said...

So Selena was in on the Augusta National "controversy" that the NYT tried to create? They tried unsuccessfully to recruit Tiger into the cause - mentioning him in every article about it - because he's black, and they think blacks can be manipulated to think (and vote)the way white liberals want them to.

That was the story that finally made it clear that the once great paper had become ruinously agenda driven.

I suppose you could excuse Selena as a sob sister columnist who is supposed to be controversial. The problem occurs when the opinion page overlaps the news coverage, as it always does at the Times.

The astonishingly shallow and contrived reporting of the Nifong hoax, once again, matched the Times political ideology.

Anonymous said...

Hey Bill Anderson,

Some enablers on TalkLeft are insinuating that you didn't have respect for Kirk Osborn's widow when you published his private correspondence with you ... by perhaps not asking for her permission.

rod allison, detroit said...

We all knew someone like Selena and Marcotte in High School, didn't we?

But none of us guys would be caught dead being seen at the Pizza Hut with her.

I'd sooner be seen with Precious.

Anonymous said...

Cincinnatus said

A good tough article in the Duke Chronicle by Stephen Miller. In simple clean prose he calls out 1. Nifong and the acuser for jail time and 2. the faculty and Brodhead for their many failings in their duty to their students.

It's good read and refresingly forthright.


http://media.www.dukechronicle.com/media/storage/paper884/news/2007/03/26/Columns/The-Crawl.Of.Justice-2791481.shtml

rrhamilton said...

Something I think many are missing: Roberts' main concern is now for the "meta-narrative". She, like the G88 member who said "white innocence equals black guilt", is afraid that the Duke lacrosse case -- which was always the meta-narrative in a microcosm -- will lead people to begin questioning the meta-narrative itself.

Anonymous said...

Cedarford asked the question that's been rolling around in my head for some time: why does someone like Selena Roberts, who clearly hates most athletes, have the job of writing for the Times sports section?

What good is she doing for the paper, its staff and readers by her constant put downs of athletes? She could be writing the same drivel just as persuasively (i.e., not at all)about your average stock brokers or auto mechanics but no one at the Timeswould think anyone wants to read it. So why can't her bosses figure out that no one wants to read her diatribes against athletics and athletes either.

The Times should get a clue and move her out. Perhaps if a couple hundred of us wrote her bosses every time she's published and complained about her hate-filled racists comments they'd get rid of her.

Anonymous said...

Please ignore the Talk Left enablers. All they crave is attention. Cedarford has a point. Letters should be directed to the NYTimes board of directors. Writing to the editor or to the public editor or to the sports editor would be a waste of time. The board of directors, however, would likely take polite and accurate criticism seriously.

Anonymous said...

Selena Roberts is deep into Tawana Brawley territory by now. Very predictable.

Anonymous said...

I am not sure the Times would even respond to this, but vote with your money and don't support the times. Like Kemp,I wish we has seen the last of gg.

hman said...

To Georgia Girl 8:32
I am not adverse to hearing your wisdom and insight on this case but you really must use the English language here.
I have no doubt that you had a thought behind your post, but none of it got translated into understandable word-craft.

Anonymous said...

9:49 Well now see, there is a Santa Claus.

Cedarford said...

The business decisions of the NY Times, its charge in reportage to sloppy, it's focus on editorializing from the front page are all matters of great scrutiny as the writing of the "sickness" at the Times grows more intense. Many stories have been written about the poor leadership of Arthur Sulzberger Jr., dismissively called "pinch" to his esteemed father, Arthur Sr. nickname of "Punch".

[Writing the Board of Directors is futile. The Times was organized in it's SEC offering as a twin tier stock artifice as it went public. The "A" shares, the voting shares, are mostly held by the Sulzberger-Ochs company that has made all Board and top management staffing positions - while appointing the annointed family member as "Publisher" who then controls as near dictator all the business and content. There has been speculation that "Pinch" has been on his way out for years, yet he remains, and the Times slides deeper into the toilet. Writing the Sulzberger Family to complain about the family's choice does no good.

However, they are scared of the "B" shares owners with no vote doing a class action lawsuit. And they are scared of the declining circulation and advertising revenue.]

What they do is mystifying. A paper that once had a reputation as the most accurate, the newspaper of record - where the usual fate of a reporter that damaged the paper's reputation would be fired? At one time, an error at the Times was news in itself because it was 3-4 times a year rare, and usually found&corrected by other NYTimes people.
The Times had a reputation as rising with the NYC Jews from the turn of the century onwards. A paper owned by a Jewish family that was essential in every Jewish home for their attention on Jewish matters in the USA, Israel, the Soviet Union. Jews, half ardent Zionists, were once to the NYTimes what Southerners were to the Democrats - their biggest subscribers and reporters. Then the NYTimes, perhaps thinking that non-Leftist Jews owed it to the Times to continue subscribing - became the biggest Israel bashers in the media, then followed that with celebration of Islam as the Religion of Peace. Now their subscriber base is eroding with them as more religious and conservative Jews switch to Newsday and the NY Post...some even buy the Daily News, now.

Their apparant suicidal contempt of readers forming other subscriber niches is amazing. The sports pages are read - well - not by sociologists - but by sports fans who have had to put up with the reporters regularly denouncing the sports and players and the "silly fans" - but the NY Post and Washington Post respect fans - so lots of them have stopped reading the Times. Same is true in the Education section now being for Educrats and teacher unions - not parents and teachers. The business pages now have a predictable anti-business slant with has driven ...surprise...business people who have grown tired of daily accusations of being scumbags to Bloomberg, the WSJ, the Internet...

They have also done horribly, given the NY Times brand recognition - in their TV and Internet investments.

IMO, the way to hurt them is not read them, help publicize their mistakes and ethics lapses, show others the biases to lower subscriber base, thus lowering advertising price. Ask your own media if you don't get the NY Times not to accept syndicated NY Times product being offered for sale to them because the paper has gone shoddy. Finally, as Class B shares slip further in value, express hope in your writings that the stakeholders sue to replace pinch with a better CEO - like Sulzberger family member Michael Golden.

They are one hurtin' sick puppy.

Anonymous said...

I must've missed something:

Why are some people here down on GeorgiaGirl? It seems to me (I admit I've not followed her posts or those of her critics with my trademark photographic memory) that she is a fellow sojourner here -- one who seeks truth without claiming to know it.

Anyway, if y'all don't want to come across as little better than the G88, show respect for GeorgiaGirl. I know I will.

Anonymous said...

Great post, anonymous at 8:26 PM.

cobraxus said...

the new spin is that Nifong didn't fabricate a hoax.instead he bungled the investigation that let them get away.

rod allison, detroit said...

Good post (2:15) Cedarford.

Also great quote in the earlier post;

"writing for the NY Times means never having to apologize to lesser mortals."

That hits the nail on the head.

Last December, USA Today, the Washington Post, the Daily News, and other papers nationwide, came out with editorials strongly critical of Nifong.

But not the Times. That would be admitting that crack investigative reporter Duff Wilson missed the mark last August.

No, instead of recognizing their mistake, they dispatch Selena to insult everyone else.

Their disgraceful coverage of the Duke hoax is just another in a long line of suicidal blunders.

don t. said...

To 5:31pm

Whoa!! Let me see if I understand your concept of the justice system.

Someone makes a totally false and baseless charge against a person or group of perceived "haves". This charge, which is immediately assumed to be true by locus parentis (in this case university administrators) and the main stream media (in almost all cases snot-nosed kids trying to make a name for themselves) inflames and infuriates the "have-nots" who are referred to as the minority but in fact are the majority. Now despite the efforts of dishonorable and dishonest public officials and the politically correct university administrators and faculty, it becomes 100% certain that the accused have committed no crime. Nevertheless, in your conception of justice, the accused must still go through the pain and expense of a public hearing to satisfy the bloodlust of the minority majority, most of whom will be satisfied with nothing less than a public crucifixion no matter the guilt or innocence of the accused.

Amazing!!! Can you imagine the state of the judicial system if every baseless charge was treated this way??? In most places outside Durham, police investigations and grand juries would prevent idiocy such as this from ever coming to trial.

Trinity60

hman said...

To 5:31
You seem to be one of those who believe that a trial is the only way for "the whole truth to be known". OK, but why should this be a trial with the Duke guys as defendants? The DA admitted in court that he had no evidence except the accusers testimony and she has zero credibility. So the Duke guys would make terrible defendants for "getting the truth out".
But if there was a civil trial against the accuser for filling a knowingly false accusation and against Durham/Duke and about a dozen more entities the bottom of this could be gotten at much more thoroughly than what would be possible with a doomed, hopeless criminal prosecution of three provably innocent guys.

Anonymous said...

To Trinity '60

Bravo............