Tuesday, July 17, 2007

AJR: Comprehensive Summary

What should emerge as the definitive article of the media’s handling—and mishandling—of the lacrosse case is now on-line at American Journalism Review. Penned by AJR managing editor Rachel Smolkin, the piece will be the cover story for the AJR’s August/September issue.

Smolkin’s article is just under 8,000 words, and provides both a comprehensive narrative of events as well as impressive analysis. The piece features interviews with editors from the New York Times, the N&O, the Chronicle, the Herald-Sun, and Newsweek—as well as Dan Abrams, Joe Neff, Ruth Sheehan, and critics of the media’s handling of the case, such as Dan Okrent, Stuart Taylor, and me. (Nancy Grace declined Smolkin’s request for an interview, while Wendy Murphy implied that her over-the-top comments came because she was expected to play a role on cable talk shows.)

Times Executive Editor Bill Keller offered a half-hearted defense of the Times’ performance, but the Herald-Sun was defiant:

Asked to assess his paper’s coverage, Editor Bob Ashley replies: “Overall, I thought it was pretty good. We were operating in a very difficult environment with media from all over the country... It was pretty much down the middle and pretty thorough . . . We weren’t prepared for what turned out to be the enormously nonexistent case of the district attorney. It was a veteran prosecutor. He’d been here for a while . . . Given the context and the context of what we knew at the time, we were fair. We were opinionated, but we were fair.”
Read the entire article here.


Anonymous said...

G/d.....how I despise that little inbred Barney Fife-esque Ashley!

He is such a liar.

Although he is so stupid and unprepared for the world of reality and truth that he inadvertently revealed for all to read that he was behind the rogue prosecutor because he was a veteran.


I am a small-time, bumbling idiot.... I am so thrilled and desperate to keep my job as editor of a newspaper located in the Triangle.....home to three major universities with lots of exciting people from all over the globe--Gosh! This is so much better than my previous career in small one-horse towns--and I needed to go along with the black community or risk bodily harm.

My wife Pat and I intend to kiss as many asses in Durham and surrounding areas as possible. Mike Nifong was a well-respected prosecutor and a member of the Durham Democratic Party. Black people liked him. Some still think he's Christ.

Do you think I was going up against the Liberal People's Alliance and the Durham Committee on the Affairs of Black People?

Besides, I have always been a scrawny, now slick-headed POS....and very envious of buff, muscular, and academically successful athletes.

Hey, this was my Perfect Storm and I weathered it where it counts. My retirement plan with the bottom-feeding Paxton Group is intact!

So there!

Bob Ashley


Anonymous said...

Does the "editor" Bob Ashley sincerely believe that that the H-S coverage of the Hoax was: “Overall, I thought it was pretty good...." ??!!

I mean, even someone as stupid as Ashley cannot truly believe that, can he?

No wonder he's is driving the H-S into Chapter 11. Readership continues to fall like a rock. The H-S will be gone w/in 12 months. Bank it.

wayne fontes said...

Dadisman forgets there was an entire universe of blogs lined up against the players in the early going. Just because they were wrong doesn't mean they didn't impact the story. I think the tone of much of the early MSM coverage was derived from blogs.

Anonymous said...


I read the article, which I thought was wonderful, but one cannot help to wonder why the media have not focused on AG Cooper's failure to charge Crystal Mangum with a crime. Professor, do you know whether Mangum lied to the grand jury?

Also, Professor, do you think that Cooper's failure to charge Mangum sends a terrifying message to American men?

Cheryl K.
Trinity '09

Anonymous said...

Does anyone know how Nifong's resignation will impact his retirement pay? Did it lower it? Or did Nifong hold off on resignation long enough so that it had no negative affect?


Anonymous said...

You're too kind, KC. The Drive-By Media was part of the lynch mob from the start. They're just as guilty as Nifong and the Durham PD, in my opinion.

Abject apologies from all the miscreants (too numerous to name here) should be the least they do.

Walter Abbott

Anonymous said...

Ashley's an idiot.

Anonymous said...

Perhaps the Herald-Sun would have been better prepared to deal with the D.A.'s "enormously non-existent case" if the H-S' reporters had actually investigated the FACTS of the case before they published their "opinionated" pieces (which were anything but "fair" -- despite Ashley's ludicrous claims).

Anonymous said...

Wonderful article. The last two words are chilling but at least we have the K.C. Johnsons, the John in Carolinas, the Bill Andersons, the Michael Gaynors etc. to provide us with accurate analysis, narrative in perspective and the truth. Bless you all.

Anonymous said...

That is an excellent article.

AMac said...

The AJR piece is excellent.

Author Rachel Smolkin offers multiple quotes from NYT Executive Editor Bill Keller. Each instance is a disgrace. If the Times' initial coverage wasn't a firing offense--if Duff Wilson's hit piece wasn't a firing offense--if the excreble Op-Eds weren't firing offenses--if the Times' continuing failure to own up to its derelict performance isn't a firing offense--then the self-serving and dishonest statements to the AJR should be.

Note each mention of Keller's name in the article, and be appalled. Unbelievable.

Gary Packwood said...

Duke's Ryan McCartney Gives Advice to American Journalists about Truth Telling

"The outcome of this whole story is square pegs can't be fit into round holes, and we saw the dangers of what happens when modern media attempts to do that," says Duke senior Ryan McCartney, who for much of the saga was editor of the Chronicle, the independent student newspaper. "Hopefully this case will kind of go down in the books as a lesson to media organizations on all levels to...second-guess themselves any time they think a story is clear-cut."

Duke scores again. Good job, Ryan.

Anonymous said...

What a ridiculous joke Bob Ashley is. He's as bad as Burness or the Group of 88 saying they have nothing to apologize for. At least have the guts to say you screwed up Bob. What a spinelss dishonest dolt.

AMac said...

The AJR missed an important detail when reviewing the News & Observer's early coverage of the Hoax/Frame.

In the paragraph beginning "A front-page, March 25, 2006, interview with the accuser," author Smolkin left out one of the most damning pieces of journalistic misconduct of the entire case.

As John in Carolina has repeatedly documented, N&O reporters Samiha Khanna and Anne Blythe heard Mangum claim during their initial 3/24/06 interview that the second dancer, Kim Roberts, was also raped. Mangum said Roberts didn't report the rape because Roberts was afraid she would lose her job if she did, and Mangum accused Roberts of being willing to “do just about anything for money.”

The N&O withheld these details for over a year before publishing them on April 12, 2007. Was that acceptable conduct on the part of these reporters, their editors, or the newspaper?

Anonymous said...

Finally, someone in Journalism has spoken out authoritatively about the misdeeds of so many in that profession.

Shortly after graduating from J-School a long time ago (1962), I had the privilege of sitting in a small conference room in New York along with about a dozen writers and editors. The guest speaker that morning was the renowned Edward R. Murrow. I can still picture him sitting across the table from me as he shared his experiences with our relatively small group and explained what distinguished a good reporter from a mediocre one.

The one "rule" he talked about at great length was “if you want to be a good reporter . . . get your facts right.”

Since that morning in New York, “get your facts right” was something that was always at the forefront of my mind whether I was reporting a story, writing a business communication or simply sending an e-mail to friends and acquaintances.

“Get your facts right” is so easy to remember.

For many of the “journalists” who wrote or spoke about the LAX players, “get your facts right” was so easy to forget.

Rachel Smolkin definitely got the facts right in her “Justice Delayed” article.

Mr. Murrow would be proud of her.

AMac said...

You can't have everything.

It's a pity that Smolkin didn't get current "see-hear-speak no evil" NYT Public Editor Bryan Calame on the record about the Times' handling of the case.

And that she didn't extract a strained "No comment" from the Hoax's second-worst reporter, John Stevenson of the Herald-Sun.

Anonymous said...

Mostly in reaction to the Herald-Sun's unpardonable temerity, but partly in anticipation of the H-S folding, I switched today to the N&O. A pity that this area will soon be down to only one daily paper. The H-S no longer knows who its readers are or what news is worth reporting.

Anonymous said...


I'm not from US. I know that Duke and the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill are proximate, so what is the 3d university in the Triangle?

Anonymous said...

JLS says...,

That is a pretty fair summary of the media angle of this case. It is a place to direct someone who did not follow this case to understand the media situation somewhat.

The author was nicer to the Sheehan/Sills branch of the N&O than I would be. The author failed to press Sills to find out to what extent a particular black editor there pushed their early rush to judgement. The author failed to press Sills on what was left out of the Mangum N&O interview. The one new bit of information to me was that the N&O had a stand down on columns on the story. More probing questions on that would have been nice too.

The author also completely missed the NCCU student reporter who said she found out negative things about Mangum from her neighbors but refused to include them in her article. There was clear bias in this case not just bad placement of disclaimers.

Anonymous said...

Mangum did not go to the grand jury.
Gottlieb and Himan went to ask for indictments of Reade and Collin.
Dave was indicted based on Himan's testimony to the grand jury. Mangum was not present for either grand jury.

Anonymous said...

Polanski inregards to your NYT AIDs article question of bias...are you a stockholder or something?

I made it to the inside first column and had read enough…

Why was the AIDS article on the front page? Is this newsworthy? No, it is a political article attempting to humanize illegal alien’s problems. It is only presented as another effort to sway opinion on any immigration bill. It is assumptive that we need a bill instead of enforcing what we already have on the books.

It calls illegal alien’s immigrants. They are not.

One wonders how the article reads when one considers AIDS and legal immigrants or AIDS rates for all citizens. Those issues aren’t addressed, or at least addressed in the first paragraphs.

.“…language barrier to services” – is complete bullshit, especially in CA, AZ, NM, TX, CO, OK. Parkland hosptial is the #1 hospital for delivering babies. I think somewhere around are 70% are Illegal's. They speak Spainish at Parkland. This comment and point begs the question of why we pay for Illegal’s services in the first place…

“…exposed to different sexual practices” Really? The odds are they like Illegal's incurred AIDS from using needles and/or having unprotected sex with prostitutes and/or homosexuals. I doubt many illegal alien’s phone numbers showed up in the DC madam’s black book. More likely they are having sex with…other illegal aliens.

These quotes are from some US MD who is an “authority”.

The article opens anecdotally with an unnamed man who has AIDS who presumably has not told his wife. It is framed as another man screwing over a woman, which is quite true if he in fact has AIDS and is having sex with his wife. He should be executed. He says he can’t remember how he got AIDS…must be related to Nifong or others in Durham.

On the other hand no mention is made, that he may have got AIDS from a WOMAN, maybe even a prostitute or even a woman or homosexual who knew she/he had AIDS.

The author discounts that Illegal's are bringing other contagious diseases into the US, regardless of whether they get AIDS after the fact.

The NYT sucks. Fortunately I was able to scan it in a Starbuck without actually having to put down any coin. At 5:00 p.m. it didn’t look like anybody else had spent any money for the paper either, as the news rack was full.

Anonymous said...

I feel like a child on Christams Eve - somewhat giddy and excited. I just received the Duke Alumni Association Forever Duke solicitation.

How shall I respond? What to do?

Anonymous said...

GET YOUR FACTS RIGHT is only part of the story. While I thought Smolkin's article was a fair excursion into the history of the case (as defined by the mainstream media), I was dismayed that she neglected to note the MEN'S RIGHTS aspect to this case that has been virtually ignored by all media:

--No in-depth discussion of why Cooper failed to indict Mangum

--No analysis of how the law fails to protect men from female predators

In addition to which, Smolkin failed to zero in on the most racially charged aspect of the case: the degree of hostility that was brought to bear by all facets of the black community against the "lacrosse players."

I give Smolkin a D+ for effort. IMO, the article is a failure. Ms Smolkin, you need creative perspectives--PLUS FACTS. You dig?


Anonymous said...

This is perhaps a minor point but ... Did Wendy Murphy actually admit she's playing an extreme character on TV and that no one is supposed to take her "commentary" seriously?

Anonymous said...

Very good points. The editor at the N&O named Linda Williams is a good example. She is very much to blame for that awful article done with Mangum where they called her a "victim" instead of "alleged victim" and told a story that made her look very respectable.
I have my doubts that black reporters are capable of being objective and professional when dealing with such topics. For that they should be fired. Will they be? Of course not.

mac said...

Wendy Murphy was role-playing?
On cable talk shows? (Shouldn't someone alert the FCC? That's nearly child pornography!)

But seriously: does anyone take her excuse as anything
but a lame attempt to stay out of the courts and cough up large hairballs of money?

Anonymous said...

I've just finished reading about half of the AJR article. I have note yet viewed other comments because I don;t want any other influences at this time. If I am redundant and parrot others, please forgive my indiscretion.

I'll focus on the underlying theme of the media reporting as memorialized in the comments of the various pariticpants.

First and importantly:

"New York Times columnist Selena Roberts railed against the "code of silence" that same day, declaring, "At the intersection of entitlement and enablement, there is Duke University, virtuous on the outside, debauched on the inside...a group of privileged players of fine pedigree entangled in a night that threatens to belie their social standing as human beings." "

I personally resent the notion that "pedigree" imparts some special status. Frankly, I don't think the reporter (who I don't know and probably wouldn't want to know) has a clue of what the notion of "pedigree" involves.

And although many of the students at Duke University and many of the lacrosse players come from well-heeled families, that has absolutley nothing to do with "pedigree." But it is clear that attacks on pedigree sells advertising and appeals to the masses. Now,... I believe that most if not all of the Duke lacrosse team, as well as most of the greater Duke family come from good families, families that represent a cross-section of values, but generally with character and integrity.

Pedigree and its cousin, "background" is the totality of one's knowledge of who one is and represents. Look at the first book of the New Testament. The first words in that important book was a recitation of Christ's "pedigree." Now with that moral auhority and support, I offer this:

Among those that don't even know their own father -- no pedigree at all. And this has nothing to do with money. For those who can affirmatively state that their families came over to the United States to avoid the potato famines in Ireland, some pedigree -- and that pedigree can be either good or bad. To illustrate this, consider "Camelot." I am one who frankly views the Kennedy's pedigree as 'not quite good enough,' for their is serious mischief in their past. Then there are those who have a seriously good pedigree. I include members of organizations such as the Society of the Cincinnati among that group. Look it up. Everyone in this country owes a debt of gratitude to the anscestors of that very special group (to which, by the way, I do not belong). Now that starts to yield a special pedigree. Then you get to those who have national holidays such as Thanksgiving that honor their 10th or 11th great grandparents. (Imagine that. An entire nation prays every single year in honor of one's family.) Now that's when you get into the mysteries of things that most people, the vast majority of people, heck almost everyone...will never know.

And that is the sub-title to what this is really all about. It's about those who don't have, demanding that which others do have. And when it involves something that they can NEVER have, such as "pedigree," then they want it extinguished. Eradicated. Made illegal. Just wait folks...this is the logical conclusion of the popular notion of "all people are created equal."

I'm now looking at a certificate I have that says, in relevevant part:

"...founded ... to maintain and defend the principles of civil and religious liberty, to cherish and maintain the ideals of American Freedom and to oppose any theories or actions that threaten their continuity."

The name of that organization (to which I do belong by virtue of my grandmother's quite remarkable pedigree) I'll leave unstated. (Hint: Think north of the Mason Dixon line.)

But, mark my words, I believe to the core of my soul the thoughts it represents. And I fully intend to keep it central to my thoughts, plans and actions.

Thanking you for your courtesy and forebearance, I remain a fellow KC fan,
Thomas S Inman '74

Anonymous said...


Yesterday's "leave the man alone blog" paints Nifong as a victim unfairly scapegoated. The entry starts out:

"Mike Nifong, the disgraced prosecutor in the Duke lacrosse case, was a scapegoat. Not to say he wasn't wrong or unethical or even criminal. However, relative to the conduct of other attorneys in other prominent sports related cases, he is a choir boy."

She then explains that Nifong was disbarred "mostly for called the accused, 'hooligans:'"

"Do you know how difficult it is to get disbarred? Difficult. Very, very difficult. Most cases of disbarment center around the theft of client's money. Nifong was disbarred mostly for calling the accused, "hooligans."

Next we are told to excuse Nifong's withholding of DNA evidence because it wasn't "malicious" but rather the result of overwork and the limited resources of a poor public servant:

"He was also guilty of some inappropriate (but not necessarily malicious) withholding of evidence and maybe the general understaffed and overworked neglect that plagues the realities of working in a prosecutors' office (or typical law practice, for that matter)."

Despite Nifong's access to the infrastructure of the state of NC and the DPD, we are asked to feel sorry for Nifong because:

"The defense team had vast resources and used those resources to punish Nifong. It's possible that Nifong was the vile man the defense painted him to be. It's possible that he's not."

Read the post at


Anonymous said...

TO 6:31PM--

The third one is N.C. State University. It's located in Raleigh and is best known for engineering, architecture, and veterinary schools.

You must remember the wonderful character, Jim Valvano, who used to be the basketball coach there....and who, sadly, died of cancer in 1993.


mac said...

I'm curious about Ashley's comment:
"It was a veteran prosecutor."
("It?" As in: "Cousin It?" I thought Nifong looked at least a little more like Lurch.)

And what's this about a "veteran prosecutor?" He was only on the
"B" team, and was never elected,
and was considered a rookie as head DA.


Anonymous said...

Good work, K.C. It always is fun to see scummy journalists exposed!

Anonymous said...

"Gifts to the Duke Annual Fund provide EACH (emphasis mine) of Duke's schools and colleges with UNRESTRICTED (emphasis mine) dollars taht diretly support educations opportunities for current and future generations of students"

Now that is funny. I give money so they can distribute to AAAs and Women's Studies? I give money so they can distribute it to those "award" winning students?
I don't think so, but thanks so much for asking.

Anonymous said...

The article fails in one major respect--it did not hammer home the racial double-standards that fueled the coverage.

Anonymous said...

Oops, my mistake, I previously quoted the Duke Annual Fund and not the Duke AA fund. They are explaining why give to both. Please excuse the confusion. Regardless, we aren't feeling real charitable with the lack of transparency, governance, leadership, and the continued stiff arm under the jaw every step of the way.

mac said...

I once wrote an article for a student newspaper; it wasn't supposed to be an editorial.
My original version looked like a Duff-piece, and when the paper's advisor
got through with me (woe the red pen!) my article looked more like a Neff-piece.
She was cruel with her red pen.
I'm thankful.

She taught me more about journalism and journalistic ethics in that one,
small article than is apparent in all the collective efforts of people like
Selena Roberts and Nancy Grace and Bob
"What? Me Worry" Ashley.

Too bad she isn't around to use her red pen anymore;
more's the pity that these shameless
progenitors of soiled pablum couldn't
have had some of her discipline and mentoring.

Anonymous said...

TO "mac" (7:28PM)--

large hairballs of money?

It never occurred to me that I could be looking to the lovely Kitty Diva for some big bucks.



Anonymous said...

What's most damning about AG Cooper's moral vindication of Crystal Mangum is the fact that he failed to address how future Mangums will be treated by the good State of North Carolina.

Thank you, Debrah, for the info on NC State. Never heard of the school.

Does anyone know if Mangum lied to the grand jury? If she is so mentally ill, how is she still the primary caregiver to her children?

Something stinks here.

mac said...

Debrah 8:09

It seemed...like Murphy was always about to cough up
something. I figured it must be
a hairball.

Anonymous said...


I realize the Times has a liberal bias, but I respect a lot of their editorial decisions regarding content. I thought it was an extremely interesting article, dealing as it does with the relationship between illegal aliens and the various health costs borne by both US and Mexico in treating affected workers.

I think it's damn good reporting to have spotted this trend. Why can't you acknowledge that? And the story's placement was smart as it was newsworthy--that was the 1st article I read.

The point is, Do you doubt the accuracy of the reporting? Or could you please tell me why it's not newsworthy? The AIDS factor, it would seem to me, would support closing the borders.


Anonymous said...

Cheryl K. asks if CGM lied to the grand jury. One: The "Louvre of DNA" did not make an appearance before the grand jury that indicted the first two LAX players. And Two: As far as what was produced to the grand jury as evidence, we'll never know, because the state of North Korealina does not require a transcript or any other record to be kept of grand jury proceedings. This may come as a shock to the rest of the civilized world, but it's a fact. People's lives can be fu**ed up beyong belief by people like Nifong, Gottlieb, and Himan, and there is ABSOLUTELY NO WAY TO CONFIRM WHAT EVIDENCE WAS PRESENTED BEFORE A GRAND JURY!! Since we now know that there was no evidence of any crime, just what was it that Durham PD officers Gottlieb and Himan told the grand jury to obtain the indictments? I say they lied, but there's no record, so they are free and clear. Folks, if you're from NC, get in touch with your state representative or state senator and tell them the law needs to be changed. I ask you, is it unreasonable or too difficult to make transcripts of every grand jury proceeding? No, I didn't think so.

Anonymous said...

In the teaser at the top of the piece, the author notes that, "Many in the media ... were too slow to correct the record ...." Apparently, the author is using some type of future tense that I cannot discern, as the Herald-Sun and the New York Times have yet to "correct the record." And that is just a couple of the biggies.


The author placed an emphasis on the first (and only) interview of Mangum by Samiha Khanna of the N&O.

"The one-sided sympathetic portrayal, which several times referred to the accuser as 'the victim,' allowed her to make blind accusations."

Why doesn't the media adopt a policy regarding interviews of rape victims. It is unfair to allow the "alleged victim" to hide in the shadows and throw allegations at the defendant or defendants.


Each reporter in every mainstream media organization should be told that if they are going to interview an alleged rape victim on the subject of the rape, they must provide this warning to the alleged victim:

"By coming forward and providing an interview, you are waiving your anonymity. It would be unfair for us to publish a one-sided interview of only your part of the story, while at the same time you are free to maintain your complete anonymity. If you chose to go forward with this interview, and we decide to publish it, we will also publish your name and picture. Do you wish to proceed."


"King James ordered them to leave out the 'Book of Johnson' so as to maintain a little mystery." Pope Pius III (1742) MOO! Gregory

Anonymous said...

did anyone answer 5:08's question about Nifong's retirement pay?

I was also wondering.

Anonymous said...


Your post on pedigree, while vastly amusing, struck me as a good premise for a Monty Python skit. There you are, in close-up, ranting about your fuck'n pedigree while someone more clever than you (you know, the guy putzing around in the background) steals your watch, wife--and moves into your house. You finish your pedigree monologue out on the street.

Now, dear Inman, are you really talking about your genetic history?

Let's not be PC.

And remember a little lesson from genetics: geniuses very rarely have genius offspring (the Bach family is an anomoly).


Anonymous said...

Re: Pope Gregory @ 8:38

First, please excuse my blasphemy.

But...I agree that your posited recitation of one's "Mangum rights" is very much appropriate. If an "alleged victim" talks, he/she waives all privilege.

In addition to Miranda, all rape victims deserve the Mangum. If they are truly victims, this should not be a problem. I think of my daughter in this regard -- her short-term humiliation would be vindicated by the long-term benefit. For false accusers would have the calumny of society visited upon their house, while the innocent victims would have the unequivacal support of their community and society as a whole.

This simple solution would mitigate false accusations and prompt society's proper support of violated people (not women, but people...I say that, because the rape of a man is also possible).

And the real perpetrators of what is truly a horrific crime would know that society will haunt their very existence.

Gregory...your insight is brilliant.

Anonymous said...

gregory is brilliant. bet he's good in bed!

Anonymous said...

Polanski @ 8:47

I like the Monty Python skit idea. And I admit that there are many more clever than me. But I take this most seriously. And yes, its my genetic history. Its kinda like being a human thoroughbred. How fast can one run given the wins and losses of ones sires and grand sires.

And yes, genius is not a function of one’s genetic heritage. However, when there is an overwhelming number of people that historians and society have determined deserve respect, one cannot be help but wonder how one’s current failures could in any way be associated with the history.

How many United States citizens can claim a right to the throne of England, however far removed? I don’t know, but I do know that such a claim can be made by virtue of lineage.

Finally, I couldn’t care less about PC….for it falls into the category that I dismissed in my prior statement.

And I can document every single statement I make. And I am angry that others have, in effect, dismissed the blood, the sweat and the tears, and yes even death, of my family.

mac said...

8:33 pm
Maybe lifting the gag order on the Grand Jury who heard the evidence,
for starters?

If they can agree on what was told them...

mac said...

Gregory 8:38

Perhaps this also should be included in the statement:

"In addition to taking your statement,
I will allow the accused the right to rebuttal,
just as those who are accused are
allowed to face their accuser."

Anonymous said...

IT was so juicy to "cover up their innocence"...the BROADROT theory of the case...

Anonymous said...

"mangumize" the rape victim/accuser...
a new notion in the processing of criminal complaints...

Also, allow a veteran rape advocate to be present so that noone can accuse the system of an overbearing sense of "innocent until proven guilty" ... just a "reasonable and believable" sense of that concept

Anonymous said...


Sorry, wouldn't have tossed you into the bushes in our drunken college days if we'd known you were a virtual royal.

Keep up the good work; I read several of your posts, and you often approach eloquence.

D White

Anonymous said...

I'd like to know the significance of "in man". In what?

Anonymous said...

D White....thank you for your kind words...and about the bushes, I figure at this point that it was the sincerest form of fraternity hazing...to which I was most likely deserving. After all, I was in "obnoxious" training at that point.

One of these days we should have a beer at whatever that place was that phi kappa cocktail called home.

Anonymous said...

Re: 9:45

That is my given christian surname.

Anonymous said...

Oh, I thought it was just a made up name for the blog. Started to make something dirty out of it.

Anonymous said...


You have a defective mind.

Anonymous said...

8:19 Polanski, the article is interesting, but a stretch. What's more impactful are the contagions coming into the country. They have dangerous, muddled thinking which sways public opinion.

They are no different than the 88 and Brodhead regarding what is said and left unsaid.

Anonymous said...

Polanski, two other thoughts. It is NOT interesting because it is taking space of a larger story. For example the aliens bringing in disease.

Also, the bias is atrocious. My property taxes are over five figures for a house that is under 1800 s.f. I'm paying to birth an ass pot of illegal children. Other states, including NY have no idea what they are advocating. That is dangerous on many levels.

As someone else mentioned, just because they are the best steaming pile, doesn't mean they aren't a steaming pile.

Anonymous said...

8:19 Oh by the way I do doubt the accuracy of the reporting for the reasons mentioned in my initial post.

The experts quote is unfounded bull shit. What is not considered invalidates the entire point of the article.

How is the article substantively different than the one about the average height of Americans dropping?

Anonymous said...

Plansky, where do geniuses come from? My grandfather and grandmother, while not stupid, were not brilliant. My father was off the charts smart - college at 16, top medical schools, a long career, well thought of by his peers. My oldest brother was one of the smartest people I ever met. I do ok, maybe not up to your gentleman's 100 IQ, but you know, better than the IP here in Durham. My sons worry me - I chose my wife poorly, and I see the flower of brilliance that once blossomed in my family dimming as the generations progress.

Please enlighten me about how and why such things occur. And I would argue that of the 20 or so children that JSB had, none rose to his level of genius. Sure, CPE did good, and a couple of his brothers were adequate, come on - compared to Poppa's 1000 works of astoundingness (ok, it is late and my words are escaping like Gagrrls help after the war), they fall short.

Anonymous said...

Actually, Gottlieb has explained in his bar deposition what it is he told to the grand jury, so we have an idea as to what evidence was presented.

Anonymous said...


Alas, so it is with thoroughbreds...the heart of winner may be one in a millenium...but as history unfolds, time ceases to have meaning, but the deeds of the thoroughbred live on.

Michael said...

2.6 million unique visitors to this site. Unreal!

Anonymous said...

michael ... is that true ... then KC has achieved true star status...right? Others, please comment.

Anonymous said...


Samika Khanna is stupid--very stupid. Unredeemably stupid. I won't even bother telling you why, but you could check out the transcript from her appearance on the Abrams Report.


I can agree with your focus on pedigree if you couch it strictly interms of how it has contributed to civilization. I have some distinguished people in my background (1 lost to Thomas Dewey for governor of New York), but that doesn't change the fact that my father was an abusive--albeit "successful"--alcoholic and my mother was a paranoid schizophrenic. You are aware of the Forrest Gump expression about chocolates--well, genetics is similar.

re "rape of a man is possible"--Debrah a while back provided a wonderful link of an article by Dennis Prager in Jewish World Review on the whore. Prager argues convincingly that Mangum raped the names (cf pedigree) and souls of CDR. I agree with him, yet no one is proposing legislation that would mete out the proper punishment to the whore.

American society has made it much too easy for scum like Panties to attach themselves to the public trough. Society should no longer involve itself in expediting the breeding behaviors of the Crystal Gail Mangums of the world.


Anonymous said...

Just finished reading the Smolkin article. Very good. A panoramic look-back; however, I'm still not pleased with the fact that the N&O simply refuses to discuss the horrific damage done by their editorial staff.

Everything they say as an apology never zeros in on them at all.

KC and Stuart had some nifty coverage.....as well as Ed Bradley's work.

I'd like to use a thick piece of sandpaper on Bob Ashley's hairless noggin for allowing the poorly-written personal attack on Bradley to appear on their editorial page.

He's such a clueless moron.

Ed Bradley's work got a Peabody and a Murrow award.

Ashley and his cowardly cronies got plummeting circulation.


Anonymous said...

inmanski starts his discourse on pedigree with the following quote:

"I personally resent the notion that "pedigree" imparts some special status. Frankly, I don't think the reporter (who I don't know and probably wouldn't want to know) has a clue of what the notion of "pedigree" involves."

Let me emphasize the first and predicate statement "I personally resent the notion that "pedigree" imparts some special status."

Is that not perfectly clear.

And yes, I frankly believe that pedigree is singular in the analysis of civilization, whether it be Europe, Asia, Africa or the Americas.

As to legislation...that will only happen when the pedigree of the masses is in jeopardy. i.e. Never, since it does not exist.

Anonymous said...


I enjoyed your post, and would guess that your IQ is way above 100. I am not a geneticist, so I hesitate to even venture a comment about the whys and wherefores of genius. Certainly it's more likely to manifest itself in some populations--eg, English, German, Italian, Ashkenazi Jew (most famously). My guess is that while one's breeding is definitely an element, genius, like severe mental retardation, occurs by accident. And it is certainly true that the major geniuses have virtually all been male. I emphasize that stat because males also represent the lion's share of dullards. See the connection?

Yes, JS Bach was undoubtedly 1 of the alpha geniuses in the history of music; however, his sons Carl Philippe and Johann Christian were amazing musicians and composers. I've read that there are 6 generations of musical genius in the Bach family.

Why did you write that you chose "poorly" in your wife? Was she a great lay, but not too bright? Brains aren't everything. Were you serious about this? Strange issue to bring up.


Let's just say we disagree on this one. I perceived no agenda in the article.


Michael said...

re: 10:31

I got that number from the AJC article. That's bigger than the circulations of certain newspapers.

Anonymous said...

Side bar which may be totally irrelevant:

To all who are reconsidering their choice of mates based upon ...whatever the reason...

for all men.....this is why the notion of "trophy wives" exists...

for all women....this is why the legal system rewards women in divorce.

The equation follows:

1 luscious and sensual 24 year old

= an infinite number of bitchy 50 year olds

= 1 divine 93 year old with a net worth of $750 million

Sorry. I've got a bad attitude tonight.

Anonymous said...

A tribute to KC"s place and the millions he's attracted to his blog for justice......



Anonymous said...

Carolyn says:

Smolkin's article is wonderful! I was incredibly pleased the subject of biased reporting was tackled head on - and also pleased at how she was honest enough to stress how few reporters admit their bias.

Speaking of refusal to admit, I almost snorted my tea when Times Executive Editor Bill Keller whined that his paper didn't cover the Hoax accurately because "we were slow figuring out who had custody of the story: sports, national, investigative." Keller, that's a chicken shit excuse! It's your f**king JOB to make that decision, instantly. After all, you didn't have any problem instantly deciding which side of this hoax to believe in. Still.

(KC, I assume that since Grisham has given a comment on your book that the book is now finished and at the publisher's. If so, I guess that this article won't even get mentioned in it. Too bad.)

Anonymous said...

Here's a Dennis Prager redux for the conversation above:



Anonymous said...

TO "inman" and all the bewildered men of Wonderland this evening......

.......Tina has a message for you that still resonates as if she were singing it yesterday.

Hit it, Tina!



Anonymous said...


You're absolutely correct about Keller. I know how things work at the Times. Everyone at Times knows that the Duffer is a lightweight, so Keller put him on the story instead of 1 of his stars who would have sniffed how rotten Panties' story was. This was a major story, and the Times deliberately put a bushleaguer on it.


Anonymous said...

After all this time Keller still doesn't get it. He's quoted as saying "I'm not dismissive of the people who think that what appeared in the sports columns kind of contributed to a sense that the Times declared these guys guilty. I think that's a false impression, but I can understand where people got it." How can he possibly think the NYT was anything other than a kangaroo court?

Anonymous said...

I’m sure that there are good people all over the country who really feel betrayed by the press. I mean you know the press is mostly liberal and you cannot trust everything they write, but this—how could it be a lie? I believed them at first and then felt guilty about it.

I was in California when the news broke. I only saw the headlines and was sick about it. I did not know the details; I mean this was a world away from my college. We often filter news through our own lenses. It reminded me the concerns I had had at my daughter’s university 15 years before. There were no race issues there. But so often universities have their own PDs and do not release rape statistics for fear of losing prospective students. There were stories of dozens of rapes that the university denied. My daughter was a very naïve 18 year-old. So the first thing on my mind was how awful I felt for the female student and her family.

I did not follow the news for a week or so. I was getting ready for vacation in Mexico. Then I read an update article 2 weeks or so later. I was bothered by the article. They were spending a lot of time describing the fact they were athletes, white, and privileged. I had lived through 2 major riots in Los Angeles. I was familiar with the “I’m a victim” mentality. Whites are bad. I started to get a very queasy felling about the accusations. I then started reading conservative blogs. Even though I was only fooled for a couple of weeks, I really felt guilty. I should have known better.

How could I forget that newspapers often get it wrong? `Did some of us forget that about 10 years ago the press had done the same thing? I would venture that many readers know Richard Jewel was accused of the Olympic bombing in Atlanta, Georgia. Can most people remember who actually did it? How many people also remember he alerted law enforcement, and because of that, many lives were saved? There was one death and over 100 injured. How many more would have died if he had not been alert? He is a hero.

Many reporters say they only report the facts. Well, most of us lead busy lives. We assume that reporters will check the facts. Joe public cannot do that. They did not check the facts. In the Jewel case, an FBI agent apparently stated that Jewel “fit” the profile. A neighbor “thought” he saw him with a backpack that looked like a bomb. He “looked” guilty when interviewed on TV. Tom Brokaw, a respected anchor for NBC, pegged him as the bomber. I don’t have to restate all the wrong “facts” of this case.

So, since we’ve been fooled before, let’s not believe the press so quickly. They have given more opinions than verified facts, and most of all ---THEY HAVE FAILED TO EMPHASIZE THAT ALL ARE INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY. Let’s remember this case. Let’s not read about another case like this 10 years from now.

One Spook said...

Gee ... what fun ... pedigrees and all, but let's return to comments on Rachel Smolkin's review in the AJR.

I believe her review was an excellent piece; well-researched, well-written, thorough, and balanced.

Remember, her work is a review of how journalists performed in covering this story. As much as Polanski has criticized her for failing to advance, or criticize journalists for not advancing, another agenda or angle to this story, that is not her purpose in writing a review.

Yet, I believe her review has one very glaring omission.

In discussing the dreadful August 25, 2006 NYT report by Duff Wilson and Jonathan D. Glater, she failed to mention one highly important aspect of the reporters' reliance on the "notes" of Sgt, Gottleib.

As everyone knew at the time, including Wilson and Glater, Gottleib's "report" was produced nearly four months after the events, and Gottleib admitted that "he took few handwritten notes and relied on his memory and other officers' notes."

For any professional reporter, that should have been a HUGE red flag!

I seriously doubt that Ms. Smolkin would, as an editor, accept any reporter's "notes" assembled from memory four months after the fact on an important story, let alone rely on such notes as an important part of a part of a "body of evidence" in a criminal case.

That Gottlieb's descriptions of the suspects stood in significant("irreconcilable" according to N & O reporter Neff who also saw those notes) contrast to the contemporaneous descriptions of the suspects by officer Hinman, should have been another serious red flag.

And the biggest surprise? The "memory" report by Gottlieb included descriptions that were amazingly like the three indicted young men. Amazing!

And, since this four-month old "report" of the barely literate Gottlieb formed the complete foundation (by their own admission) of the piece by Wilson and Glater, their report is pathetic journalism at best, and in truth, journalistic malpractice.

One Spook

Anonymous said...

bill anderson said...
Good work, K.C. It always is fun to see scummy journalists exposed!

Jul 17, 2007 7:47:00 PM

I resemble that remark.
B.J., The University of Texas at Austin, 1981

Anonymous said...

The NYT reporting of the LaxHoax has suddenly been eclipsed by wholesale invention in their article on a porn star with a call to ministry. See


and weep.

AMac said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
AMac said...

One Spook 12:51am --

Good point about Duff Wilson's and his editors' negative due diligence on Gottlieb's fabricated notes. Joe Neff saw the problem. Why not the NYT?

[Replacing my strident comment of 7:49am:]

The problem is not that the media "got it wrong". Nor that so many got it so wrong--after all, each of us has exercised poor judgment at points in our work lives.

The crucial failing of the "bad actors" in the media is their refusal to acknowledge error, and to undertake restitution to the extent possible. The quotes of reporters and editors in the AJR review are full of weasel words, excuses, and half-truths.

There is an entire cast of characters that has still failed to face their moral obligation to utter these words:

"I'm sorry. What I wrote was wrong, and I apologize."

That these people (at the NYT, the N&O, the H-S, and elsewhere) are blind to this need is a powerful testimony to their sense of Honor. Their visions of Right and Wrong have more in common with those of narcissists than with those of their audience. I hope.

Anonymous said...

Jul 18, 2007 : 9:46 am ET

DURHAM -- Pittsboro lawyer Wade Barber will serve as counsel to the city of Durham's committee investigating the Durham Police Department's role in the Duke lacrosse case.

Barber, 63, is a former district attorney and Superior Court judge.

Former state Supreme Court justice Willis Whichard chairs the committee.

("Discuss among yourselves.......like butta....")


Anonymous said...

Sorry not to have responded earlier, I had Little League obligations last night - The coach said I would get to pitch!

To Mac @9:27: Your amendment was voted on, and it passed unanimously! Should we also allow the accused the right to anonymous rebuttal (i.e. an anonymous source close to the case)? Of course, a good reporter would get other sources to back up the "anonymous source."

To Inman @ throughout: Brilliant! I love the idea of calling it "The Mangum Warnings," and that the person hearing same would be "Mangumized"! Anything else would be dreadfully unfair.


I appreciate the author's work on the piece. It must be difficult for a reporter to call "bias" on other reporters, especially if the calling-out reporter goes to reporter bars and reporter parties after the reporting.

The MSM really needs to confront this "bias," which I would, instead, call the intentional omission or even fabrication of crucial evidence (or "lying").

The Herald-Sun and NYT still have not done articles comparing all of the contradictory and impossible allegations in Mangum's Book of Lies, Vols. I-VII (police statements, N&O interview, SANE report). K.C. Johnson and Tony Soprano over at Liestoppers have done it COUNTLESS times.

If Duff Wilson or John Stevenson were to do that now, it would be an admission of what I like to call "lying," since we know they had the evidence at the time.

(I don't go to reporters' parties, so I can call it what it is).


I used to paper my parrot's cage with the New York Times and the Herald-Sun, but my parrot soon started lying and ommitting crucial details. She had also started to bait me against the dog.


"If only I was a fly on the wall of K.C. Johnson's office," is what those interested in effective assisted-suicide lament. -- Jack Kevorkian (Larry King Live!, August 2007). MOO! Gregory

Anonymous said...

Polanski @ 10:43

I appreciate your parental issues...in fact, all too well, since I am an abusive and, at times, successful achoholic, as well as a parnoid schizophrenic (TIC = tongue in cheek).

Regarding your statement: "I can agree with your focus on pedigree if you couch it strictly in terms [sic]of how it has contributed to civilization." I'm not sure that a "pedigree" has ever contributed to civilization. But, many of those individuals included in a pedigree can, and often have contributed. In my case, I am burdened with knowing the deeds of my forefathers. Often, as I understand it, the success of a father weighs on the son. Well imagine a whole host of fathers, each of whom achieved national, if not international recognition. Imagine what tricks that can play with the ego.

And in the case of the Hoax, imagine what tricks the news medias coverage has played on the ego and super ego of the all too willing believers of the reported story, ... and yes, a story that pleases their predisposition.

Hence, the H-S.

Even yellow journalism has a responsibility to the society that allows its existence, and it seems to me that the responsibility increases as the potential consequences affect a smaller and smaller group, with the greatest responsibility existing when the possible consequnces affect a single individual.

And, by the way, just because I make a statement that is a generalization does not necessarily imply that the generalization applies to me.

Anonymous said...

Thanks, I