I don't trust that police reporter (Renee) as being unbiased. (On The Last Word)

[LiberalFighter]

I betcha she is allowing herself to be used by the police so they can slant the story their way.

O'Donnell is doing good job cross examining the reporter. Reporter was also trying to be an expert in criminal law.

[elleng]

1. Could be, but hard to tell without seeing entire article.

IF there's no attribution anywhere in the story, I agree w you and Lawrence.

[LiberalFighter]

3. No atttribution

Didn't even have to read it to know. The reporter admitted during the interview that the source is not named.

[elleng]

6. But without a name, is there a 'blind' attribution,

like, 'cops/law enforcement said?'

[montanacowboy]

2. That Reporter seems to be a mouthpiece for the police

Lawrence is really grilling he

[dkf]

5. The reporters point was she was portraying what the police report said, not who was attributed.

Lawrence was attacking her for not specifically stating whose account it was but she may not know.

[elleng]

7. So she said, 'police report said?'

If so, might be good enough for an attribution, imo.

[dkf]

10. I believe that is how she clarified it when being grilled by O'Donnell.

[elleng]

13. Thx.

[alcibiades_mystery]

14. She attempted to claim that the article stated earlier that it was all a police version

It's still extremely dubious journalistic practice to switch into a factual presentation style for events you couldn't possibly know to be facts, then say "Oh, well, I said in paragraph two that most of this was coming from the police." That's an invitation to dishonesty, and official mouthpiecery at it's most insidious, was O'Donnell's point. The practice in journalism, and it exists for a distinct reason, is to always attribute an claim to a claimant if you don't know it factually, even if that means you do the whole "comma so-and-so said" and other signal phrases at the end of each paragraph. THis police reporter was essentially rubbing out that line while still trying to run an attribution in advance. Since people tend to read unattributed statement as fact in a newspaper article, this is a very dangerous and stupid practice, unless one of deliberately trying to mislead.

[alcibiades_mystery]

18. No, it's not

You need the signal phrase with every claim of fact that you can't verify. You don't simply include an umbrella attribution in paragraph one and proceed as if that's sufficient. Or you do, if your goal is to dissemble and spread lies.

[dkf]

21. I think this is the article in question.

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-03-26/news/os-trayvon-martin-zimmerman-account-20120326_1_miami-schools-punch-unarmed-black-teenager

[alcibiades_mystery]

22. Since it doesn't include the quotations O'Donnell was mentioning

and since it references the initial leaking, I don't think you're right. In this case, at least, the reporter is decent enough to use an appropriate signal phrase for unverified factual claims.

[nadinbrzezinski]

4. A little insight

She s being as fair as needed to keep a good line to her sources...

She shoud have added according to Zimmerman, or most likely a police unamed source.

This s a problem long time print reporters (and editors) have.

It is not that she is not being truthful, it is that they did not add certain words to copy to keep the spigot going. Problem is that the nterview might (will likely) dry at least some of her sources.

What you are watching is sadly textbook.

[dkf]

9. So should she not have reported the story if she doesn't know exactly whose account that is?

[nadinbrzezinski]

12. What she should have

And what she will are two different things. she's got sources to protect.

We've seen this locally as well

When unamed sources start, it's a sign the pd has lost complete control.

It is a huge red flag...

I expect more, not less, of this. Watch for official pd spokesman yada, yada, yada. Once the Feds see that things don't match.

[alcibiades_mystery]

19. THis isn't about sources

This is about addition of a signal phrase to a claim. It's perfectly fine to say "according to the police source" or whatever after every such claim of fact made by the source. The problem is that she presented claims of fact stylistically as if they were independently verified fact, and that's bush league journalism not in terms of source protection, but in terms of written style.

[nadinbrzezinski]

20. I know... According to police sources

Should have peppered. But I suspect like my local fish wrap there is more to the style than meets eye, also a little about keeping that unamed source talking.

I wonder who owns the Orlando sentinel, if you get my drift. Here it's owned by land developer and fish wrap has become dangerous to fish.

[MrScorpio]

8. She knows what side of her bread that the butter goes on...

The side that maintains her access to the police hierarchy.

[nadinbrzezinski]

16. Yup

[senseandsensibility]

11. She also said that Zimmerman's 2005 arrest was irrelevant

and something else was irrelevant too (can't remember, I was multi-tasking), but the other thing that was not relevant also reflected poorly on Zimmerman. On the other hand, things that reflected poorly on Martin were very relevant, even if not sourced. Did that seem to be her take on things?

[nadinbrzezinski]

15. Her source most likely

Pd is desperate to retake control f the story line here.

[elleng]

17. The 'also' was Trayvon's prior behavior, I think.