Felicia Sonmez

I mentioned this on the Kobe thread. I think Kobe all but certainly did what he was accused of. I can't say 100 percent because I wasn't a witness to it.

But there's a time and a place. With the helicopter wreckage still smoking isn't it, and if I were her boss, I wouldn't want her on any important story ever again if her judgment and sense of timing is THAT bad. If she had tweeted it this morning, I doubt anyone would have batted an eye.

 

Elsewhere it was claimed the suspension was for sharing the screenshots of the vile stuff she got in her DMs, some of which included email addresses, which I guess is against company policy. If thats the case its a good suspension.

Share the Bryant stories, put his history out there, fair game good work.... make it about yourself with the pics of the reaction of trolls? I have less sympathy for that.

 

Totally agree. Her first tweet was nothing more than a retweet. Perhaps it falls under the Too Soon principle, but it's not journalistically unethical. The screen grab with the identifying info of those who wrote vile messages to her is unnecessary. By all means, take that screen grab and send it to the cops. Let them handle it. But don't put it out there for the world to see. That doesn't help anybody, the reporter included.
The Greg Wemple Blog, which I have always enjoyed, defended the reporter against management while implying the reporter's only crime was retweeting. It glossed over the screen-grab issue.

 

No. Someone willing to take the time and threaten to kill a reporter lost his or her privileges to anonymity.

 

Felicia missed her lesson on intersectionality in Twitter Outrage School.

It's only OK to destroy certain people on the basis of past allegations. For others who belong to more privileged groups, past allegations can't even be mentioned.

 

This is a good example of a reporter being a know-it-all busybody and not staying in his/her lane. She exhibited a lapse in judgment and made her colleagues's work more difficult. Plus she sicced people on her and now has to live in a hotel. Ya gotta know the terrain.

 

I guess if you’re Deadspin or Barstool and you want to “get in the mud” with the cretins, sure.

If you’re the WaPo and you have a specific policy against doing that its probably a bad idea.

Look I dont have any sympathy for an asshole who has nothing better to do than Twitter threaten a reporter they’ve never heard of over an RT they don’t like.

But if thats their clearly defined policy you can’t violate it and then spin about being silenced for daring insult Kobe

 

Another bit of this story is the LA Times guy who resigned over the allegations but proceeded to whine about how they ruined his life, saying he was the real victim. Uh, bro. If you’ve been wronged as badly as you claim, sue your accuser. And don’t resign.
Oh right. You’d have to go through discovery.

 

The policy does not specify posting emails of people threatening you on social media is a violation.

 

I had never seen that Daily Beast story/link. And clearly, Vanessa Bryant never did, either. If she had, I doubt she would have been playing the part of the supportive wife throughout that time. Indeed, she probably would have followed through with any thoughts/steps toward divorce.

Kobe Bryant comes off horribly -- entitled, oblivious, a cad, someone with real potential for violence and a willingness to use his size and strength to overpower, and just generally speaking, not a good person at all. I'm not sure I would have trusted him around his four daughters, even.

And don't get me started on how easily he explained away Michelle, the apparent "other woman" in his and Vanessa's lives, and how he even managed to bring Shaq into the mess like his interview with the police was just some everyday barroom conversation.

I don't have any problem with Felicia Sonmez bringing all this out in the hours after Bryant's death. I get the sentiment about not doing it quite THAT soon. But, really, if not then, when? While Bryant's funeral/memorial is taking place? Would that be any more appropriate? Because, a few days after that, Bryant's death -- and life -- to put it bluntly, will be old news.

We're reporters/newspapers/media outlets, and the life-cycle of news is, for better or worse, short. We work on daily, and lately, even hourly (or less) time tables. News is news and should be reported as quickly, fully and in as timely a manner as possible. And in Sonmez's case, an allowance/understanding of her previous allegations of sexual misconduct by L.A. Times Beijing bureau chief Jonathan Kaiman should be taken into consideration.

I'd think Sonmez's suspension had more to do with any email addresses or other personal information/specifics that might have been tweeted or screen-grabbed. Those types of specific things I could definitely see being in violation of the social-media policy of a large company.