WriteThinking
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2008
- Messages
- 6,703
I actually did read the lengthy story, because I didn't want to comment on it, or the decision to pull it off the web site, without doing so.
"It starts off with expressions of full sympathy for Holtzclaw, hinting that perhaps there are two sides to this story. It tells only one."
This, more than anything, is what really derails the story and makes it so it can only be characterized as a major "Fail."
Had Jeff Arnold make any attempt whatsoever to include viewpoints and quotes of any of the victims, including Ligons but not just her, or had even put in anything from any of the jurors who must have had considerations, information and viewpoints that differed from the slew of the former football player/cop's supporters, it would have strengthened the story dramatically and put him and his project on much firmer, safer ground from a journalistic standpoint.
That said, I would not have pulled it from the site. Not by a longshot. Edit: (I say this presuming that when Double Down suggested it might have been better that the story was killed, he meant that it should have been killed before it was posted to the site. I would've agreed with that).
As an little aside, I found it ironic that SB Nation pulled a story revolving around cases of rape and sexual assaults, and then put among its reasons that "it gets real forking messy with race."
Geez.
"It starts off with expressions of full sympathy for Holtzclaw, hinting that perhaps there are two sides to this story. It tells only one."
This, more than anything, is what really derails the story and makes it so it can only be characterized as a major "Fail."
Had Jeff Arnold make any attempt whatsoever to include viewpoints and quotes of any of the victims, including Ligons but not just her, or had even put in anything from any of the jurors who must have had considerations, information and viewpoints that differed from the slew of the former football player/cop's supporters, it would have strengthened the story dramatically and put him and his project on much firmer, safer ground from a journalistic standpoint.
That said, I would not have pulled it from the site. Not by a longshot. Edit: (I say this presuming that when Double Down suggested it might have been better that the story was killed, he meant that it should have been killed before it was posted to the site. I would've agreed with that).
As an little aside, I found it ironic that SB Nation pulled a story revolving around cases of rape and sexual assaults, and then put among its reasons that "it gets real forking messy with race."
Geez.
Last edited: