Comments on: Live From the Post-Columbia Heights Shooting Press Conference; Evans Says Think West Side Story!

By: Pete Witte

Pete Witte — Fri, 26 Jun 2009 19:58:08 +0000

http://wordsofwitte.wordpress.com/2009/06/20/anti-crime-act-of-2009-press-conference-at-columbia-heights-metro-station/

By: dale

dale — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 21:27:50 +0000

If Jason is guilty of anything, it’s being overly detailed in his reporting. Courageously highlighting information other reports wouldn't or maybe fail to notice. That's why I read this stuff; keep up the good work……..WCP

By: Fred

Fred — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 17:09:39 +0000

So if Barack Obama ever has to send tanks through the streets of Idaho or Nebraska or any other majority white place are they supposed to object categorically? I mean, at what point does race NOT matter? Don't we dance with the ones that brung us? I mean, ok, protest if you wish, but I'm saying if the situation called for it (and I don't know if this one does) then I would expect my elected politician to act, be he/she black white or latino. You know?

By: Angry Al Gonzales

Angry Al Gonzales — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 16:04:22 +0000

Anybody who thinks race doesn't matter in DC is a fool. & "AG" Nickles is a lawless pit bull. This article was good, solid reporting. You have three white council members, whose kids will not be considered "gangsters", trying to impose an unconstitutional law on a majority black city. You have a white "AG" from Virginia who practices toxic litigation trying to further the interests of the white ruling class of DC. People who refuse to see the central role played by race in this issue are worse than fools. They're knaves.

By: downtown rez

downtown rez — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 15:42:09 +0000

Jason: You continue to mischarictarize my objections. I do not expect CP (or any entity with an editorial arm) to always do straight news. That would not be reasonable of me. But I do expect editorial to be labeled as such. Otherwise, when I read a report about a news event, especially on City Desk (News, Politics...etc) I expect that report to be... news.
My own opinion on any given set of facts really has no bearing whatsoever on this basic expectation, which really comes down to one of honesty.

By: Fred

Fred — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 14:08:21 +0000

How the CP refers to the Councilmembers is to me about as inconsequential as you can get. It's the City Paper for cryin out loud!!!!!

I'm just waiting on them to actually report the story. Or, don't they work on the weekends?

By: New2DC

New2DC — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 13:05:19 +0000

In a community as diverse as Columbia Heights, [three white councilmen] is material, especially when their proposed legislation specifically impacts minority groups in such a significant manner. The AG as a [pit ball] is factual based on Nickles behavior; viciously attacking innocents individuals without cause and threatening attacks on any citizen, employee, or business that even looks wrong or question the one that feeds him, fresh raw bloody meat, from the spoils of misused resources and stolen tax payers funds. The AG has earned this reputation; injuring many and scaring a few with his pusillanimous sneak attacks and delay tactics. Nickles appears unashamed and proud of the same. Jason reported the facts. And in my opinion did a decent job. However, he omitted the fact that the pit bull is old, gray, wrinkled, and toothless. Now that would’ve been bias!!!

By: Sally

Sally — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 10:55:02 +0000

Jason - Stop being a tool. In your own response, you can't even keep your story straight. In your first paragraph, you're saying you're not biased simply because you're asking tough questions. Yet in your last paragraph, you're asking why anyone expected you to do a "boring" straight news story on the topic. You are totally unreliable in presenting an unbiased report on this issue. Same as Harry Jaffe and his ridiculous spin in favor of the crime bill. I've got no problem in you presenting the usual, tired snark that passes for witty commentary in the City Paper these days. Just don't try to claim that the same commentary is "just the facts." It's insulting to the intelligence of your readers.

By: Q

Sat, 20 Jun 2009 04:37:44 +0000

Jason, I usually like the stuff you write, but I agree with Rez on this one. Your angle wasn't clever, wasn't poignant, and made you come off as lame. The questions you asked were on point, but the "three white councilmembers" and "pitbull AG" lines added nothing to the article. Believe it or not, a straight news story would've been hilarious, simply because of the recent facts surrounding the suspect. Instead, more people are blogging about what you wrote instead of the story. Was that the intent? The Examiner has Jaffe as their pariah, the Post and Times have multiple ones. Other than Valdez and Amanda, the City Paper was usually reliable in getting the facts, but with enough slant not to take away from the story. I'm not a critic (or trying to be), but the reason that some of the bloggers took offense is that they have come to expect BETTER from the City Paper. It's your own fault for putting out so many quality articles in the past, you are a victim of your own success. LOL!

By: Jason Cherkis

Jason Cherkis — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 04:02:15 +0000

I don't get why being skeptical about this crime bill means bias. I have no idea whether the gang injunction would work or even whether it violates civil liberties. So by asking pointed questions and raising points, I guess I'm biased. I'm not going to write a straight news story on this p.r. event which uses a fresh shooting to score political points because certain politicians didn't get what they want out of a crime bill. The other side--i.e. the councilmembers who rejected the gang injunction did not attend. Why not raise points and not let Evans, Fenty, etc. off the hook. There are plenty of laws on the books that mimic these gang injunctions--nuisance property laws where law enforcement can shut down houses that are suspected crack houses. Just about every defendant who enters Superior Court walks out with a stay-away order. This latest idea just feels like an old one and one that would never work because a) cops won't enforce it and b) gang members won't pay the fines. Downtown Rez, I'm not sure why you expected a straight news story on this press conference. Wouldn't that just be boring? Haven't you already heard these same talking points over and over again. Aren't you the least bit skeptical that these politicians would use this shooting to score points?

By: CL Huges

CL Huges — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 02:38:11 +0000

Correction WTOP

By: CL Huges

CL Huges — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 02:33:39 +0000

Hey Rez and Sally, if you want the same BS political quotes without balance journalist opinion based on the facts then go listen to WTPO, Watch WUSA 9, and read The Washington Times; O Yea... and comment on their dead blog sites.
Good work Cherkis. [WCP Keeps It Real.} Yep Fred, ole Jim boy's young hot thug "intern"?????? When did Graham learn this fact Rez?

By: Fred

Fred — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 02:19:42 +0000

Did I hear right? Was the shooter an intern in Graham's office??

By: DC Res

DC Res — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 02:08:05 +0000

Jason, maybe you were right on target based on the Breaking News. Jim Graham and others are now eating their talking points.... This means you too Rez

By: Sally

Sally — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 00:10:19 +0000

Does anyone bother to take Cherkis' views on the crime bill seriously?

He's as ridiculously biased on the matter as Harry Jaffe. Except that Jaffe writes a dopey opinion column, where as Cherkis thinks he writes a straight news story. Both are in the can for their points of view, and their reporting of "facts" should be taken as nothing more than personal opinions.