What the heck happened to those Ten Questions?
So here’s a peek behind the In Box curtain…
Early this morning — as in, way too early — I was writing a draft of a blog post, posing some skeptical and challenging questions to the environmental community regarding their stance and views about the Adirondack Club and Resort.
It was posted accidentally (some kind of tech error on my part) before I was satisfied with my approach, and — more importantly — before I was comfortable that this was an essay I could post without breaching journalistic neutrality.
I often compose essays like this one without being sure whether they are appropriate or not. Then I live with them and think about them (and often consult my editors) until I’m confident that they work.
Then I either post or delete.
Even when I delete, writing these things helps me to think things through and frame my own understanding and my own approach as a reporter more clearly.
As I say, in this case, I hit a wrong button and out it went…
Some folks saw it before I hit the delete button and I’ve had several inquiries about the post, so I wanted to explain what had happened.
I’m running flat out today on other projects, but I hope to edit and repost the essay in some form later, or perhaps approach these questions with environmental leaders in some other way.
Thanks. I guess they are stuck in the ether of the internet now for posterity!
Those were tough but fair questions. They would certainly stir the pot a bit more than it needs to be stirred right now. To be fair I think that many of those questions will be raised and perhaps answers to some degree in this hearing.
This is apropos of nothing, except the future of NPR, and as a consequence, Brian’s blog posts. When NCPR is defunded and closes up shop, it will be thanks to this guy:
http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/03/citing_punkd_james_okeefe_questions_calif_recording_law_in_acorn_sting_suit.php?ref=fpb
Ah, Brian, better you should lose ten questions than ten commandments, eh?
Thou shalt not hit the Enter key in vain…
Brain, you may have gotten lucky. The first version of your post was sort of over the top, if you know what I mean. We understand that the Tupper Lakers support the project; the question is, are there environmental concerns that should be addressed? Advocacy groups are,by definition, dedicated to keeping their concerns in front of the public and government – that’s what they do. Do they want to kill the ACR project? I don’t know. But it’s odd for a journalist to become offended that they work to pursue their mission, that is, scrutinizing any action in the Park to see how it affects environmental concerns.
*Brian
“it’s odd for a journalist to become offended”
Erb, how is posing some tough questions say that a journalist is offended in some way?
“Do they want to kill the ACR project? I don’t know.”
Erb, yes Protect! specifically has said that the want the permit denied.
But like you say there is no reason that they should not be advocating for that. They are quite honest in their positions. Other groups appear to be supportive to some extent but they may be suggesting changes to the project that will essentially kill it anyway if they have to be incorporated into the plan. I prefer a more straightforward approach. The “Yes, But” approach is dishonest.
I never read the 10 questions but this post does raise some interesting questions of its own when it is seen in light of The Schiller Affair.
I’ll bet if you were NPR home office personnel the firing squad would have gotten you by now. Instead you get to say “oops, I’m human and I made a mistake.”
Double standard?
Knuck, I saw them not even a mistake.