muldoonthief:
And once again, here in the United States, no reporter has to get permission from any public official before putting their name in an article. Even if a person specifically demands that a particular reporter never mention their name or write it again, the reporter is under no legal requirement to respect that. Delauter himself has admitted he was wrong to do so.
Please try to understand.
She invented an opinion for him. He had not stated that opinion. In fact, he had declinhed to speak to her at all, due to an earlier incident.
She is now trying to pretend that he made a blanket ban on even mentioning his name. She is lying.
Peter_Morris:
Please try to understand.
She invented an opinion for him. He had not stated that opinion. In fact, he had declinhed to speak to her at all, due to an earlier incident.
She is now trying to pretend that he made a blanket ban on even mentioning his name. She is lying.
You still have not provided a cite of her saying what you are accusing her of saying.
Peter_Morris:
Please try to understand.
She invented an opinion for him. He had not stated that opinion. In fact, he had declinhed to speak to her at all, due to an earlier incident.
She is now trying to pretend that he made a blanket ban on even mentioning his name. She is lying.
Here’s the original mention in the article.
Councilman Kirby Delauter, who is also a former commissioner, has joined Shreve in concern over parking for elected officials. Gardner has reserved three parking spots at Winchester Hall for council members, since the part-time officials will rarely all turn up simultaneously.
Where is the “opinion”?
And if you agree that she lied and twisted, then provide the statement that The Unnamed Councilman made.
The entire article supports my statement. Have you actually read her comments in the article?
If he can’t be bothered to give the media direct quotes, then he has to live with what other people say about him, but he certainly doesn’t get freedom from having his actions as a councilman reported on.
Peter_Morris:
Please try to understand.
She invented an opinion for him. He had not stated that opinion. In fact, he had declinhed to speak to her at all, due to an earlier incident.
She is now trying to pretend that he made a blanket ban on even mentioning his name. She is lying.
Just to prove how extremely wrong you are, I’m going to type out his entire original facebook post, which is unfortunately a graphic on the arstechnica website:
Kirby Delauter on facebook:
Shame on Bethany Rodgers for an unauthorized use of my name and my reference in her article today. She contacted me by phone yesterday, I did not return her call and did not authorize any use of my name or reference in her article. I had let her know after her hit piece during the election where she embellished, twisted and downright lied about what we discussed for that article, that she was never to contact me again since she has absolutely no morals or journalistic ability.
Bethany, please understand, when you do a hit piece, you need to know who you’re dealing with. I have worked very hard to earn an honest reputation in this county. You could have earned my respect, instead you’ve shown that you will sell your soul for the liberal agenda at the FNP. You’re better than that, but you have already sold your credibility and that is something you won’t easily get back.
So let me be clear… do not contact me and do not use my name or reference me in an unauthorized form in the future.
I don’t see anything in there claiming that the article he’s currently complaining about included anything where she invented an opinion for him. Just that it used his name and referenced him without his authorization.
Cheesesteak:
I don’t care what she puts in her story. If a person says they don’t want you to contact them again, you should respect that. If that makes it harder to do your job, that’s your problem, not theirs.
Please don’t contact me via any posted message on this forum again, even one that does not specifically address me; you know I read posts here and I don’t want to read any more from you.
Will you respect my request? :dubious: :rolleyes:
Peter, your defense of He Who Shall Not Be Named* is almost as nonsensical as his original Facebook rant.
*Kirby Delauter.
You mean this?
The reporter he threatened, Bethany Rodgers, issued Delauter a brief civics lesson in response: “First of all, there is no requirement to get a person’s authorization in order to mention them in a paper, particularly if that person is an elected official. It is not just our right but our responsibility to report on people like you, who occupy positions of trust in our government, and I make no apologies for doing that.”
How does that support that she “lied and twisted”? Or that she claims he threatened the media in general?
Because he did. When he threatened legal action against a reporter for using his name, he’s threatening the whole media. What’s to stop him from doing it again if it worked the first time?
And since I’m already typing, here’s her entire facebook reply, again a graphic in the arstechnica article:
Bethany Rodgers on facebook:
Wow, Well, just to answer a few of these accusations: First of all, there is no requirement to get a person’s authorization in order to mention them in the paper, particularly if that person is an elected official. It is not just our right but our responsibility to report on people like you, who occupy positions of trust in our government, and I make no apologies for doing that. I am also aware that you asked me not to call you anymore. However, it is a journalistic principle to reach out to individuals who are part of an article. Again, it would be irresponsible for me NOT to do so, and I plan to continue giving you the oppportunity to comment on articles that concern you. Whether or not you return my calls is up to you.
Why am I ‘subject’ to being contacted by a journalist? I feel that I have the right to refuse contact with a journalist, or a specified publication, at which point they have no more right to contact me than any other person who I’ve refused contact with.
Cheesesteak:
Why am I ‘subject’ to being contacted by a journalist? I feel that I have the right to refuse contact with a journalist, or a specified publication, at which point they have no more right to contact me than any other person who I’ve refused contact with.
Don’t forget, Name Redacted was upset at the use of his name. He then ordered the reporter to never contact him under threat of legal action.
Peter_Morris:
Sigh. Look, everyone this is very simple.
He gave an interview to a journalist.
That journalist “twisted and downright lied” about him.
He publicly denounced that one specific journalist for lying.
he stated that he would give that specific journalist no further interviews.
That journalist continued to harrass him
he warned that journalist that he would take legal action if she continued.
she then continued to twist and lie.
It is obvious that she is in the wrong and he is in the right. I hope he does sue her and win.
Wow, pretty much every single bullet point in this list is factually incorrect.
Here is her comment (not comments):
Wow. Well, just to answer a few of these accusations: First of all, there is no requirement to get a person’s authorization in order to mention them in the paper, particularly if that person is an elected official. It is not just our right but our responsibility to report on people like you, who occupy positions of trust in our government, and I make no apologies for doing that. I am also aware that you asked me not to call you anymore. However, it is a journalistic principle to reach out to individuals who are part of an article. Again, it would be irresponsible for me NOT to do so, and I plan to continue giving you the opportunity to comment on articles that concern you. Whether or not you return my calls is up to you.
Where has she stated that he made a “blanket ban on even mentioning his name”?
Are you the councilman’s son?
running_coach:
Here’s the original mention in the article.
And if you agree that she lied and twisted, then provide the statement that The Unnamed Councilman made.
One correction : the “lied and twisted” comment applied to an earlier and unrelated article … “a hit piece during the election”
So, on the parking issue, she telephoned him for a statement.
He declined to reply to her, based on prior experience.
So she simply made up an opinion for him.
You ask what his statement was? He didn’t make one. No statement at all. She invented a statement fo him. And that shows her to be a liar.
And here’s the full article , dated Jan 3, that Delauter said used his name and referenced him without authorization. Peter Morris, if you would care to quote the opinion that you say she invented for him, I’d love to see it.
And here is the original “hit” piece that Mr KIRBY DELAUTER says is his basis for shunning the reporter. If that’s what passes for “hit” journalism, it’s pretty damn lightweight. Lot’s of “he said, she said” both for and against MR KIRBY DELAUTER. I don’t really see where the reporter herself says squat about him, but she quotes a lot of people who do.
“… how should we now refer to Kirby Delauter if we can’t use his name …”