Newpapers SUCK!

The BBQ Pit
41

I don’t think I, or anyone else in the thread is advocating that the person be held to any sort of different standard in her behavior after this episode. She has paid her debt, no matter how light some of us may feel it was and should be allowed to ‘get on with her life’. But Bill seems to think that she should avoid any social consequences of this crime. I agreee that once it’s done it is done. But, given the information provided by Bill, the conviction is something that occured recently (see below) and as such is not a case of people muck raking and throwing it her face from long ago but the legitimate interests of the community being served by reporting the outcome of a public criminal court case.

Jodi took care of this already.

The offense took place a year ago. The conviction took place last week, or at least recently. As such, it’s pefectly normal for the paper to include it in the public record events.

42

Let’s see if I get this straight…

On one hand, when you don’t like someone - like, say, people who prosecute your business (as you have mentioned here), or the ACLU (who you called the “Anti Christ League Union” or some such nonsense over at LBMB), or Planned Parenthood, or homosexuals (you claimed you would not hire one to work for you no matter how qualified he or she might be), it is ALL BAD.

People pointing out how lawyers would help you in a minute don’t matter. Showing you that the ACLU actually has fought for religious rights and how Planned parenthood offer prenatal care, adoption help and birth control to needy women doesn’t matter. Telling you that gays can do a job without their sex life getting in the way and even pointing out that JESUS HIMSELF hung out with lepers (not to equate homosexuality with leprocy; making a point about tolerance, forgiveness and how it’s not your place to judge) doesn’t matter.

Now, here you have a friend. She has done a reprehensible act, certainly an act reprehensible to many here all across the country. And you are making excuses for her. And everyone - the media, the hardened hearts of the SDMB - are all out to get her, because she’s really good and deserves forgiveness.

Here is the biggest problem with you, William: You see everything as black and white. Enemies over here. Freinds over there. And if you already deemed a person or an organization on either side, not all the evidence in the world will get you to change your mind because the ACLU is bad and your drunk-driving friend is good.

Well, guess what? The world is not only full of shades of gray, William, but it is made of the most amazing colors of all shades and hues!

You need to learn this, William, because the world you live in cannot be simply divided into “us” and “them” as I’ve seen you time and time again try and do.

People are far more complex than this. Groups of people are extremely more complex than this. And you would be a lot less confused if you would just get that through your head.

Yer pal,
Satan

*I HAVE BEEN SMOKE-FREE FOR:
Six months, two weeks, four days, 21 hours, 46 minutes and 32 seconds.
8076 cigarettes not smoked, saving $1,009.53.
Extra life with Drain Bead: 4 weeks, 1 hour, 0 minutes.

*THE YANKEES WIN! THAAAAAAH YANKEES WIN!
1996 · 1998 ··· WORLD CHAMPIONS ··· 1999 · 2000
26 Titles! The #1 Dynasty of all-time!
And most importantly… RULERS OF NYC!!

43

Good Lord!

It looks like it’s “felch the hicks” week here at the pit.

::grabs a straw::

Bill,

While I do not believe that the reporters were in any way acting maliciously when they printed the story, I do think it was extremely beneficial. Think about it. Based upon your account, your friend had no knowledge that driving drunk was bad. I’ll suspend my ability to disbelieve for a sec and agree with you.
She’s probably done it before and she did it then, and there’s no guarantee she won’t do it again.

She got caught but served no time. So the next time she decides to pick up a drink (and don’t tell me it could never happen just because she happens to be on the straight and narrow right NOW) she won’t have the experience of jail to deter her. She paid her fine and then left. Six months from now, she’ll have ended probation and have forgotten about it.

But it seems to me that the one thing she took out of this whole experience is that she doesn’t like her name in the paper. Maybe, just maybe, the next time she picks up her keys after taking a drink, she’ll think about that.

Can I write a thank you note to the reporter?

44

That’s actually not a bad outcome for her. Damn good thing she had a good, ahem, lawyer.

45

Bill, I’m going to try to avoid making a joke about Posting under the influence, but if you honestly beleive the things you’ve posted in this thread, namely:

$3000 and probation is a TOUGH punishment for DUI;
The “piss test” in rehab was unneccessary and degrading;
The newspaper SHOULDN’T be publishing the results of recently decided court cases;
Your friend had no prior knowledge of the legal consequences of DUI;
Your friend had no prior knowledge of the physical consequences of DUI;
Your friend had no prior knowledge of the social consequences of DUI;
EVERYONE has driven drunk at one point in their lives;
People only commit crimes because they haven’t been forgiven for prior ones;
That I should, for some reason, forgive this woman’s crime because "it was a long time ago and she’s sober now;
That I should, for some reason, forgive this woman’s crime because they lawyer cost her a lot;
That I should, for some reason, forgive this woman’s crime because she’s really sorry about it;

then you, sir, have a lot of learning to do about life in this world.

If, on the other hand, you DON’T really believe this, and you just posted it to gain sympathy, FUCK YOU.

And whether or not you expect me to agree with the above, Fuck your liquor swilling, life endangering, dumbass, felony committing friend. And no, I do not forgive her. DUI is one of the lowest of the low among crimes, and should be punished MUCH more severely than it currently is.

46

Wow. Now I feel weird. Here I am, considering whether to be either a lawyer OR a journalist, and Bill’s telling me that BOTH these jobs are the works of Satan! Now I’m all confused! :confused:
Can I at least come into the party? I brought soda! And welcome back, Jodi!

Anyway, now that that’s setteled, I’d like to say that Bill, with all due respect (cough none cough), you can take all your generalistic, mis-informed, biased shit and go to the 9th circle of Hell.

Your friend committed a crime. I think you can agree on that, at least. Now, think about this:

-The type of crime that your friend committed causes people to die on a daily basis.
-One of those people was a friend of my family’s, who died recently while DUI.
-There is no way in HELL that your friend didn’t know what drunk driving can do, unless she has been under a rock, with her fingers stuck in her ears and her eyes gouged out, and the rock that she was under was under a larger rock, in the middle of the desert.

Now, that said, I think you can also agree with me that the crime your friend committed was a particular bad one. Once you’ve let that sink into your brain, think about this, and try not to confuse yourself:

-It is a newspaper’s job to report all relevant information to the general public.
-This information includes crimes committed in the community.
-I’m gonna take a guess and say that your friend is not a well-known figure in society.

That being the case, why the hell would a newspaper print an article about her for the sole purpose of humiliation? They don’t just pick random people and say “Hey, guess what, I feel like spreading gossip about Joe Shmoe who I’ve never met.”
The newspaper printed the story because it’s NEWS. A person was convicted for a potentially deadly crime. That qualifies as news. And don’t say that they did it just cause they needed to fill space. There’s a presidential campaign on, for God sakes, and it’s peak football season. The paper said what it felt the public had a right to know.

So Bill, just shut up already.

47

Jesus is the one name I do not associate with Billy here.
:wally (not for you, mouthbeather)

48

Polycarp, I can’t really comment on the particular situation because I haven’t read the article. (To be able to completely understand the article in context, you’d have to examine like articles from the same paper to get a general tone.) WB, if you would care to describe the content and location of the article, as well as any details that are important to know about the paper, then you might give the rest of us an insight into your anger.

I can tell you, though, that if someone recieved a DUI conviction or the like in the area that the paper I work for covers, it would most likely be a buried article or something in the police blotter. There is a social function to reporting convictions- it does create a social idea that Something Has Been Done, if that makes sense. Many papers, if they covered a story at the start, will follow up when a trial has been decided.

Of course, who the person is has a lot to do with the case coverage. The chief of police being convicted for a DUI will generate more ink than a Wal-Mart employee.

Actually, I’d like more of a description of the paper. I’d especially like to know if the paper has political affiliations, has a target audience, or is a general newspaper. Distribution, how much was going on in a given day/week, if it’s a daily or a weekly… all of these would affect coverage. WB, context would be appreciated. I for one would understand your anger more if the paper ran a front page banner with a slug like “Justice against drunk driver” as opposed to a paragraph on the police banner on page 27.

49

I bet the newspaper article that has Bill “hacked off” is a police blotter type column listing the dispositions of cases in court during the previous week. And I also would bet that said column is read religously (if I can use that term) by a fair number of people in town because it’s the local print version of “COPS”.
Bill’s friend got busted, her case takes a year to go to judgment, she spent all of one night in jail, and got probation and a fine. I think she got off pretty easy.
I’ve always wanted to be a traffic court judge. I’d be throwing maximum penalties at everyone, and for DUI convictions I’d be giving out jail time, not to mention license suspensions.
So, Bill, things could be worse for your friend. If I had been the judge she’d have spent more time in jail and she’d be pedalling a bike to and from work for the next couple of years.

50

I don’t think that she suffered nearly enough. I think that she should have spent those six months in jail. AND I think it’s the public’s right to know that she got convicted of a crime. If she did this thing (and apparently, even YOU admit that she drove while intoxicated) then she should have just pled guilty and taken her punishment. She got off incredibly lightly.

Let’s see, she’s upset because people KNOW about it, right? From your writing, I don’t get the impression that she’s upset that she drove drunk. I say that every busybody old gossiping hag SHOULD ask her about it. Maybe then she’ll think. I think that she probably needs to go in for counseling. Maybe she’ll get her priorities straight. She shouldn’t be upset because people know about this. She should be upset because she did it.

Oh, and no, I’m not gonna close this thread, so don’t even ask me to.

51

Jesus-fucking-Christ there is a lot of self righteousness in this thread.

I don’t know a damn thing about Wildest Bill. But from everything I’ve seen he seems to be a guy who has the courage to state what he truly believes (even if I don’t agree with any of his views personally), and back it up, having a good sence of humor about people who disagree with him. If you disagree with him about one of his points, then argue about him with it in that particular thread. This thread he started is about him having sympathy for someone who made a mistake, and you are bringing in pure hatred from other threads. You hypocritcal Motherfuckers who have sympathy for anybody around, unless they happen to know somebody who you disagree with, which apparently means they are worthless scum.

52

**
You’re right, you don’t know a damn thing about him. While he doesn’t havea problem stating what he believes, he isn’t able to “back it up”; For example, here, the only rationale he’s given for why this convicted felon shouldn’t be treated in the same way every other convicted felon is treated is, “she feels real bad” about it. ‘What difference does that make’ we asked. Well she feels really, REALLY bad about it. he answered, she’s suffered enough. ** THIS ** is backing it up?

Sense of humor? Sometimes, it may seem that way. However, note that he’s able to spell names correctly when they agree with him, for example.

I also disagree with your assertion “you are bringing in pure hatred from other threads.” what we ARE doing is pointing out HIS inconsistency in that here, he has all sorts of sympathy for some one who has commited a crime, and in other threads he has no problem being very judgemental himself (calling all lawyers who practice civil law scum for example). And, by the way, ** Bill’s ** position is not “showing her sympathy” but that the “newspapers SUCK!” (maybe you didn’t notice the title of the thread) for publishing her crime in the paper, as they apparently do for other criminals. He was looking for special treatment for his friend.
And as for "You hypocritcal Motherfuckers who have sympathy for anybody around, unless they happen to know somebody who you disagree with, which apparently means they are worthless scum. "

may I be the first to offer you the opportunity to allow the local syphilitic goat creative use of your orifices? What we’ve been insisting is that ** Bill’s buddy ** should have the exact same consideration as any other convicted felon. As a matter of fact, many of us have stated that we ** do ** have empathy for the person, we merely also require that she be held accountable.

**
[/QUOTE]

53

Uhhh…sorry no…The thread is about whether a newspaper should publish the facts about a drunk driving conviction. Sorry…no biscuit for you today.

54

I’m feeling a bit down Bill. Can you do economists or drummers or Australians soon?

55

And you feel a proper reaction would be what, shit-lips? Shall we clap him on the back, nod sagely and murmur with a supporting voice, “Yes, yes Billy-boy, we agree thoroughly. Your poor friend is clearly being persecuted . After all, what she did wasn’t really that bad. It’s hardly more than a speeding ticket. As you say ‘almost everyone has driven when they shouldn’t have.’ And those who haven’t. Well, they’re actions are ‘commendable’ but hardly releveant. Your friend should definitely be treated differently than all the other people convicted of a crime. Because she feels so badly about it. She should never have to face the consequences of her actions since it’s just the first time. That evil newspaper did a bad thing by mentioning her in the public record. It destroyed her reputation, not her own actions.” Tell me, Dicknose, would you find that a better way to react to Bill and his insistence that his friends shouldn’t face the consequences of their actions?

**

Bill “backs up his beliefs” the same way a 3 year old “backs up his beliefs”. He simply tries to speak louder than anyone else. And when someone brings up points that show him he’s wrong, he shoves his fingers in his ears and screams “I’m not listening to you! Lalalalalalala! I’m not listening to you.”

Okay, let’s check to make sure we’re all reading the same thread. His first post had nothing to do with him having sympathy for his friend. It was a rant against a community paper for printing the public record. For serving the public interest. Or Billy Boy isn’t quite capable of seeing that, so to him it’s: “small town busy body newspaper that print(sic) that kind of crap.” He then asks the question So why then does this little piece of crud rag of a newspaper need to print that about her. Not satisfied with asking it once, he asks it twice * "What gives a newspaper the right to ruin someones reputation over the penalties the court has already bestowed upon her? " * This is the question many of us damn near broke an ankle in the rush to answer, seeing as it’s about as hard to answer as “What color is the sky.”

When pldennison pointed out the answer first, Billy Boy changed the entire rant in midstream. Suddenly his friend’s crime shouldn’t be counted. Not only was it not as bad as the other crimes, she was really really embarassed. And sorry. And humiliated. And other things. Oh, and since *’… almost everyone has drove [sic] when they shouldn’t of [sic] the only difference is that she got caught.’ *

There have been people in this thread who expressed a great deal of empathy and the wish that she get her life in order, hoping that she does. It’s an expression of caring I find very touching. But, except for Bill, there has been no attempt to say that the consequences of her actions are either unfair or unwarranted. There was a user from this board who was busted for DWI, I believe. And in reading some of the threads before he went in to serve his sentence, I found a lot of empathy and hope for him to get control of his problem. But there, like here, there wasn’t any indication that I saw that expressed the feeling that the sentence wasn’t fair or deserved. Granted, this happened before I really started reading the boards, and it is possible that I missed someone saying just that.

People were not ‘spewing hate’ in this thread. They were pointing out a tendency that Bill has of holding his friends to a different standard than everyone else. All lawyers suck, except for his friends. All criminals suck, except for his friends. Are you noticing a trend here, or are we going to fast for you. Just keep moving your lips while you read, it’ll come to you eventually.

Read into the responses to Bill’s ranting whatever you wish, Shit lips. The fact remains that Bill thinks it’s unfair that his friend face the consequences of her actions and is offended at the very suggestion that she not be allowed to pretend that it never happened.

56

Okay, it’s confirmed. I really DO love you!

Bonus points for calling him a “dicknose,” which Drain Bead will attest is something I’ve been known to use when appropriate…

Yer pal,
Satan

*TIME ELAPSED SINCE I QUIT SMOKING:
Six months, two weeks, five days, 18 hours, 30 minutes and 13 seconds.
8110 cigarettes not smoked, saving $1,013.85.
Extra time with Drain Bead: 4 weeks, 3 hours, 50 minutes.

*THE YANKEES WIN! THAAAAAAH YANKEES WIN!
1996 · 1998 ··· WORLD CHAMPIONS ··· 1999 · 2000
26 Titles! The #1 Dynasty of all-time!
And most importantly… RULERS OF NYC!!