Please? He provided the court doc ... the full motion from the DT, with ALL of the "*advertiser censored* sites" listed, without black-outs. (You're maybe reading from "other" sites?)
Not going to provide the link. Go find it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellow_journalism
“Yellow journalism, or the yellow press, is a type of journalism that presents little or no legitimate well-researched news and instead uses eye-catching headlines to sell more newspapers. Techniques may include exaggerations of news events, scandal-mongering, or sensationalism. By extension, the term yellow journalism is used today as a pejorative to decry any journalism that treats news in an unprofessional or unethical fashion.”
I fail to see how Keifer is unethical. Nor, IMO, is he a shill for the defense. He is journalist, doing his job in this age of “get it first, in-the-moment.”
Listen. I have NO connection with Kiefer. But, as a former/and, now, semi-current journalist (30+years) and as a person with a Communications/Journalism degree, I’m in a position to offer some valid insights.
Throw tomatoes. I don’t care.
Ok, I'll play.
Is it ethical to report the identity of the jury foreperson in a high profile case before it is disclosed nor have they returned their verdict and been dismissed? Yes or No.
If yes, then why do you suppose he redacted that portion of his online article within about an hour of publishing it. After people (ahem, me) started asking questions around the hallway about how he would know, much less publish, such delicate information.
In the same article, he reported that it was known the jury was hung. A day before they actually did hang. Is this his use of sources? Reporting a jury verdict before it's been decided much less delivered? Also redacted. Yes or No
Finally, is it within your ethical boundaries for a journalist to be sitting in a courtroom calling the victim in a murder case a "" or a "douchebag", blaming the surviving family members for the actual existence of a trial and/or this comment "when that Murder 2 conviction comes in, I'm gonna walk up to Juan Martinez and tell him to shove it up his A$$". Are these behaviors of an ethical journalist? While on the job and inside the courtroom? Yes or No
Because, whether you choose to believe me or not, I first hand witnessed every one of those things. And I have documentation from Michael Kiefer on far worse comments said about the victim in this case and the family (and the prosecutor).
I'm interested in your remarks about the ethics involved here. Is this just a journalist doing his job? Reporting in an unbiased fashion?
I can go on and on as you'd imagine but I'll leave it at that for now.
These aren't tomatoes by the way, I'm not victimizing you in any way. But I know how to handle the Truth.
PS. In case you or anyone might be concerned about my own personal ethics, these kinds of caustic comments about the victim, the victims families and the prosecutor were spewed by Michael Kiefer for months to anyone would listen in that courtroom. Out loud. While he was on duty being paid to be a reporter of facts by the AZ Republic. How do I know this? Several other journalists, who I know personally, were complaining about him. Ok truth be told, laughing at him behind his back for the caricature of a journalist he'd become. At least two were trading seats so they didn't have to sit next to him to be subjected to this constant barrage. Is this ethical journalistic behavior for a BEAT COURT REPORTER?
Plus I'm not on the job, owe nothing to anyone and let me be clear on this: I will ALWAYS land on the side of victims and when I say victims I mean the person who was murdered or otherwise abused/assaulted/wronged and their family members. ALWAYS. Kiefer jumped the shark on our friendship after I subjected myself to months of his victim bashing BS out of a history with him. He turned a corner when he turned that venom directly on to me, to my face. Boom, done, poof. Then he blocked me on twitter.
anic:
