Replies

The panel, titled "Why rape allegations against men's lacrosse players became a national story on race, class and crime," answered its titled question with the presence of the Duke University student newspaper Chronicle alumni most culpable for a journalistic mess of their own making, seated at the table.

The university's OWN journalism alumni 'screwed up the story'.

---- Ashley ' 70, and the HERALD-SUN

--- Drescher ' 88, and the NEWS & OBSERVER

--- Meadows ' 95 and NEWSWEEK magazine.

The idea that they may have had a better handle on the story because they knew Duke was the first mistake.

Any unaquainted outsider would have been better able to see through the hysteria and lies being spewed forth on the campus and downtown.

Noticeably absent was Applebome ' 70, from THE NEW YORK TIMES,

or the circle of imcompetent story-telling would have been complete.

The student editor Darby, gets a pass, since she wasn' t a professional.

Where were Abrams ' 85 and MSNBC

or Feinstein ' 76 , ex-WASHINGTON POST?

Putting NPR's Stasio in as moderator guaranteed this panel was merely a public relations stunt.

** And these people STILL don't get the story. They really don't.

What this story needs is a good Criminal Reporter willing to shake the rats
up downtown and nothing else.

They can start with a trip to the Platinum.

Feinstein and Abrams are two obvious choices for additions to the panel. I feel they had the maximum number of people that was practical. Who would you have removed?

As much as I liked Bilas' performance it's not really his "beat". I would say the same about Feinstein. They are more straight "sports" reporters (despite Bilas' J.D.)

Here's what Feinstein said back in May
http://articles.news.aol.com/sports/_a/dukes-handling-of-lacrosse-mess-has-been/20041202125109990001

Unlike so many media people, there's not a thing in this article he'd have to change. I'm sure he'll have a book out on it at some time in the future. Maybe he can get Brodhead the negative attention he deserves.

I, frankly, I would have substituted Abrams for Bilas or perhaps Footlick. And if you could have gotten K.C. Johnson, I would have subbed Johnson and Abrams for Bilas and Footlick.

To be fair, however, we don't know who was invited and couldn't make it.

This is to all the Dukies reading here...

I know I've forgotten several. Please forgive.

This is really a reply to something way up thread where I pointed out that there had been an alumni coup of sorts at Dartmouth and a couple of renegades had gotten on the board.

Here are the bylaws of the Duke University Board of Trustees

The Bylaws of Duke University

ARTICLE II. BOARD OF TRUSTEES

2. Nomination and Elections. The thirty-six elected Trustees shall be elected as follows: twelve by the North Carolina Conference of the United Methodist Church; twelve by the Western North Carolina Conference of the United Methodist Church; and twelve by the graduates of Duke University. Any student, faculty member, alumnus, Trustee, or other friend of the University may offer candidates for consideration. A roster of such candidates shall be kept in the office of the University Secretary, and it shall be reviewed whenever vacancies are expected to occur. The Executive Committee shall then make its recommendations to the Board of Trustees, and the Board, after hearing the recommendations of the Executive Committee, and by a majority of the Trustees present at any regular meeting, shall nominate the persons to be elected Trustees and submit its nominations to the appropriate conference of the United Methodist Church and the graduates.

Have you ever been asked to vote on a the Board? Who votes for the Alumni? It sounds like the Executive Committee controls the nominations.

I just saw this (was visiting relatives this weekend, so I missed it)

from abc board:
http://forums.go.com/abclocal/WTVD/thread?threadID=134693
From another news source:

Committee switches support to Nifong

BY BRIANNE DOPART
Oct 21, 2006 : 10:34 pm ET

DURHAM -- The Durham Committee on the Affairs of Black People switched its allegiance to Assistant District Attorney Mike Nifong in the November election.

The DA's race has probably been the year's most-watched political contest due to the controversial prosecution of white members of the Duke University lacrosse team on allegations they raped a black exotic dancer.

The Committee had previously endorsed Keith Bishop, who came in third in the May primary behind Nifong and former Assistant District Attorney Freda Black.

Nifong, a Democrat, faces City Councilman Lewis Cheek, whose name is on the ballot, but says he won't serve if elected; as well as Steve Monks, chairman of the Durham County Republican Party, who is running as a write-in candidate.

[continues]
Posted: 10/22/06 5:21 PM

Of course I am NOT surprised.It is only offical now.

Does ADA Couch like the clubs, I wonder? He is being groomed; Phase 1: DA's office.