Posted on 07/03/2004 9:25:12 PM PDT by SpyderTim
I'm in the midst of preparing a letter to the editor to the Chicago Tribune concerning their recent editorial from June 25 arguing why they decided to go to court to obtain the Ryan's child custody records. I recognize that not everyone here will agree with my thoughts, but I would like to seek your feedback on my letter. I appreciate your comments. Thanks!
Here's a first VERY ROUGH draft:
Dear Voices of the People:
The Chicago Tribune claims in its editorial, “Why the Tribune went to court”, that court files are open unless a compelling interest tips the balance in the favor of secrecy, using the example of juvenile court records, which by their very nature refer to children. Why then did the Chicago Tribune choose not to take Jack Ryan’s (and Jeri Ryan’s) claim that the records had been sealed in the interests of Alex Ryan at face value? At a minimum, can the Chicago Tribune at least acknowledge the damage they have done? Try explaining sex to a special needs child, let alone the concept of a sex club.
The Chicago Tribune also claims that the newspaper sought the Ryan divorce files for one reason: so readers are informed. I believe the Chicago Tribune went well beyond mere informing and instead editorialized the news by both the tone of the articles, the choice of headlines, and the prominent placement of the original story above the fold. In addition, the photo the newspaper used of Jack Ryan with what one might ordinarily consider a smile, instead played off of the content of the story, giving the impression that Jack Ryan is some kind of crazed pervert. The Chicago Tribune overplayed the story at a time when there had been many arguably more newsworthy stories (ie. Sudan crisis, upcoming handover in Iraq, finding of possible WMD in Iraq, etc). I contend that the story on the release of the records was worthy of front page news but not in the manner in which the Chicago Tribune chose to display it.
Even if the allegations made by Jeri Ryan against Jack Ryan in the child custody records are true, they do not rise to the level of criminal activity. I contend that the Chicago Tribune knew that the contents would put Jack Ryan’s candidacy in a straight jacket and fracture Ryan’s GOP base due in part to the prudishness and religious convictions of SOME of the GOP’s right wing. This zealous fight for the opening of records sealed by BOTH parties in the divorce borders on malicious intent. Far more damning than my speculation on that point are my legitimate suspicions that the Chicago Tribune intentionally neglected to mention in their articles that in court, Jack Ryan’s denials of the allegations were found to be more credible on their face than Jeri’s allegations. While the publication of the contents may not rise to the level of negligence, false light or actual malice, it most certainly was in poor taste. As A.M. Rosenthal argued many years ago, the First Amendment was not designed for voyeurs.
Yet, the Chicago Tribune chose to take a “hands off” approach to the story after Ryan had announced he would not continue his run. Suddenly, the CT backs off and pretends not to have anything to do with it, letting Ryan’s Republican colleagues sink his candidacy with their ridiculous claims that Ryan had “mislead” them simply because he insisted that there was nothing in the records that should prevent him from becoming a United States Senator. It is only AFTER Jack Ryan has announced that he will not be the candidate, that the Chicago Tribune runs an article about how divorce cases are a minefield in that all sorts of allegations are thrown about.
In the final analysis, the Chicago Tribune has inserted itself into a highly important Senate race for our state and for our nation’s future. If voters wanted to know the contents of the records they could have filed suit themselves. By the Chicago Tribune suing they inserted themselves into the story and gave the media far too much control over the electoral process in their gatekeeper role.
A few additional questions come to mind:
Will the Chicago Tribune seek any records of O’Bama’s past drug use?
When was the last time the Chicago Tribune ran a prominent front page story about Jack Ryan’s support of school vouchers? Is that not as important in the interest in keeping voters informed as the child custody records? (Not to mention that there is an ongoing and enormous humanitarian crisis in the Sudan which certainly deserves more attention than it has received, save a column by Rich Williamson or a scant article now and then.)
Shamefully, the bar has been set. Future candidates beware. With a divorce rate in America of nearly 50 percent, will a significant portion of our population be excluded from running for elected office?
Were they married? Were they at this club? I don't know all the facts, but I don't see her screaming bloody murder for the sake of "the children." Somewhere I read she's a democrat. Wonder how much she was paid for this...........For shame.
Well said. I wish there were more editorials making the same points.
It sounds like the Chicago Tribune is becoming the Los Angeles Times of the midwest. What a shame.
They were married at the time they "allegedly" went to several clubs. Jack Ryan disputes that they went to more than one club. He said in the child custody records that they went to one club in Paris but left when they both felt uncomfortable.
I'm most frustrated that the media tends to take liberal Democrats denials at face value but never gives the GOP the benefit of the doubt.
I have no more interest in Jack Ryan's divorce than I do in John kerry's: some things, somehow MUST be off limits!
Seeking your comments.
My sentiments are similar to yours. However, who are we to say whether or not Jack Ryan was embarassed? Sure, such allegations might be embarassing to the average person.
Good points, however papers usually will cut the length. Try cutting about half the length.
Answer to another post - yes they were married.
Even if he wasn't embarrassed by them, I think that any reasonable person would know his candidacy would be as dead as Uday and Qusai as soon as the media got hold of that information.
I agree about divorce proceedings. What's worse is that divorce records are very unreliable. The truth is often stretched, to put it mildly.
I think that the account of this was muddied on purpose. It is not the kind of thing Jack wants to get into during a divorce, but if he did call her on it, she could tell the truth under oath (which is, I'm assuming for this exercise, more like Jack's account) without contradicting her statement.
O'bama was already way ahead of Ryan and the GOP assumed a Democrat would take over, so it ultimately didn't matter who said or did what in the GOP primary.
Tribune operates 13 leading daily newspapers including the Los Angeles Times, Chicago Tribune, Newsday and Spanish-language Hoy, plus a wide range of targeted publications. The company’s broadcasting group includes 26 television stations; Superstation WGN on national cable; WGN-AM in Chicag.
For shame, that someone who knows nothing about the case would make such nasty, baseless charges. If you had even read the post here through, you'd know that Jeri Ryan also wanted the record sealed. How do you manage to form such vicious opinions based on absolute ignorance?
--------------------------------------------------------
The Chicago Tribune claims in its editorial, “Why the Tribune went to court”, that court files are open unless a compelling interest tips the balance in the favor of secrecy, using the example of juvenile court records, which by their very nature refer to children. Why then did the Chicago Tribune choose not to take Jack Ryan and Jeri Ryan’s claim that the records had been sealed in the interests of Alex Ryan at face value? At a minimum, can the Chicago Tribune at least acknowledge the damage they have done? Try explaining sex to a special needs child, let alone the concept of a sex club.
Meanwhile, the Chicago Tribune neglected to mention in their articles that in court, Jack Ryan’s denials of the allegations were found to be more credible on their face than Jeri’s allegations.
I contend that the Chicago Tribune knew that the contents of the divorce records would put Jack Ryan’s candidacy in a straight jacket. This zealous fight for the opening of records sealed by BOTH parties in the divorce borders on malicious intent. As A.M. Rosenthal argued many years ago, the First Amendment was not designed for voyeurs.
My meaning is that I have not read the case itself, nor the filing for release as submitted by the Tribune. I have only read what the Tribune has reported, what I have read here and elsewhere, and what I have listened to on television. There can be no claim of absence of malice on the part of the Tribune. Would that the actress had stepped up as vigorously to defend her family as John Kerry and his handlers are his records. But, she didn't, or, her protests went unheeded. It is clear to me that many benefitted from this--everyone, but the child, who is my main concern in complaining of these shenanigans for political gain.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.