That is an admirable goal. I hope you succeed
Semper Fi
An Old Man
http://www.hannibal.net/stories/090800/com_0908000007.html http://archives.cnn.com/2000/US/09/07/officer.shot.03.ap/index.html http://www.amarillo.com/stories/090800/usn_mankills.shtml http://archives.cnn.com/2000/US/09/08/officer.shot.ap/index.html http://www.morningsun.net/stories/091000/kan_0910000006.shtml
The feud between Watson, who works for a lead mining company, and the city began about 10 years ago when Watson purchased the vacant lot where the city held an easement, Alderman Rexel Conway said.
Watson initially owned a smaller lot, but bought adjacent property about 10 years ago, alderman Rexel Conway said. That second lot contained an easement allowing city workers to get to and from a sewage lagoon behind Watson's house. Watson has disputed the city's right to cross the property, Conway said. ''He didn't want us on the property,'' Conway said. ''We've had a couple of disputes, but it always got settled.''
One time I got them to retract the headline on the top of the fold front page story. It took some work but in the end they admitted that there was nothing in the story that justified the headline and in fact the story actually refuted the headline. (They were just getting in the democratic talking point).
Only problem, retractions are in small print on page 2 and nobody ever reads that.
I once worked with a reporter about why he didn't refer to his subject as a socialist when the subject of his story was a proud, open socialist. He agreed and the next front page story he correctly referred to a person (early 20th century Californian named by a state senator as the inspiration for a bill) as a socialist. Despite the fact that all history books refer to this guy as a socialist, this reporter was relagated to the 3rd section and it was about a year before he got a front page story again. I felt sorry for what I talked him into doing. I got the word "socialist" on the front page but hurt his career.