Did the PW post opinions/comments as facts? Crimes & Incidents, posted by Came to the party late, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Dec 1, 2009 at 11:11 am
I just read the two threads about the Angela Street fire. I don't want to comment about the fire, just about the postings that discussed how the PW included comments that sound more like gossip than anything else - comments that effectively tried a citizen in the press.
It seems that over the past year, there have been numerous complaints about the PW being very biased in its reporting and staff members behaving unethically.
Wasn't there recently an article about Round Table that was really more of a complaint than a news article?
What a shame there isn't a rival newspaper in town that would make the PW start behaving with journalistic integrity.
Posted by uscgret, a member of the Amador Valley High School community, on Dec 1, 2009 at 1:08 pm uscgret is a member (registered user) of PleasantonWeekly.com
I agree... The PW has only reported on "Gossip" and not the truth. It is very damaging and hurtful to the people involved. I think that the PW should be writing a formal apology to Keith Zuffa and his 2 sons for the slanderous remarks they made about him. No wonder Keith does not want to talk to them. I can see how these reporters would twist his story up to make a big lie out of that too.
Posted by What happened?, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Dec 1, 2009 at 2:33 pm
Anyone can read the Society of Professional Journalist's Code of Ethics by googling it.
USGRET - when you read through the code of ethics, do you believe the Pleasanton Weekly violated the code? Since the original published article has been revised, those of us who didn't see the original article do not know.
If the PW did violate the code, then, according to the code, they should publish a notice that they made a mistake, not unlike the notice they posted in the publisher's blog last spring.
I'm not arguing with you USGRET, but I did not see the original article.
Posted by a pleasanton resident, a resident of the Birdland neighborhood, on Dec 1, 2009 at 5:54 pm
hey came to the party late: don't read the pleasanton enquire anymore!!!! The PW lets us know where the crimes are in this town. I give the staff credit. THEY ARE GETTING INFO FROM THE PPD. The gossip comes from former pleasanton residents......Get it
Posted by T.H., a resident of the Pleasanton Meadows neighborhood, on Dec 1, 2009 at 6:01 pm
As evidence the PW was wrong just retype what they did and watch them scramble to pull it down. They basically repeated an accusation of a neighbor about the woman who the police say started the fire and her husband. My topic "Coverups and mistakes" is about this same issue. I'm still waiting for a formal appology from the PW but they are trying to sweep the whole thing under the rug. It makes me hope Mr. Z sues the PW into bankrupcy. It was not just a scummy move by the PW, it was proof they have no idea what they are doing. This makes Jeb posting posters real names look like nothing.
Posted by Came to the party late, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Dec 1, 2009 at 6:33 pm
To a Pleasanton Resident,
You acknowledge that the PW posted gossip. How would you feel if there was a problem at your home and you later read an article in the only paper in town that your neighbors said your spouse was abused? Why didn't the PW ask the PPD if they received any domestic abuse calls from the Angela St. home? Or if they did ask the PPD why not print the PPD's response? Is it possible the PW did ask the PPD, but chose not to print the PPD's response?
According to posters who saw the original article, PW published the article and then deleted the gossip after publication. That seems to point to someone recognizing after the fact, and perhaps after having it pointed out to them, that publishing gossip makes the PW no better than a tabloid.
Whatever the truth is about the people involved in the Angela St. fire, it will come out. This thread isn't about the fire, it's about the PW behaving irresponsibly.
Sounds like you're taking writing tips from Cholo!
Posted by T.H., a resident of the Pleasanton Meadows neighborhood, on Dec 1, 2009 at 7:20 pm
Unknown - You seem to not know what the PW printed. It has nothing to do with the fire really. It has to do with a hersay accusation about the husband who was not there when the fire started. It was about printing a horrible thing about the man. If he would have been in bed at the time of the fire it would have been the movie "Burning Bed". Figure it out.
Posted by unknown, a resident of another community, on Dec 2, 2009 at 11:03 am
The PW owes Mr. Zuffa and his children an apology. The articles that they write accuse an innocent man of being an abusive husband. This family is reading all of these posts by everyone, don't you think they have enough to deal with? They don't need bad-mouthing from the local paper. That sets the tome for what friends and neighbors may think. Think about these kids and Mr. Zuffa and what he has to deal with.
Posted by T.H., a resident of the Pleasanton Meadows neighborhood, on Dec 3, 2009 at 10:04 am
At this point I believe the PW feels that they didn't do anything wrong. I think they believe what they did was legal, moral and accurate reporting. I beleive they took down the part of domestic abuse just to keep people on the forum from reading it and complaining. They seem to think they were in the right but just didn't want to deal with all posts pointing it out. That's why the closed the topic and opened up another restricted to reg'd members.
Posted by frank, a resident of the Pleasanton Heights neighborhood, on Dec 3, 2009 at 9:42 pm
Yes, T. H. and yep. True.
This is one aspect of narcissists' behavior. In their mind they are never wrong. They are disingenuous when confronted with facts. If you have a problem with their behavior, they make it look like it is your fault. They display an attitude that they cannot be bothered by faulty complainers. Behind the PW's actions probably lies a narcissist.
Posted by Bad practice, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Dec 3, 2009 at 11:20 pm
To frank, I believe you are right, but in most organizations, there are checks and balances, and if the person in charge is perceived to have this rather skewed view of public service (the "I am in charge, I can do no wrong, do not dare to question my viewpoint or authority"), then the "maybe-not-so-yes-men/women" will step up and gently remind that person that he/she is in a position of public service and maybe a small dose of hubris is in order to bring things into balance.
Unfortunately, from what we have seen in the past couple of years at the PW, there are no checks and balances, and when a reporter, or cub editor OR senior editor is questioned about whether a statement, an article is within bounds, the matter is always buried deep under the rug and there is no accounting for poor journalistic practice. I am fully aware that the staff of the PW have the means to track down my ip address and hound me for being frank and for practicing my freedom of speech, but honestly, this doesn't bother me, since the breaches of judgement and editorial oversight have been so egregious that I don't mind speaking up and jeopardizing my anonymity.