Ugh. This article contains so many unsupported assumptions it makes my head spin.
First, there is no evidence here that Dr. Daniels was referring to the FLS, the Advance, or to any reputable larger news media source. Today, many online blogs and social media sites call themselves "media", as the author of this article well knows. Furthermore, those sites were "covering" the Downs/Riverbend issues in concerning ways, fabricating facts and allegations out of whole cloth. And some of those fabrications, specifically the ones on a certain social media site that claimed that a coach was a pedophile, were libelous to be concerning. And, yes, those types of hack social media journalism sites deserve to be "thwarted".
Dr. Daniels could not have emailed Taylor with "what are we doing about that hack site Spotsy Wire?" He would not have responded positively. If she wished to secure his cooperation in stemming the flood of calumny against a coach, she needed to be respectful and diplomatic.
Second, a school division has a responsibility to thwart certain information when it comes to student privacy. Since this issue involved a student, it's probable that this is what she was referring to and the author of this article has grossly misinterpreted her meaning in this email.
Third, the false equivalency here is mind-boggling. Have you reached out to Dr. Daniels as you did with Phelps and Twigg to ask about her goals for the division? Did she respond?
Fourth, this online publication did a story on the exact issue that was references in Dr. Daniel's email. With FOIAd emails. Clearly you were not stonewalled by anyone.
Dr. Daniels is nothing like Nixon. Invoking the specter of Nixon to imply "work with the press or we will take you down" doesn't inspire a person to work with you. Perhaps you should put down the pitch fork and pick up an olive branch: writing informationless hit pieces like this based on a single line from an email is exhausting to readers who are looking for real stories and thoughtful opinions. These partisan blog posts in which the FA attacks the new Spotsy SB chair over literally nothing are fatuous and dull.
I agree with you. This is the second editorial that Mr. Davis has written in the past 1-2 weeks that has harshly criticized Dr. Daniels. If the Advance is to have credibility as a legitimate news source, the editor should refrain from editorials that appear as though he wants to be the news rather than report it. The new board's majority, under the leadership of Dr. Daniels, has not thwarted Davis or anyone else. The issue with the Riverbend HS swim team involves serious personnel matters that Dr. Daniels is not, by law, allowed to share.
I suggest Mr. Davis take a step back. It's 2024. While he wants to be a source of local news, he needs to do that and be that. My suspicion is that Dr. Daniels' remarks were geared toward what has been rampant on social media and, as the writer of the comment ahead of this has pointed out, the information on various social media pages and blogs has been intentionally misleading and incorrect. While Mr. Davis may not enjoy social media or believe it's legitimate, in this day and age he needs to be aware of what's being pushed to the eager public as "news" before he falls prey to it.
Mark Taylor is not the good guy in this or any other issue relating to SCPS. It appears that Mr. Davis is pandering to him. Has Mr. Davis forgotten that for two full years Mark Taylor refused to an interview with our local mainstream media while giving an interview to a local social media page that has an anonymous owner and did not reveal who interviewed Taylor? Taylor also gave interviews that contained multiple misrepresentations to right wing media sources while shunning our local legitimate media. He's now the source of ethics for Mr. Davis? It's time to reboot that idea.
Finally, I am tired of the misuse of the word "conservative." Our previous school board majority and the two women from that majority who remain on the board do not represent conservatism. True conservatives do not throw taxpayer dollars away as the former board did, hiring unqualified and inexperienced employees at outrageous salaries. True conservatives do not hire a search firm and pay about 25K of taxpayers dollars while knowing the candidate they plan to hire is has already been selected. True conservatives do not lower fees for outside groups to use facilities such as sports fields so that the fees don't cover the cost of field upkeep while charging rent to a nonprofit group that does nothing but support and raise funds for SCPS students and teachers. None of those actions were conservative.
In closing, I hope Mr. Davis does a little professional soul searching. Does he want the Advance to be a successful legitimate media source of local news or does he want to make it about himself? I personally want the Advance to succeed but the recent direction it is taking is disturbing.
Extraordinary timing with the issues seemingly teed up before the Supreme Court right now with the Texas and Florida 1st Amendment-social media cases. I'm glad this debate is on the table as we'll need a national understanding, if not consensus, on what needs to be maintained from the Framers' vision about our democracy, self-governance and the role of free, uninhibited speech and a free press to track the activities of government. One can argue that a high accuracy ethic and some way to enforce that ethic in a given item is a necessary element of what the 1st Amendment envisions. If that is correct to say, it's hard to imagine how social media can make that case. All the rest that follows -- tight libel standards, protection of "sources", and prevailing standards of accurate reporting (corroboration, credibility, sourcing, etc.) -- might have to be reimagined, or jettisoned altogether, especially if the original free press paradigm is fully and finally eclipsed by "content" without standards. Check out WaPo . . . https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2024/02/26/supreme-court-social-media-netchoice-texas-florida/
Just a reminder to folks that COMMENTARY means “opinion.” Mr Davis is sharing his opinions here.
Here are mine:
I dont think Dr Daniels was wrong to use the word “thwart.” Not when a faction of people in this area consider Fox News and OANN a legitimate source of factual information. Not when that faction has set up their own kind of “news source” on the internet full of lies and opinions that are going to get someone hurt or worse one day.
Maybe *that* is what she wants to avoid? But you didn’t appear to ask, so you wouldn’t know. You decided to vent-write instead.
The “facts” surrounding the Riverbend debacle are all over the place. I’ve been trying to follow it all yet there have been so many opinions being shared that this is no longer an issue I’ve been able to see clearly and I’ve honestly stopped following it. Let me know when the principal is fired or finally gets licensed and comes back.
I urge Mr Davis to step back and think about what he’s doing here. People need a news source around here. Sorely. Not another substack full of commentary and personal opinions.
We are living in a world where facts don’t matter and the lies someone tells or their skewed opinion holds a lot more weight. If you want clicks for bucks, keep going. You’re doing great 👍🏻
But if you want to be considered a legit way for people to get local news, you need to be better.
I’d start by going to Dr Daniels and asking her what she meant by “thwart.”
"The means chosen must be as pure as the ends sought." MLK, Jr. -- Lttr from a Birmingham Jail. If we seek Justice, we should be very comfortable using truth-finding and truth-telling as its means.
Ugh. This article contains so many unsupported assumptions it makes my head spin.
First, there is no evidence here that Dr. Daniels was referring to the FLS, the Advance, or to any reputable larger news media source. Today, many online blogs and social media sites call themselves "media", as the author of this article well knows. Furthermore, those sites were "covering" the Downs/Riverbend issues in concerning ways, fabricating facts and allegations out of whole cloth. And some of those fabrications, specifically the ones on a certain social media site that claimed that a coach was a pedophile, were libelous to be concerning. And, yes, those types of hack social media journalism sites deserve to be "thwarted".
Dr. Daniels could not have emailed Taylor with "what are we doing about that hack site Spotsy Wire?" He would not have responded positively. If she wished to secure his cooperation in stemming the flood of calumny against a coach, she needed to be respectful and diplomatic.
Second, a school division has a responsibility to thwart certain information when it comes to student privacy. Since this issue involved a student, it's probable that this is what she was referring to and the author of this article has grossly misinterpreted her meaning in this email.
Third, the false equivalency here is mind-boggling. Have you reached out to Dr. Daniels as you did with Phelps and Twigg to ask about her goals for the division? Did she respond?
Fourth, this online publication did a story on the exact issue that was references in Dr. Daniel's email. With FOIAd emails. Clearly you were not stonewalled by anyone.
Dr. Daniels is nothing like Nixon. Invoking the specter of Nixon to imply "work with the press or we will take you down" doesn't inspire a person to work with you. Perhaps you should put down the pitch fork and pick up an olive branch: writing informationless hit pieces like this based on a single line from an email is exhausting to readers who are looking for real stories and thoughtful opinions. These partisan blog posts in which the FA attacks the new Spotsy SB chair over literally nothing are fatuous and dull.
I agree with you. This is the second editorial that Mr. Davis has written in the past 1-2 weeks that has harshly criticized Dr. Daniels. If the Advance is to have credibility as a legitimate news source, the editor should refrain from editorials that appear as though he wants to be the news rather than report it. The new board's majority, under the leadership of Dr. Daniels, has not thwarted Davis or anyone else. The issue with the Riverbend HS swim team involves serious personnel matters that Dr. Daniels is not, by law, allowed to share.
I suggest Mr. Davis take a step back. It's 2024. While he wants to be a source of local news, he needs to do that and be that. My suspicion is that Dr. Daniels' remarks were geared toward what has been rampant on social media and, as the writer of the comment ahead of this has pointed out, the information on various social media pages and blogs has been intentionally misleading and incorrect. While Mr. Davis may not enjoy social media or believe it's legitimate, in this day and age he needs to be aware of what's being pushed to the eager public as "news" before he falls prey to it.
Mark Taylor is not the good guy in this or any other issue relating to SCPS. It appears that Mr. Davis is pandering to him. Has Mr. Davis forgotten that for two full years Mark Taylor refused to an interview with our local mainstream media while giving an interview to a local social media page that has an anonymous owner and did not reveal who interviewed Taylor? Taylor also gave interviews that contained multiple misrepresentations to right wing media sources while shunning our local legitimate media. He's now the source of ethics for Mr. Davis? It's time to reboot that idea.
Finally, I am tired of the misuse of the word "conservative." Our previous school board majority and the two women from that majority who remain on the board do not represent conservatism. True conservatives do not throw taxpayer dollars away as the former board did, hiring unqualified and inexperienced employees at outrageous salaries. True conservatives do not hire a search firm and pay about 25K of taxpayers dollars while knowing the candidate they plan to hire is has already been selected. True conservatives do not lower fees for outside groups to use facilities such as sports fields so that the fees don't cover the cost of field upkeep while charging rent to a nonprofit group that does nothing but support and raise funds for SCPS students and teachers. None of those actions were conservative.
In closing, I hope Mr. Davis does a little professional soul searching. Does he want the Advance to be a successful legitimate media source of local news or does he want to make it about himself? I personally want the Advance to succeed but the recent direction it is taking is disturbing.
Extraordinary timing with the issues seemingly teed up before the Supreme Court right now with the Texas and Florida 1st Amendment-social media cases. I'm glad this debate is on the table as we'll need a national understanding, if not consensus, on what needs to be maintained from the Framers' vision about our democracy, self-governance and the role of free, uninhibited speech and a free press to track the activities of government. One can argue that a high accuracy ethic and some way to enforce that ethic in a given item is a necessary element of what the 1st Amendment envisions. If that is correct to say, it's hard to imagine how social media can make that case. All the rest that follows -- tight libel standards, protection of "sources", and prevailing standards of accurate reporting (corroboration, credibility, sourcing, etc.) -- might have to be reimagined, or jettisoned altogether, especially if the original free press paradigm is fully and finally eclipsed by "content" without standards. Check out WaPo . . . https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2024/02/26/supreme-court-social-media-netchoice-texas-florida/
Interesting comment. Thank you for your perspective.
Just a reminder to folks that COMMENTARY means “opinion.” Mr Davis is sharing his opinions here.
Here are mine:
I dont think Dr Daniels was wrong to use the word “thwart.” Not when a faction of people in this area consider Fox News and OANN a legitimate source of factual information. Not when that faction has set up their own kind of “news source” on the internet full of lies and opinions that are going to get someone hurt or worse one day.
Maybe *that* is what she wants to avoid? But you didn’t appear to ask, so you wouldn’t know. You decided to vent-write instead.
The “facts” surrounding the Riverbend debacle are all over the place. I’ve been trying to follow it all yet there have been so many opinions being shared that this is no longer an issue I’ve been able to see clearly and I’ve honestly stopped following it. Let me know when the principal is fired or finally gets licensed and comes back.
I urge Mr Davis to step back and think about what he’s doing here. People need a news source around here. Sorely. Not another substack full of commentary and personal opinions.
We are living in a world where facts don’t matter and the lies someone tells or their skewed opinion holds a lot more weight. If you want clicks for bucks, keep going. You’re doing great 👍🏻
But if you want to be considered a legit way for people to get local news, you need to be better.
I’d start by going to Dr Daniels and asking her what she meant by “thwart.”
Public relations spins can end up insulting the audience they are intended to sway. They can feel patronizing.
"The means chosen must be as pure as the ends sought." MLK, Jr. -- Lttr from a Birmingham Jail. If we seek Justice, we should be very comfortable using truth-finding and truth-telling as its means.