"Based on their facebook page?"

News & Record reporter Travis Fain tweets:

Based on their facebook page, these guys were just openly running a $$ poker game at a bar near #UNCG http://t.co/NEkKy2qw #gso

That's some fine investigation there. Far superior to traveling the 1.3 miles from the paper's office to the open-to-the-public gambling parlor any time during the four months it had been open prior to last night's raid and actually reporting on their activities.

But, you know, Facebook!

Flushing credibility

Ben Holder on a News & Record reporter deleting his questions about a wildly inaccurate story that remains uncorrected and unaddressed:

I went back and checked yesterday and learned that my comment about her inaccurate reporting was no longer even there.  I went back today and checked and guess what?  Still nothing.  It appears that Amanda has deleted my comment from her Facebook page.  I was kinda surprised.  I would expect this from Tony Carmany, Robbie Perkins, Zach or Nancy Vaughan.  But, a reporter? 

This is bad because we need a real press.  We need a real press especially when we don't have a real council or a real city managers office or a real police force.  We need reporters to report facts because our leaders embrace lies.

We need reporters that have a sense of responsibility to their readers.  We need reporters that are bothered if they get something wrong.  We need reporters that feel a need to correct mistakes.  We don't need reporters that refuse to acknowledge their own journalistic shortcomings.

This was a simple, honest mistake made by ignorant media personalities and council members.  A simple oops woulda been acceptable.  It would have been forgotten.   What is not acceptable is arrogantly ignoring mistakes and deleting comments.  That will not be forgotten. 

Ben's right. For all the hope that new ownership at the New & Record may portend computer upgrades and more staffing, none of that matters if the people there don't now how to or don't care about restoring credibility.

Greensboro 101 apologies

In an attempt to curate spam out of the feeds to Greensboro 101, I applied some filters that were too strict. They ended up blocking feeds from the good folks at Greensboro Sports and other Greensboro related news and posts. I apologize.

I think I've fixed the problem and you should have all the chewy local goodness back at your disposal now.

Beauty

Full screen and headphones recommended.


Winds of Autumn from Hervé Demers on Vimeo.

Silence of the lambs

GREENSBORO, NC -- Have any of the local media (News & Record, WFMY and WGHP) who breathlessly and mistakenly reported the released-in-2007 police chief/city manager transcript as newly-released this week made any corrections? Have any of them walked back their implications that this will either: a) add to the mystery or b) end the mystery?

Of course, what their readers and viewers are really owed is a correction of the same magnitude and the same reach as the original error, but have any even uttered a whisper of a correction?

Grits?
Clinkingbeard?
Koutsky?
Lehmert?
Flash mob?
Jones?
Mickens?
Rivera?

Anybody going to show us how the pros do it? Baaaa -aaaaa -- aaaaa.

[update: 11:42, corrected Jones' name.]

Dear John Hammer, for Jerry Bledsoe's sake...

Dear John Hammer,

The most important local news reporting of the last decade was the Jerry Bledsoe series Cops in Black and White published in your Rhino Times. Even today, it remains an important touchstone as the inept local media remain unable or unwilling to handle the relevant facts.

I've publicly appealed to local reporters to read Bledsoe's series if they are going to venture into this subject. There's just one problem, other than an index of the first 25 chapters at Ed Cone's blog, there is no other consolidated means of navigating the series.

This is an inconvenience to us, the public, and a disservice to Jerry Bledsoe. His legacy deserves a more respecful treatment. He did a great service for the people of Greensboro and his work product deserves greater veneration than you've afforded it.

Will you please create and publicize a complete index of links to all of the chapters of the Cops in Black and White series?

Thanks,

Roch

Local reporters' reading assignment

Dear local media people,

I have a request.

If you are going to report on the events and controversies surrounding the Greensboro Police Department under the command of former Chief David Wray, will you please read Jerry Bledsoe's series Cops in Black and White?

Please?

Yes, I know it's long and I know it was published by a competitor, but it is the ultimate guide to the issue and familiariity with it would keep you from such inaccurate things as:

Amanda Lehmert of the News & Record reporting that a transcript of the conversation where former City Manager Mitch Johnson locks the Cheif out of his office as newly released when it has been available for almost six years.

Brandon Jacobs of Fox8 News following Amanda's lead and describing the transcript as "newly-released."

Mark "Flash Mob" Geary (2:15 mark), describing the years-old transcript as a "new revelation" and saying it has Mitchel Johnson referring to the "Secret Police Unit" when locking Wray out of his office (heck, Geary could have just read the transcript carefully to see that wasn't so). Geary also insinuates that the RMA report has not been made public and otherwise generally mangles the facts.

Tanya Rivera describing (0:02 mark) "Greensboro's black book scandal" as "still a mystery." (To her, perhaps.)

Here are the first 25 parts of the Bledsoe series, you'll have to Google the rest, but please do.

Thanks,

Roch

An open letter to Greensboro City Council

GREENSBORO, NC -- There is a theme quickly coming into focus about the current Greensboro city council: that they are not very good exerting management when they need to over city policies, especially those that might affect the civil liberties of Greensboro's citizens. No directives on public records, no directives on surveillance, no procedures for handling complaints against top-city staff, and now, it appears, no control of what the police may do with DNA it collects from Greensboro's citizens.

The following has been submitted to the Greensboro city council:
--------------------------------------------------------------

Dear Mr. Mayor and City Council.

The News & Record reports today of the Greensboro Police Department about to build a "regional DNA database," through the use of a private company. I have some questions:

Has the city council made themselves aware of what laws or policies may govern the collection, storage, sharing and disposition of DNA collected from Greensboro citizens by the police for this database?

The State of North Carolina has laws strictly governing the handling of DNA collected for the state lab that address some of these matters, but Travis Fain, author of the News & Record article tells me that local law enforcement is of the opinion that those provisions only apply to the state lab.

With that in mind:

1. What laws or policies will guide the circumstances under which the Greensboro Police collect DNA for use in their regional database?
2. With whom and for what purposes may it be shared? Has the city examined and found acceptable the laws or policies governing the handling of DNA at agencies with which the Greensboro Police may share DNA?
3. Is the private lab free to use DNA provided to it for other purposes? Can it share or otherwise use the DNA of Greensboro citizens for its own purposes? If not, what measures, if any, have been put into place to compel the private lab to handle DNA collected from Greensboro citizens in a manner that comports with our expectations?
4. State law provides for specific notification be made to people who are having their DNA put into the State database. Are their any provisions governing such notification by the Greensboro Police when they collect DNA for their database?
5. State law provides for specific means by which people may have their DNA expunged from the state database. Are there procedures, laws or policies in place to govern expunction from the regional database? Is the private lab bound by these provisions?

I'm sure I don't need to tell you the importance of this matter. DNA is not just a better fingerprint. It is our blueprint, our complete physical being in a digital record. Posession and use of it have implications far beyond simple identity. It can be used to make predictions about our health, develop medicinal treatments and trace our ancestry. Has the City of Greensboro taken the steps necessary to confidently assure its citizens that DNA collected from them will not be missused?

I look forward to hearing your answers to these questions.

Sincerely,
Roch Smith, Jr.

But, he said so. News & Record fails to fact check

GREENSBORO, NC -- In touting a new regional DNA database in which the Greensboro Police Department is participating, the News & Record quotes the president of the private contractor:

DNA:SI President Richard Clark said agencies using the system see "a 10 to 15, 20 percent decrease in crime in the first year."

Sounds great. Is it true? The reporter doesn't cite any facts, but what the heck, the guy says so, right?

Greensboro media stricken with mass amnesia, blunderfest ensues

[Editor's note: The word "report" is used in this post. It is not always intended to mean researching, investigating and conveying facts or anything like the traditional meaning of the word "report." In some instances, it is used to describe a charade, the way one would describe children in pirate costumes as "sword fighting" at Halloween. They think that's what they are doing, it sort of looks like that's what they are doing, but that's not what they are doing. You know, "reporting."]

GREENSBORO, NC -- I can't stop laughing.

Apparently kicked off by a report in the News & Record, Greensboro's media jumped all over the newly-released transcripts of a recording of former city manager Mitchel Johnson firing former police chief David Wray in 2006.

One minor detail though: The transcripts were released six years ago.

Under the original headline "Transcript in Greensboro police scandal now public," (since changed), the News & Record reported (emphasis added):

"It was a meeting that had ripple effects across city government.

"It led to a police chief resigning, a city manager being fired and several new politicians being elected into office.

"And now, the details of that closed-door meeting are open for public review."

WGHP rushed in to report (emphasis added):

"Seventeen pages of newly-released transcripts read like a never-ending saga"

Cut to City Council representative Zack Matheny:

"It's finally, at this point, seven years later, coming out to what actually happened."

Cut to City Council representative Marikay Abuzuaiter:

"Once I review the information am I going to change any personal feelings I may have had in the past? That's going to be huge for me, that's going to be a huge informational overload that I am going to have to filter through."

Not to be left out, WFMY jumped on the goofwagon and reported:

"A transcript of that 'private' conversation is now public."

WFMY's accompanying video has been removed without comment is back online. In it, a reporter describes the transcripts as "new revelations."

Then, just when everyone was having so much fun, along comes Ben Holder to spoil the blunderfest by reminding us that this "new" information was released six years ago. He posts video of the City Council approving release of the information on September 17, 2007 and of WXII reporting on it two days later:



WFMY report of the release in 2007 too:

Council Releases Audio Conversation Between Johnson and Wray
WFMY News 2
Sep 19, 2007

Most sad though is that the progenitor of this week's mass amnesia, the News & Record, had also covered the original release of this information in 2007 but this somehow eluded them this week even though the original reporter still works at the News & Record:

Wray Lockout Transcript Released
News & Record, by Margaret Moffett Banks
September 19, 2007

.

City Council as managers and Charles Cherry's good question

GREENSBORO, NC -- Somewhere between micromanaging and hands-off there is the sweet spot where our elected city council representatives must assert themselves as managers. I don't think they have found it. Their failure to assert their campaign promises of transparency and open government is one area where council needs to exert more control over city policy.

Here's another:

Although he is a thorn in the side of city government, former Greensboro police captain Charles Cherry asked a good question at last night's city council meeting that deserves an answer regardless of who is asking. It was, essentially, this:

Who investigates complaints against the upper managers of city government over whom there are no other city employees?

It's a good question.

Here's what happened as Cherry tried to get that question answered during last night's city council meeting (video, begins at 01:09:10):

Mayor Robbie Perkins responded, "Alright, we're not going to solve this tonight."

Cherry persisted, demanding to know who has the authority to initiate investigations of complaints against top-level city employees.

Mayor pro-tem Yvonne Johnson offered, "The council could. The council has the power to do so."

Cherry: "So why has that not happened when you have several legitimate complaints, written and stamped as received by you that have not been answered?"

Johnson: "I'm not the mayor, I'm just one person and nobody...

Mayor Perkins: "Mr. Cherry, thank you."

And it was over.

The particulars of Cherry's complaints not withstanding, this is the kind of thing for which council should develop a clear and public procedure. What is the process for initiating a complaint against the City's top employees and what steps does city council take in response? There appears to be no policy currently, an abdication of council's responsibilities as the people's managers of city government.

Speaking to city council on censorship

GREENSBORO, NC -- Last night, I was not joined by Yes!Weekly publisher Charles Womack to speak out against the City of Greensboro's preposterous attempts to censor his newspaper and we did not address the city council during speakers from the floor. I did though.

Here is the text of my remarks (hyperlinks added):

Honorable Mr. Mayor and City Council,

My name is Roch Smith, Jr. I built and operate Greensboro101.com, a website that collects and links to the latest news, blogs, tweets and videos from the people of Greensboro.

Last week the City of Greensboro attempted to censor local newspaper Yes!Weekly. Police attorney Jim Clark and Police Chief Ken Miller secretly filed a lawsuit, without notifying Yes!Weekly, that attempted to get a judge to stop Yes!Weekly from publishing a story about police surveillance.

I find this action shocking. Not only was this stunt an affront to the the legal principles against prior restraint well established for decades since the Supreme Court ruled on the Pentagon Papers, it was a brutal assault on government transparency in its underlying purpose which was to hide from the public information about the police spying on law-abiding citizens. This is not the Greensboro I thought I knew. Nor is it the one in which I think we want to live.

Doug Clark, editorial writer for the News & Record described this stunt as “bizarre and disturbing.” He's right. He also said “City Council must demand a full accounting of police surveillance policies and activities." He's right about that too but this is just the latest and most disgraceful episode of a larger problem, an ongoing adversarial and overly secretive approach by the City's legal departments towards the public's right to know what our government is up to.

Since last July, I have been trying to obtain records from the city about the extent to which the City of Greensboro surveils and monitors the public at-large – those of us not suspected of any crime or evoking suspicion, but just going about our daily business. How, when, why and for whom is the City watching us? The city has successfully kept that information secret largely by citing laws intended to stop terrorism.

The citizens of Greensboro need to assert themselves, through our elected representatives, as the overseers of our local government, not its subjects or its children, and change the city's posture towards one of genuine openness and transparency and away from the kind of overreaching secrecy that has earned us the rare and appalling distinction of being a City that tried to censor a newspaper.

[The mayor interrupted here and told me to "wrap it up." I skipped the following paragraph and jumped to the last.]

The city's approach to public records is broken, more than I can describe in a mere three minutes, but I have kept city council apprised by email. So, I'm asking you, as an accompaniment to examining police surveillance policies to also take control of the City's broken approach to public records requests. Which is what got us here.

I leave it up to you to decide how best to get there, but I am asking specifically for city council to take some type of concrete action that will expeditiously result in a public, city-council approved set of directives that instruct city employees how to approach public records requests. One that reorients our city away from secrecy and confrontation and towards cooperative and real transparency. Will you please begin this undertaking as soon as possible?

Question for Yes!Weekly: City Councilor set up?

GREENSBORO, NC -- [Please see Yes!Weekly editor Brian Clarey's response below.]

There are murmurs, rumors and grumblings that Greensboro City Councilor Marikay Abuzuatier was somehow "set up" with the release by the City of Greensboro of an email from a police sergeant that identifies her as a confidential informant.

It is hard to consider these theories without quickly finding oneself wading into the most improbable of conspiracies. Nonetheless, with the release of the complaint the City filed in a failed attempt to get Yes!Weekly to stop publication of a story based, in part, on those emails, there is a bit of information that raises a legitimate question.

The complaint lists the search terms Yes! submitted for their records requests. Among them is an email address for Abuzuaiter. No other city council members' email addresses were among the search requests submitted by Yes! Just Abuzuaiter's.

Why is that?
-----------------------

Yes!'s response: Yes!Weekly editor Brian Clarey says that the search terms listed in the City's complaint were from requests made subsequent to Yes!'s receipt of documents from prior records requests in which Abuzuaiter's association with the police was first noticed. Those previous documents prompted the additional requested search specifically for Abuzuaiter's email address says Clarey.

Tone deaf

GREENSBORO, NC -- Look, I don't consider local developer Roy Carroll a villain—good for him for being a successful entrepreneur, it's not easy—but he is not very adept at reading the social and political landscapes or his place among them when he chalks up the friction he encounters as simply the "1 percent thing."

Mr. Carroll is seemingly too self-absorbed and unaware to recognize the irony of saying, "I don’t expect to be treated any differently from anybody else," after he has received millions in tax breaks from the city of Greensboro to contribute to his business success. To be among the 1 percent and not recognize the special treatment he received is pretty amazing; and more than a little galling.

Mr. Carroll also seems unaware of the incongruity of his complaining about a 75 dB noise limit downtown being too high for him to live peacefully while building homes for people at the end of the airport runways where noise levels regularly exceed 85 dB (map below, Carroll's apartments starred). 

None of this is to say that Mr. Carroll doesn't deserve his success or a liveable home (as do we all, ahem), but Mr. Carroll is wrong to think that his frustrations are merely because he is unjustly scorned as a symbolic target for the vague dissatisfaction of the hoi poloi. Mr. Carroll is playing the role of entitled rich guy better than he realizes.

Stale city website info

GREENSBORO, NC -- Why are the last minutes for the Greensboro City Council meetings to be posted online from December 4, 2012, two months ago?

There have been two meetings since then.

Black Network TV deleted my comments referring to Truth & Reconciliation Commission

North Carolina's Black Network Television posted a video to YouTube that showed up on Greensboro101 yesterday. In it, a chipper young woman describes the November 3rd, 1979 anti-Klan march in Greensboro as being a reaction to the film Birth of a Nation.

I posted a comment to the video that said, in essence, that such an explanation of the march was a disservice to the memories of those killed and the survivors who were, in fact, motivated by more complicated issues of race, class, labor and unions and for which the film was a minor and ancillary part of the story—certainly not a reason for the march that led to the tragic shootings.

In my comment, I suggested that the video makers turn to the findings of the Greensboro Truth and Reconciliation Commission for a correct understanding of the events leading up to that day, particularly Chapter 2 of their final report that includes the section "What brought us to November 3, 1979," in which there is nothing about Birth of a Nation.

My comment was deleted without explanation.

I can only assume that Black Network Television would rather perpetuate incorrect misunderstandings than admit their mistakes. Too bad.

Here's the video:

I would like to thank the following merchants

• Domino's Pizza
• ShelfGenie
• Mattress Outlet
• Window World
• Save a lot
• Ulta Beauty
• Food Lion
• Subway
• JC Penny Optical
• Baskin Robbins
• Sunsetter Awnings
• Portrait Innovations

Thank you!

Thank you for throwing your advertisements in the yards and driveways of our neighborhood where they deteriorate and blow around like so much litter.

We appreciate it and will show it with the purchasing decisions we make.

"This is one bizarre and disturbing turn of events"

The News & Record's Doug Clark:

The City Council must demand a full accounting of police surveillance policies and activities — not about their tracking of criminals but of citizens who are exercising their constitutional rights.

Yes, but let us remember, the City is also refusing to provide information about its surveillance of the public at large—people just going about their daily business. Maybe Clark can see how the two are related and call for a broader scope.

My city just tried to censor a newspaper

The City of Greensboro attempted — and failed — to obtain a temporary restraining order against YES! Weekly on Tuesday evening to stop the distribution of information it says was accidentally given to the paper in public-information requests.  -- Yes!Weekly

GREENSBORO, NC -- Every election season, candidates for Greensboro city council talk about the importance of open and transparent government then, once elected, ignore affronts to openness and transparency.

State public records law defines some types of records as neither public nor confidential, it allows the custodian of those records discretion about whether or not to provide them to the public. When the city defines records as "police intelligence" or as "details of public security plans" in order to claim such discretion which it then exercises to keep records secret, that's not open and transparent.

The City of Greensboro reached new extremes this week though when, through the actions of City Attorney Mujeeb Shah-Khan in consultation with police Chief Ken Miller and Police Attorney Jim Clark, it attempted to exercise that discretion in a failed attempt to convince a judge to censor local newspaper Yes!Weekly.

Attempts at that kind of censorship are suitable for totalitarian dictatorships and we, as citizens of Greensboro, must firmly say, "no, you will not do that on our behalf."

It is time for Greensboro city council to intervene. It is well within the power of City Council to direct city staff to reorient their approach to government information, insisting that discretion fall to the side of openness and transparency. This latest stunt and the subsequent slap down by the judge are warning flags that the city's hunger for secrecy is a danger. It demands action.

Will city council take control or will they twiddle their thumbs? Since Mayor Robbie Perkins reportedly pushed for Shah-Khan's hire, he should take the lead, unless he likes where things are going, of course.

Pulitzer worthy

The News & Record writes a report of Yes!Weekly's report.