Broadsheet.ie & IT deleting articles relating to Kate's death

The Sweeper

Hmmm. Experiment in dissemination.

News tip sent to the editor of the Huffington Post on Ireland's best known newspaper in trouble for editing the last words of a dead girl. Here's hoping they pick this up and run with it? Perhaps some international attention will shame the Irish Times into realising they're not the most important paper on the planet...

strobe

DeVore wrote: »

Tell me something that hasnt kept me awake for over a decade

But the US is attempting to undo it own freedoms at the moment with SOPA.
Bought and paid for by the RIAA.

DeV.

Out of curiosity DeV, has anyone contacted boards.ie (or whoever it is people contact these days in relation to threads on here) about the story and the contents of this thread?

Dudess

The Sweeper wrote: »

Hmmm. Experiment in dissemination.

News tip sent to the editor of the Huffington Post on Ireland's best known newspaper in trouble for editing the last words of a dead girl. Here's hoping they pick this up and run with it? Perhaps some international attention will shame the Irish Times into realising they're not the most important paper on the planet...

UK or US Huffington? The fact that she was also American and worked on the Obama trail, and is buried in California might pique some interest over there.

Nodin

The Sweeper wrote: »

Hmmm. Experiment in dissemination.

News tip sent to the editor of the Huffington Post on Ireland's best known newspaper in trouble for editing the last words of a dead girl. Here's hoping they pick this up and run with it? Perhaps some international attention will shame the Irish Times into realising they're not the most important paper on the planet...

I wonder if VB would do a show on the matter.....

DeVore

strobe wrote: »

Out of curiosity DeV, has anyone contacted boards.ie (or whoever it is people contact these days in relation to threads on here) about the story and the contents of this thread?

No, not to my knowledge (I'm abroad but in contact with the office).


I think they know better.


DeV.
nb: We're about 21 times the size of the Irish Times in terms of reach. 1/3rd of readers from outside the state.

The Sweeper

Dudess wrote: »

UK or US Huffington? The fact that she was also American and worked on the Obama trail, and is buried in California might pique some interest over there.

US Huffington.

DeVore

Actually, I'm going to write a bit more about that.


The Times is caught in a difficult situation. They published the anon piece in good faith. Then they got caught when the hive mind put 2 and 2 together from various sources and came up with the right answer.

Then something happened and we all don't know what, if anything, that was and the Times started acting "weird". We can guess but no one here actually knows.

Then Broadsheet was given a "warning" from a "friendly journalist" and panicked. I don't blame them, its pretty freakin' scary when you get those letters and your lawyers aren't much help as all they keep saying is "Route A has no risk, Route B might lose you everything and then some".

Then Broadsheet drew a deep breath and put the piece back up. Kudos. They also went on the attack, which counter-intuitively is clever. If you want to be safe, get somewhere VERY public.

Broadsheet is now relatively untouchable because going after *them* will kick this off into high orbit and in the end, no one is above being cut loose by a politician looking to cover his ass.

For similar reasons, we're pretty much left alone because I'm frankly, not sane.
MCD proved that.

The Times however operates in a different sphere. They don't have the protection of the Betfair ruling (which means we have to be given a take down notice), they are liable from the moment it ran off their presses.

Whether you believe what they wrote is or isn't actionable is rather irrelevant. Its scary enough and plausible enough that the directors wont want to bet the farm on it. Thats the horrible bit, you dont have to be "right" you just have to be "close enough the judge wont think you're taking the p*ss and have deep pockets, deep enough to bankrupt your opponent before the end of the case".


This is where my sympathy for the Irish Times runs out. They should have stood their grounds, ended the conversation with "send us an official legal letter but know this, we'll put it on the front page tomorrow and on the last issue we ever print, we'll bankrupt ourselves fighting you so you'll win nothing and you'll have wrecked your company's reputation in the process".

That letter would NEVER have been written and we wouldnt be here.

DeV.

expectationlost

DeVore wrote: »

Actually, I'm going to write a bit more about that.


The Times is caught in a difficult situation. They published the anon piece in good faith. Then they got caught when the hive mind put 2 and 2 together from various sources and came up with the right answer.

you skipped the step

1. they published then anon letter
2. they published the anon letter's author real name

number 2. thats was _the_ mistake, that wasn't good faith it was incompetence.

The Sweeper

Kate submitted her article and had contact with Peter Murtagh on 22nd August.

Later that night, unbeknownst to him, she took her own life.

The IT published Kate's anonymous article on 9th September, still unaware that she had committed suicide.

Tom Fitzgerald rang the IT on 10th September telling them the article was his daughters and she had commited suicide.

The IT took the opportunity to honour Kate in an obituary on November 26th, written by Peter Murtagh, the same editor to whom she had submitted her anonymous piece. I don't think that was remotely incompetent and don't believe that was the mistake.

Ireland is a small country. Kate's name and the company she worked for would have been all over the press releases she issued during her time with the Communications Clinic. The Independent published an article about another Communications Clinic employee taking them to tribunal over constructive dismissal and thus generally painted the place as an unpleasant company to work for. Drawing a parallel between that and Kate's suicide was most probably a fair natural next step for questioning minds to take, and Broadsheet.ie were the first to put both stories in the same place online.

That's when the backlash began.

Where the Irish Times failed was in editing the original article. However many caveats they wished to run with, or whatever right to reply they may have sought to give the Communications Clinic, their single greatest error was to change Kate's original article.

It would not have been unreasonable for them to print something that stated that the original piece was Kate's point of view, and open to the subjectivity of such. All of our points of view are subjective - that's the beauty of opinion! But the problem is that Kate wrote it because she felt it, and by deleting it the Irish Times have denied her the right to those feelings and overlooked the subjective nature of opinon.

The thing that rankles most is the dismissiveness of the retraction - instead of saying this was her opinon, they basically said it never happened, guv, with all the implied subtext that Kate may have invented it because after all, she was depressed and suicidal and subsequently what would you believe.

niall_h

Stunned that I've only come across this story this morning on here.

Is it getting any coverage in the mainstream media or is it a total blackout?

ciarafem

niall_h wrote: »

Stunned that I've only come across this story this morning on here.

Is it getting any coverage in the mainstream media or is it a total blackout?

No coverage in the mainstream media, but the social media on the Internet are doing a very good job.

Here is a link to a very good blog by an acquaintance of Kate Fitzgerald's - well worth a read. It has an open letter to the editor of the IT and a good timeline of the events that occured

http://www.conorfarrell.com/wordpress/uncategorized/a-letter-to-kevin-osullivan

statina

I have just sent an email to the editor conveying my disgust- its my first time ever to email a newspaper editor! It takes alot to get me angry but I am absolutely sickened by the actions of the Irish Times. The cheek of them to make out a person who cannot defend herself is a liar rather than take on Terry Prone:mad::mad:. They have lost me and my family as daily readers. RIP Kate.

DeVore

Today the Times used Facebook to publish their usual front page without comment despite dozens and dozens of people asking for an explanation and expressing their anger.

I'm glad the internet (specifically Broadsheet and I guess here ) is proving an effective back channel to get stories out there regardless of the spin doctors.

http://www.facebook.com/irishtimes

We haven't gone away you know.

DeV

copacetic

DeVore wrote: »

Today the Times used Facebook to publish their usual front page without comment despite dozens and dozens of people asking for an explanation and expressing their anger.

I'm glad the internet (specifically Broadsheet and I guess here ) is proving an effective back channel to get stories out there regardless of the spin doctors.

http://www.facebook.com/irishtimes

We haven't gone away you know.

DeV

I doubt whoevers job it is to post their front page is in any position to make any comment Dev, so that's a bit unfair. They are just doing their daily role. It's up to the editor to make further comment.

I'd also say that their own story on Saturday is probably what gave the ongoing issue much wider coverage. So they deserve some respect for that.

The Sparrow

DeVore wrote: »

No, not to my knowledge (I'm abroad but in contact with the office).


I think they know better.


DeV.
nb: We're about 21 times the size of the Irish Times in terms of reach. 1/3rd of readers from outside the state.

Quick question DeVore if I may on that subject. Am I right in thinking that boards and The Journal are both companies owned by the same organisation? Perhaps you are not connected to The Journal bit but I have been curious why during this whole saga The Journal haven't really being covering it at all. AFAIK they covered the Irish Times article a couple of days ago about the statement from Kate's parents but I haven't really seen any other coverage.

At this stage, I pretty much expect traditional newspapers and the media in general to put their head in the sand when there is any mention of defamation but I had hoped from more from The Journal. Especially as it is so connected to social media and is always posting the most obscure videos and stories that are being talked about on Twitter or here. It seems very strange that they wouldn't cover this story in detail because it is a chance to show that they have more balls than traditional media and that they are genuinely connected with social media and what is going on.

I'm going to guess that you probably don't want to talk for The Journal but I would be curious to know if an editorial decision was made to not cover this in any depth and if so why that was taken.

Seems to me that as broadsheet has proven this is a real opportunity for online media to show their worth over traditional news sources.

DeVore

copacetic wrote: »

I doubt whoevers job it is to post their front page is in any position to make any comment Dev, so that's a bit unfair. They are just doing their daily role. It's up to the editor to make further comment.

I'd also say that their own story on Saturday is probably what gave the ongoing issue much wider coverage. So they deserve some respect for that.

No, thats a cop out. And you of all people would be in uproar if there was an issue on Boards and I suddenly went silent and then Dav comes along and says "oh I'm just the social media guy, I have no authority to say anything".

The role is communications not *broadcast*. If they dont have the answer, the answer is "I'll go ask".

DeV.

DeVore

The Sparrow wrote: »

Quick question DeVore if I may on that subject. Am I right in thinking that boards and The Journal are both companies owned by the same organisation? Perhaps you are not connected to The Journal bit but I have been curious why during this whole saga The Journal haven't really being covering it at all. AFAIK they covered the Irish Times article a couple of days ago about the statement from Kate's parents but I haven't really seen any other coverage.

At this stage, I pretty much expect traditional newspapers and the media in general to put their head in the sand when there is any mention of defamation but I had hoped from more from The Journal. Especially as it is so connected to social media and is always posting the most obscure videos and stories that are being talked about on Twitter or here. It seems very strange that they wouldn't cover this story in detail because it is a chance to show that they have more balls than traditional media and that they are genuinely connected with social media and what is going on.

I'm going to guess that you probably don't want to talk for The Journal but I would be curious to know if an editorial decision was made to not cover this in any depth and if so why that was taken.

Seems to me that as broadsheet has proven this is a real opportunity for online media to show their worth over traditional news sources.

I have absolutely no connection with the Journal. I am not even in the same country as the editorial team at the moment. We share a common director (Paul Kenny) and a common shareholder in Distilled Media.

Its a fair question and one you can put to them directly, but they dont have any say in Boards and I have 0 say with them. To be fair, if they came here and hassled me about the way I run Boards, they'd get told to keep to their own business

They keep to themselves and while we are friendly with them (they seem like good guys whenever I have run into them) , its not a close relationship as such.

Unlike the Times, they DO have a comments section you could use if you wish.

DeV.

copacetic

DeVore wrote: »

No, thats a cop out. And you of all people would be in uproar if there was an issue on Boards and I suddenly went silent and then Dav comes along and says "oh I'm just the social media guy, I have no authority to say anything".

The role is communications not *broadcast*. If they dont have the answer, the answer is "I'll go ask".

DeV.

Ah yeah, but I hold boards to higher standards than the Irish Times!

I just don't feel tarring everyone with the same brush is valid here. It's the easy path for us all, but likely there is as strong feelings within the people working at the Irish Times as there is here. Stronger if anything.

They will have been told not to comment online and their contracts likely control that. The story making Saturdays edition and being retweeted by some staff is likely evidence of a serious battle internally.

They will have to respond soon enough, whatever about waiting out the storm, online it won't go away and they will either have to draw a decent line under it or retreat from online interaction.

The Sparrow

DeVore wrote: »

I have absolutely no connection with the Journal. I am not even in the same country as the editorial team at the moment. We share a common director (Paul Kenny) and a common shareholder in Distilled Media.

Ah ok. Cheers. I wasn't sure what the story was as I knew there was a link with Distilled Media.

Thanks for clearing that up.

DeVore

copacetic wrote: »

Ah yeah, but I hold boards to higher standards than the Irish Times!

I just don't feel tarring everyone with the same brush is valid here. It's the easy path for us all, but likely there is as strong feelings within the people working at the Irish Times as there is here. Stronger if anything.

They will have been told not to comment online and their contracts likely control that. The story making Saturdays edition and being retweeted by some staff is likely evidence of a serious battle internally.

They will have to respond soon enough, whatever about waiting out the storm, online it won't go away and they will either have to draw a decent line under it or retreat from online interaction.

Thank you, I think its the reason we are still going strong myself. Yes its bloody awful when you have face up to the bad stuff so we genuinely try our damnedest to avoid the bad stuff but when things like the Mobile App fiasco happened, I step up and give my honest opinion. You can also bet that I make it clear internally how much I do NOT want to have to do that and how it WONT be happening again.

Thats called accountability and the Times needs some right now. It needs leadership from its leader, not skulking behind some social web guy. He's just being thrown to the wolves and its unfair on him.



But I love the Times. I grew up reading it every day. (I've mentioned before my Grandfather was their head printer and many of the old printers/journos turned up at his funeral).
They were excellent and I just want them to come out storming again. To find their voice cos God knows we need it now but its unlikely to happen I feel. Money talks powerfully and everything else gets shouted down by it.


Our job, is to help those honest journos and editors in the Times fight the internal war and get it back on track. Every post, every comment, every blog helps them and backs them up.

DeV.

DeVore

This (http://soundmigration.wordpress.com/2011/12/01/why-pr-companies-like-tcc-wont-ever-own-the-interwebs/) raises some troubling questions too!

DeV.

ciarafem

The social media could yet win this battle against censorship.

Ben Goldacre, with 165000 followers has just started tweeting about this story.

bengoldacre



@zenbuffy i think that was all about cowardice and crass thoughtlessness at the Irish Times more than anything else

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ben_Goldacre

Rowley Birkin QC

copacetic wrote: »

I doubt whoevers job it is to post their front page is in any position to make any comment Dev, so that's a bit unfair. They are just doing their daily role. It's up to the editor to make further comment.

I'd also say that their own story on Saturday is probably what gave the ongoing issue much wider coverage. So they deserve some respect for that.

Don't have time to go and find it right now but there was definitely someone in a senior position, online editor perhaps, posting as The Irish Times and answering questions on their fb page last week.

It makes the current practice of ignoring everything all the more galling.

oceanclub

Isn't Hugh Linehan (@hlinehan) the online editor? Would that include having the ultimate say on what's on Facebook?

P.

Rowley Birkin QC

Rowley Birkin QC wrote: »

Don't have time to go and find it right now but there was definitely someone in a senior position, online editor perhaps, posting as The Irish Times and answering questions on their fb page last week.

It makes the current practice of ignoring everything all the more galling.

Found it. Hugh Linehan was posting as The Irish Times for a brief period and responding to queries/posts.

In going back looking for that it was actually staggering how many people have posted on their wall without reply. I wonder how long it will take before this is escalated beyond their social media people or if they are just going to hope it goes away.

copacetic

Rowley Birkin QC wrote: »

Don't have time to go and find it right now but there was definitely someone in a senior position, online editor perhaps, posting as The Irish Times and answering questions on their fb page last week.

It makes the current practice of ignoring everything all the more galling.

It was Hugh Linehan trying his best, he also tweeted a link to the story on Saturday.

Rowley Birkin QC

copacetic wrote: »

It was Hugh Linehan trying his best, he also tweeted a link to the story on Saturday.

I understand what you are saying but relying to some comments/posts and then stonewalling the rest is insane imho.

DeVore

So, I sent this from my account Twitter:

@hlinehan I want the Irish Times I knew and loved back. The one I grew up reading every day. The one spoke the truth fearlessly.

and he replied:

@DeVore Not hiding behind legalistic niceties but it's very hard to respond fully. i hope to address some issues soon. Others are impossible


More as I get it.

DeV.

ciarafem

I’m sure most people are aware of Phoebe Prince, the Irish teenager who died by taking her own life after bullying at her new school in the US.

Her story received widespread coverage in the mainstream media here in Ireland. Rte devoted a special programme to the story.

http://www.rte.ie/tv/programmes/the_trials_of_phoebe_prince.html

http://www.rte.ie/radio1/thejohnmurrayshow/2011-04-11.html

http://www.rte.ie/radio1/todaywithpatkenny/2010-04-07.html

The Examiner gave the case extensive coverage e.g. http://www.examiner.ie/ireland/phoebes-mother-my-pain-is-unbearable-153714.html

as did the Irish Independent and Newstalk http://www.independent.ie/lifestyle/bullied-to-death-2098808.html http://www.newstalk.ie/2011/news/9phoebe-prince-school-superintendent-we-tried-to-help-her30/

These links are just a sample of the extensive coverage provided by our mainstream media.

This makes it all the more incredulous the almost absence of coverage, by the same media outlets, of what has happened with the Irish Times after Kate Fitzgerald’s death.

I wonder why this is so?

gozunda

ciarafem wrote: »

I’m sure most people are aware of Phoebe Prince, the Irish teenager who died by taking her own life after bullying at her new school in the US.

Her story received widespread coverage in the mainstream media here in Ireland. Rte devoted a special programme to the story.

http://www.rte.ie/tv/programmes/the_trials_of_phoebe_prince.html

http://www.rte.ie/radio1/thejohnmurrayshow/2011-04-11.html

http://www.rte.ie/radio1/todaywithpatkenny/2010-04-07.html

The Examiner gave the case extensive coverage e.g. http://www.examiner.ie/ireland/phoebes-mother-my-pain-is-unbearable-153714.html
the lae
as did the Irish Independent and Newstalk http://www.independent.ie/lifestyle/bullied-to-death-2098808.html http://www.newstalk.ie/2011/news/9phoebe-prince-school-superintendent-we-tried-to-help-her30/

These links are just a sample of the extensive coverage provided by our mainstream media.

This makes it all the more incredulous the almost absence of coverage, by the same media outlets, of what has happened with the Irish Times after Kate Fitzgerald’s death.

I wonder why this is so?

The Phoebe Prince case went onto to become a crinimal case in law...

About time that legislation in this country grew some b*lls and classed this behaviour similar to other forms of attack on the person...