Facing criticism for some comments he made about--gasp!--some POSITIVE SIDE EFFECTS of the foreclosure crisis, Hawthorne's Housing Director, Jeff Skrenes, has penned a thoughtful and articulate article.
Apparently defending himself PERSONALLY, and not OFFICIALLY, Jeff Skrenes posted the piece to, good grief, his FACEBOOK PAGE.
http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=63728066348&ref=nf
I'm not sure if this link will work for everybody. (It's not live, because Apples are sucky computers, so you'll have to cut and paste while muttering "Apples suck. Apples suck.")
If the URL doesn't work, folks should let me know and I'll post the article on this blog. GEE, HOW EASY WOULD THIS BE IF I HAD A (EXPLETIVE) DELL!?!?!! Highlight, copy, control shift A...JEEEEEEZ!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
(Do not click "Read More")
15 comments:
post it here!
I should also point out that when I wrote that particular note on my facebook page, I was only aware of the one article in Insight, as I'd seen a weblink and not the paper itself. There is actually a much more strongly worded editorial trying to misconstrue statements made by CM Samuels and myself in conjunction with the title of the MinnPost article. I did send a response to Al McFarlane and have requested equal space for a counterpoint in a future Insight edition. If I don't get a response, I'm just going to roll up my sleeves and get to work instead of getting dragged into what could be endless and pointless bickering.
To the first anonymous poster...OK, does that mean the URL is NOT working? I don't like to completely replicate content that can be accessed elsewhere...
To Jeff: I can concur with the "endless" part, but "pointless?"
Au contraire, mon fraire. (sp?)
the link says you must log in to see this page. i don't have a facebooke log in. don't want one either. thanks
Pointless: My inner Star Wars geek creeps out whenever I use the word "bickering." There is a scene early in the first movie where Vader is using the force to strangle someone and one of the other imperials stops him by saying, "This bickering is pointless!"
But yes, there are parts of this debate I consider pointless. What parts? Well, the parts that weren't included or referenced in my facebook note in any way because they were, well, pointless. And if the debate starts to go in a direction that is just a waste of time, breath, and energy, I'll do what I said and just get back to work.
I can't access it. I think you have to have a Facebook account to do so.
In order to read it, a person has to be a member on facebook and they also have to be listed on Jeff's list of friends.
Facebook is about the worst place someone could post anything they are wanting people to read.
cannot access article without joining facebook.
I'm giving Insight News until the end of the week to respond. I doubt they or Al McFarlane will. Once he has failed to respond in any way to my request for equal space to write a counterpoint, there will be a JNS Exclusive from me as a response to the inane content of this week's Insight.
It looks like Randolph Staten had his comment published, but I can't find any others. I guess Insight News is being rather selective. No shocker there.
Insight News will always be trying to drum up some scandal and tension - especially race-related, just because with out the tension, there is no need for them to exisist, especially racial tension. And Samuels to them, represents racial tension, they are choosing to continue on an outdated model of "being the blackest" (whatever THAT is) they can be. Al McF. has made up his mind to use his paper to try and get Don Samuels UN-elected, by anybody.
Al McF took something Don wrote to another source, twisted and distorted it, put Don's picture and by-line as if Don had submitted it to Insight News, and published it as if it was real journalism work. It is nothing more substantial than what the National Inquirer does. At least the National Inquirer calls itself a gossip rag instead of portraing to be a journalistic publication.
Al McF and company are daily displaying their hypocritical nature by continuing to blow the horns of Obama and his victory while denouncing Don Samuels for 'not being black enough'. Well guess what, Don was Obama-esque before Obama was even on the scene.
Don represents all people, of all races and demographics, and of all political persuasions. He will be your representative whether you look like him or not, whether you sound like him or not, whether you voted for him or not. And for this all-inclusive leadership style - it doesn't fit well with what Al McF and company are determined to do - which is continue to beat the drum of racial tension and victimization so that they can continue to have a place of "need" and an income stream based off of that need.
It's outdated and it's not going to work any longer.
I hope Al McF and company continue to beat that drum so that people can see what they are really all about.
looks like Insight News has Jeff's letter on line at least, not sure about print.
Yes, but that "letter" was the email he sent to request space to print a piece. That "letter" was actually an email not intended for publication. Throwing that piece in the paper was journalistic slop. If Jeff had known that email was going to be the piece published, he would have written things another way. And Insight News did the same thing to Don Samuels, taking his "Boogeyman" piece and just LIFTING it and publishing it like it had been SUBMITTED.
These things don't come off as deliberate actions, just journalistic slop. Oh, and they need to learn how to spell "Hawthorne" correctly. Wasn't it Hawthorne that gave some money to help get that publication started in the FIRST PLACE? I've heard this. Correct me if I'm wrong.
what Insight News did with Don's 'boogeyman' piece was even worse - not only did insight just lift it and print it as if Don had submitted it, but insight news moved some things around and left some things out, which totally changed the meaning of what Don wrote. even more sloppy slop slop. unethical to say the least.
Post a Comment