Stuart Orzach: Double standard

Advertisement

The DeVincentis e-mails

The double standard of this newspaper disturbs me.

You preach openness. You zealously pursue the contents of executive sessions of local boards and councils, sometimes using legal means. You label them "secret" sessions.

Yet, you assert your right to publish personal e-mails obtained from an anonymous source.

I fail to see how your reporting makes our school system - or this community - better. I don't care what language Dr. D., or anyone, uses in private correspondence, regardless of the subject. Apparently, no one is entitled to privacy except you.

The motives of your source are newsworthy. The content of these e-mails is not.

Stuart Orzach

Steamboat Springs

Comments

steamboatparent 7 years, 8 months ago

You and I, as tax payers, paid Dr.d to write these emails on our computers, at our school. Wherever you work may find this a constructive use of time (and their money), but once you do it on the job, in your office on the company's equipment, privacy isn't part of the equation. If he wanted private conversations he should have done it at home. His motives are transparent and self centered, the source's motives appear to be for the good of the community by revealing a 10th grader posing as an adult.

0

reallocal 7 years, 8 months ago

"I fail to see how your reporting makes our school system - or this community - better."

If you don't see it yet, you will soon. Horrible thing to do to someone, even DeVincentis, but right outcome. This is, perhaps, the only situation in my life where I've thought that the ends justifies the means. A person like Devincentis will never learn otherwise.

Also, it isn't the responsibility of the paper to make our community better-it is their responsibility to report what's going on in our community. In this case, they just happened to vastly improve the long-term viability of a (brand new) school board.

0

JQPUBLIC 7 years, 8 months ago

Do you actually believe your statement "The motives of your source are newsworthy. The content of these e-mails is not."? If so, you have to be one of the brainwashed, blind faith followers that believes he can do no wrong. How can anyone, of their own free will, believe we have no right to question Dr. D's motives, actions, or integrity but that we must question the motives of the person that exposed him for the egotistical hypocrite that he is?

0

elphaba 7 years, 8 months ago

Those were not personal e-mails. They were and are public property - sent by a person who signed a waiver saying they were not private. They could have been obtained by any citizen with a Freedom of Information Request.

0

kingsride 7 years, 8 months ago

Ahh Stuart..another see no evil hear no evil kind of guy. This is utopia springs colorado where nothing bad exists. Another clueless utopian.

0

geezer 7 years, 8 months ago

Seriously, Mr. Orzach, you expect the Pilot to "report" on someone's motives in providing the e-mails? How is that reporting at all? The Pilot is expected to give us facts, not speculation and the fact is that Dr. D used public property to send hate-mail.

What is your motive in pointing the finger away from the source of hatred and vehemence?

0

Requires free registration

Posting comments requires a free account and verification.