Monday, April 13, 2009
CBS Report Sets New Record For Trashing Of Meredith, Xenophobia, Multi-Inaccuracies, Possible Libels
Posted by Peter Quennell
[above: the CBS producer Doug Longhini]
Those who really know the case well were widely appalled at this vicious and highly misleading piece of propaganda.
A number of complaints have been registered. In the next several days, we’ll be analyzing the CBS report and the reaction at length.
Meanwhile, for those who did not see the CBS report and would like to, try clicking on the image above. It should just open and play.
And if it does not work for you, please tell us, or download and play this zipped version.
Saturday, April 11, 2009
CBS Reporter’s Bizarre Claims About Prosecutor And Reporters
Posted by Skeptical Bystander
Peter Van Sant of CBS is the slightly confused-looking reporter in the images above and below.
In promoting his “48 Hours” report tonight, which by all accounts seems intent on equaling CBS’s record for worst report on the case, Mr Van Sant has come out with an interview which is an absolute classic for how not to do such things.
First, consider Mr Van Sant’s remarks about one of the prosecutors in the case.
As for the accusation that Kercher was killed over a sex game, Van Sant cites an Italian blogger for putting that notion into the prosecutor’s mind. Van Sant said the blogger claims that she speaks to a dead priest who tells her what happened at crime scenes.
The blogger told the main prosecutor in the Knox trial, Giuliano Minnini (sic), that this was a satanic sex game and that’s how the theory started, Van Sant said.
Sliming of a prosecutor in this fashion has already been strongly protested against by Amanda Knox’s own defense team.
And the prosecutor in question, one of two (real name: Mignini), many weeks ago made clear that he had NOT listened to the Rome blogger (had locked her up in fact), is NOT especially pushing any particular theory of motive for the crime, is NOT especially central to the continued momentum of the trial - and has actually started a lawsuit against PRECISELY this kind of libel!
Second, consider Mr Van Sant’s remarks about the reporting of the case.
Among the many (actually rather neutral and non-inflammatory) journalists on the case that Mr Van Sant seems intent on sliming is of course Andrea Vogt of the Seattle PI. He all but refers to her by name and it seems rather obvious who he had in mind.
Ms Vogt is the reporter from the Pacific Northwest who is based in Bologna, Italy and who has been covering this case for the Seattle PI for over a year. Many observers have been impressed with her thorough, objective and factual reporting, particularly since the trial phase began.
Anyone who has been following the case knows how non-objective and pro-defense much of the reporting has been in the US, and how much fluffy air time has actually been arranged by the family-hired PR firm Marriott and company.
So the particular focus of Mr Van Sant’s criticism is really surprising. After claiming that Italy has the most irresponsible tabloid press on the planet and that local Seattle papers like the Times and the PI can’t afford to send reporters to Italy to cover the story, he explained that they hire “stringers”. Apparently these stringers simply translate articles from the Italian tabloids into English and, via the local newspaper circuit which publishes them, they get recycled and become legitimate news.
Mr Van Sant actually uses the terms “filtered” or “laundered”, as if he were talking about Mafia money being invested in life insurance policies.
The Seattle PI has enough problems without having to deal with this irresponsible and possibly defamatory remark. And Andrea Vogt, who to our knowledge is the only “stringer” working on this case who is filing stories for the PI, has been providing some of the best coverage of this case to US readers.
There are many good reasons for this: Ms Vogt is fluent in Italian and lives in Italy for much of the year; and she is a talented writer and an intelligent reporter. But most important, she has been making the trek from Bologna to Perugia and back, and spending Fridays and Saturdays in the courtroom for hours on end.
She recently wrote a piece on the mood in Seattle for Panorama, an Italian publication. For that article, she interviewed people in Seattle—including friends of Amanda Knox.
I would imagine that as soon as each daylong court session ends, she sits down - like the other serious reporters covering this case - and tries to turn out a fair and accurate report of the day’s event under very tight deadlines. Her reporting for the PI has been excellent and fair.
It is not only unfair, it is also dishonest to imply that Andrea Vogt is translating Italian tabloids and trying to pass it off as original reporting. If this interview with Mr Van Sant is any indication, then CBS viewers tonight may be in for an evening of fiction.
In which case, I think I’ll watch “The Greatest Story Ever Told” or “The Sound of Music” instead. Closer to reality than is CBS….
Friday, April 10, 2009
Rumors In Manhattan About Ludicrously Bad CBS Report
Posted by Peter Quennell
Click above for the CBS promo for a “48 Hours” report this Saturday night.
Early in the case CBS seriously shot itself in the foot. Now Manhattan lawyers and media people who are following the case are really amused that CBS seems to be about to do it again.
And CBS is said to be very, very nervous at putting itself out on such a limb. The best report by a US network so far would have to be that put together by NBC. And the worst report by a US network so far would have to be that put together by CBS.
The previous CBS report was confused on many of the basic facts of the case. And CBS tried to trash a key witness who gave some very convincing testimony a few weeks ago.
The apparent mainstays of this new report? The old chestnuts again. Prosecutor Mignini is REALLY evil! And Amanda Knox was somehow coerced into fingering Lumumba - and that in the course of a 14-hour interrrogation.
Talk about time-warp.
Not only have the claimed hitting of Knox and the endless interrogation already been discredited at trial by a number of witnesses. But the “evil” prosecutor has initiated an investigation into whether she committed slander against the interrogators.
More after the CBS broadcast. This should be most interesting.
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
Is Seattle Case Coverage STILL In Cloud-Cuckooland?
Posted by Peter Quennell
Click above for the West Seattle Herald story by (surprise surprise) Steve Shay.
Again, a complete lack of reporting of any of the hard facts. Again, a cynical, surrealistic and very misleading pull at Seattle’s heartstrings.
Has news of the Micheli report and of the Friday-Saturday testimony still not reached Seattle? There’s not yet been an inch of good coverage in any Seattle outlet.
Seems Seattleites themselves are getting ready for some real talk now. These contrary perceptions appeared right under Steve Shay’s piece.
To Brian Jones [editor of the West Seattle Herald]
I am fascinated how you and Steve Shay try to benefit from the murder of Meredith Kercher and try to get exposure and publicity for yourselves out of this.
Fascinated is probably the wrong choice of word, disgusted fits better.
To date I have seen one plausible scenario, and one ridiculous attempt at pulling the wool over everyone’s eyes.
The prosecutor’s scenario makes sense to me, and Amanda Knox’s scenario that she was not even there at the night of the murder does not.
Why was the washing machine running when police arrived, containing Meredith Kercher’s bloody clothes, when she had been dead for more than 12 hours?
A washing machine does not take 12 hours to wash clothes.
Why were Amanda Knox and Raffelle Sollecito at the murder scene with a mob and a bucket?
Why did the police find a receipt for 2 bottles of bleach purchased from a near-by store a few hours earlier?
Why does the shopkeeper of the store issuing the receipt say that it was Amanda Knox who bought the bleach?
Why did Amanda Knox tell police that Meredith Kercher usually locked her room door, when the other roommates say the opposite?
Why did Amanda Knox knew details of the position of the body, even though at the time the door was opened she was in no position to view the body as testified by witnesses?
Seattle media belatedly starting to corroborate or challenge these very damning perceptions would seem to be the best thing to do now.
For Seattle and for Amanda Knox both.
Friday, January 09, 2009
Looks Like Seattle Post Intelligencer Could Be On The Rocks
Posted by Peter Quennell
Click above for the breaking story.
The Seattle PI offered the best Meredith-case reporting, Andrea Vogt’s, from Rome. And the worst Meredith-case blogging, Candace Dempsey’s, from Seattle.
Weird editorial judgment. To say the least. More of the former and an absence of the latter could have really boosted this newspaper’s prospects.
Here are our past takes on the paper’s general decline and one bright spot.
- A Hearst-Hosted Defense Blog Abuses The Victim
- Good Take By (Surprise) Hearst’s Seattle PI
- Yet Another Smear Campaign On Hearst’s For-Profit Defense Blog
- Hearst’s Seattle Post-Intelligencer: Now On The Defensive?
- Ominous Happenings At Hearst, Seattle PI’s Parent Company
Tuesday, December 30, 2008
Another Seattle Post-Intelligencer Blog Bites Newspaper In Tail
Posted by Peter Quennell
Click above to read what appeared on a Seattle Post-Intelligencer blog before it was yanked.
Biff! Bam! Pow! Take that, rival Seattle Times! So. Are the monkeys now driving the train at Hearst’s Seattle PI ?!
Seattle’s excellent TechFlash website had this to say about the yanked post.
Ah, the wonders of newspaper rivalries in the age of online media.
Regina Hackett, the Seattle Post-Intelligencer’s art critic, cast a critical eye on her departing counterpart, Sheila Farr of The Seattle Times, in a blistering blog post Monday afternoon on the P-I’s site. By this morning, the post had disappeared.
It was the kind of commentary that probably wouldn’t have made it into a traditional print edition. But as blogging spreads through the mainstream media, one result is a reduction in the editorial layers between journalist and audience.
Hmmm. “But as blogging spreads through the mainstream media, one result is a reduction in the editorial layers between journalist and audience.”
So. You think that the editor of the Seattle PI, David McCumber, might finally have noticed that he could use a few more editorial layers?!
Hearst must be wondering about the monkeys layer. They could use less of that.
Wednesday, December 24, 2008
Perhaps Associated Press Should Try Reporting The Odds?!
Posted by Peter Quennell
Click for larger images. Online polls on whether Amanda Knox will be found guilty.
Gulp! The odds now [above] have become even more ominous than the odds one year ago [below].
Polling is by avid news followers. Probably only a small minority follow Meredith’s case specifically and seek to distort those polls
Obviously the PR campaign is doing a terrific job (!) Obviously the Associated Press is right to take it so seriously (!)
Slanted Associated Press Paroting Of Knox PR Campaign Release Achieves Over 800 Google Hits
Posted by Peter Quennell
Click above for Marta Falconi’s rather slanted AP report.
At time of posting it appears on at least 800 news websites. It opens with these paragraphs sympathetic to Knox’s Christmas plight:
The family of an American student accused of killing her British roommate says she is heading into her second Christmas in jail disappointed at a trial delay but “holding up pretty well under the circumstances”.
Knox is planning to attend an in-jail Christmas Day Mass, the family said in a recent statement emailed to The Associated Press.
Visitors are not allowed to bring in wrapped presents, but Knox’s parents are trying to get her “warm sheets, slippers, cold weather underwear, wool socks and a sweater.”
Trial delay? Of course the trial might have happened very much faster if (1) the defendants had not told several differing stories, (2) the crime scene had not been extensively rearranged to make it look like a sole-perpetrator crime, and (3) more and more witnesses had not kept coming forward.
But the AP story does not mention any of this.
It instead implies that the Italian slowness is unfair. But luckily, our plucky heroine “is holding up pretty well under the circumstances.”
Then we get this single sentence - one suggesting cold indifference - on the Christmas plight of Meredith Kercher’s sad, bereft family.
For their part, Kercher’s family will be spending their second Christmas without Meredith.
Finally, to their slight credit, the Associated Press conclude with the prosecutor’s scenario of the crime.
Prosecutors allege that Kercher was killed during what began as a sex game, with Sollecito holding her by the shoulders from behind while Knox touched her with the point of a knife. They say Guede tried to sexually assault Kercher, and then Knox fatally stabbed her in the throat.
Prosecutors say Knox’s DNA was found on the handle of a knife that might have been used in the slaying, while Kercher’s DNA was found on the blade.
For that slight attempt at corrective balance, we reckon Falconi’s story rates an E grade rather than an F.
The AP is notorious for parroting press releases rather than for doing any real digging. American newspapers are relying on it more and more as they cut back on their own reporting operations..
It is the main source for news and analysis of Meredith’s case for most American newspapers. The case reporting has been spasmodic and indifferent at best. To its credit, the New York Times has not usually published the AP releases.
The Associated Press would welcome your feedback on the story here. So would the 800-plus newspaper sites that carried the story.
They do pay for AP’s reporting, of course.
Wednesday, December 17, 2008
Ominous Happenings At Hearst, Seattle PI’s Parent Company
Posted by Peter Quennell
Above and below, the attractive Seattle PI building, on Seattle’s wonderful waterfront.
And here are two shots (scroll down for the second) of owner Hearst’s attractive Manhattan headquarters.
We remain pretty intrigued by the Seattle PI. We can’t seem to see that it’s serving either Seattle’s or Hearst’s best interests right now.
The PI runs some of the very best stories on the Perugia case in the United States, filed by its cool, dispassionate reporter in Rome.
It also runs on its website what one reader called “the most dishonest blog in America” which is notorious for its fact-challenged one-sidedness and for fronting a secret book deal on the case.
And it has run no in-depth reporting at all on the Seattle angles of the case.
Back here we mentioned the seemingly shaky economics of the paper, and the recent quite extraordinary drop in its readership.
Papers sold dropped by about 8 percent, in a period where the national drop was less than four (mostly related to the economic cycle), and where some media companies even saw real readership gains.
Our contacts in Manhattan’s great journalism schools seem to think the media industry’s best way forward for survival and growth is class journalism. Dig deeper, and avoid the vicarious thrills of, for example, blogs with an agenda
Our contacts regard the international Perugia case as a truly huge story. An absolute heaven-sent opportunity for the Seattle-based papers.
And they reckon that serious and imaginative handling of that story and its many intriguing Seattle angles could have dug the Seattle PI right out of its hole. And attracted a whole row of Pulitzer prizes.
Ball dropped. In a very serious and possibly life-threatening way.
So what is happening at Hearst’s HQ in Manhattan that relates to this?
Well, Hearst is privately owned, by a Hearst-family foundation, and they control most of the director seats on the board. They are said to be VERY unhappy with group performance.
Six months ago the CEO was forced out. And now there is a report that the interim CEO doesn’t meet with the family’s approval either.
Expected outcome?
A new Hearst CEO who is expected to be be very hungry for more circulation and more Pulitzer prizes at Hearst’s seriously under-performing papers.
Such as, of course, the Seattle Post-Intelligencer.
Time to get serious, guys…
Friday, November 21, 2008
Hearst’s Seattle Post-Intelligencer: Now On The Defensive?
Posted by Peter Quennell
Seattle tip: The newsroom seems to despise the blog “reporting” described below and to think it is hurting the paper. If incorrect, newsroom, and you really do love it, please feel free to correct it.
Above at the right is Seattle PI editor David McCumber. Seems like a nice guy, with a distinguished career.
Yesterday we received a rather tart email from a staff-member. The tone made us curious. It seemed a little defensive. So we have taken a closer look.
We’ve already posted here on the paper and the case. We noted then that the paper is part of New York’s privately-owned Hearst empire. Our header box on the post noted this:
Normally, the Hearst papers are famous for CHAMPIONING victims’ rights and memories. Not for abusing them, in a defense blog they host.
We gave the paper an F grade for that performance. And an A grade for the excellent post-Guede-trial reporting indicated here.
The Seattle PI’s circulation has taken quite a dive this year. The paper has seen a drop of 7.8 percent in papers sold, to just 117,572 in October.
Its one competitor, the Seattle Times, also privately owned, saw a similar percentage drop, to 198,741 in October.
However, the Times sells a lot more newspapers, and it seems fundamentally stronger.
Since 1983, the P-I and The Seattle Times have been run under a “Joint Operating Agreement” (JOA) whereby advertising, production, marketing, and circulation are run for both papers by the Seattle Times Co. They maintain separate news and editorial departments. The papers publish a combined Sunday edition, although the Times handles the majority of the editorial content while the P-I only provides a small editorial/opinions section.
If only one Seattle newspaper is left standing in the long run, which one might that be?
And might the Seattle PI be vulnerable, by way of that blog? It seems possible that its own legal people now think that it might be.
The so-called “reader’s blog” to which we have recently drawn attention is actually copyrighted. It has just bred a book deal, without consultation with the Kerchers. And it runs with some very high-impact paid advertising, flashing right alongside.
The paper seems to shrug the blog off as none of their business. Lawyers in New York here seem to doubt this attempted separation would carry far.
The blog was much criticized by readers in its early days, for seemingly being unable to mention the victim’s name. It’s attempting a lot of catch-up now, which seems to be fooling no-one.
It also has a bizarre history of ridiculing the prosecutor. Not something we’d have thought helpful to the ill-served Amanda Knox, now sitting in jail, awaiting his case against her.
And the blog has seen repeated waves of purges of comments in the past. HTML captures of the blog prior to these purges (there are many such captures) suggest the point of them is to eliminate any dissenting opinion or correction of wrong facts.
And perhaps to give a wrong impression of the blog’s viewpoint to any first-time readers. Or of the increasingly convincing state of the evidence.
The Seattle Post Intelligencer seems to host THE ONE NEWSPAPER SITE IN THE WORLD to carry comments deeply hostile toward the Kerchers themselves.
Not by the blogger, true. But they were long allowed to stand, and their right to stand was defended.
In the past several days, however, they have suddenly disappeared. And the google search below now no longer produces results.
Hmmm. Is yet another of the website’s many comment purges going on here? And this time, a legally-inspired purge?
Covering your tails, finally, are you Seattle PI? Legally, it makes very good sense. But another F grade for now.
One day we might upgrade you. But it’s the reporting we want to see change. And the blog toast.
Hearst’s Seattle Post-Intelligencer: Is The Editor Banning Truthseekers From Website? DRAFT
Posted by Peter Quennell
Above at the right is Seattle PI editor David McCumber. Seems like a nice guy, with a distinguished career.
************
David, David, David:...
We have had such very high hopes for you out there at the Seattle PI. There our paper is, right at the heart of the of the brightest, wealthiest and most influential media markets in the world.
Our paper absolutely could be one of the flagships. Conveying what an exciting, beautiful, cultures and caring Seattle really is. Making the readership so proud to be part of it. Making those who might visit so keen to actually do so.
So we are a little stunned at your circulation down 10 percent, when the average loss is less than five and some papers actually are doiung very well.
So we let’s see here.
And here we have this incredibly moving and tragic case with a victim who has to have been one of the most sweetest and loveliest girls in the world - young and defenseless, exactly the kind of victims
Tuesday, November 04, 2008
Wow! The Serial Italy-Smearer Strikes Once Again!
Posted by Peter Quennell
Peter Popham of the UK Independent. Yes that Peter Popham. And (wow!) that Peter Popham.
Ridicule of Italy has been a huge and hugely mistaken main arm of the Friends of Amanda strategy.
In the early days of the case, Peter Popham wrote quite rationally and dispassionately about it. He came across as an okay reporter, and he managed to maintain a detached point of view.
He actually noticed the victim and her much-suffering family.
And then he sat with Knox’s parents for an interview and seems to have been never quite the same since. Seemingly that Kool-Aid started its work on him right about then.
On Saturday (slow day, Saturday - you think maybe his editors were trying to bury him?) Peter Popham devoted 20 heated paragraphs to a blogger with a masonic conspiracy theory of the case. The “masonic theory that put Knox in the dock”.
The kicker?
[Prosecutor] Mignini does… have the benefit of a cracking story. And in Italy that counts for a lot.
They are all sheep, you see? Silly people. And the blogger? A catholic.
Well! Has Mr Mignini really sold this cracking story? And have the judge and the Italian population really bought into it?
Let’s see here.
There has been just about zero serious reporting of this masonic theory in Italy itself. Many (we included) knew it was out there. It was fundamentally just not very interesting or convincing.
And the Italian population seem to be coolly and compassionately aware of how Meredith probably did die and why. They did not seem to need lurid conspiracy theories to bring them to this point.
No clear influence of the blogger over Prosecutor Mignini on this case has been shown. Mignini apparently did make a few remarks about Halloween. But Halloween is Halloween, and masons are masons, and there is a difference if you actually look.
And there is no influence over the jury, because (American commentators, please get this right) in place of a jury, there is just a very well-informed judge.
And seemingly there was ZERO influence over this judge, and his judgment on Rudy Guede, and his overall take on the case. The judge has already explained that he went on the physical evidence and ONLY the physical evidence.
And from just that evidence these conclusions derive:
[Judge] Micheli agreed with prosecutors that more than one person took part in the sexual assault and murder, dismissing claims that the 47 bruises and knife wounds on Kercher’s body could have been made by a single attacker.
He upheld the testimony of a neighbour who heard more than one person fleeing Kercher’s house, adding that while footprints there might not definitely belong to Knox and Sollecito, they did indicate more than one attacker.
He stood by forensic evidence indicating Kercher’s and Knox’s DNA on a knife found at Sollecito’s house [hidden in a shoe box] which investigators suspect is the murder weapon, and ruled Sollecito’s DNA on Kercher’s bra strap as reliable evidence.
He dismissed as “fantasy”, the claim that Knox, Sollecito and Guede planned to involve Kercher in an orgy inspired by “Halloween parties” instead describing the fatal encounter as unplanned.
What really is the truth about the state of the evidence?
Well, much of it even now is not yet in the public domain. But what we already do know is pretty exhaustive. It hangs together nicely. It has been independently vetted. And it is very convincing.
And if there had not been a huge clean-up in the wee hours of the morning (the evidence for that is quite overwhelming) there would have been a great deal more.
And what really is the truth about the motives for the crime?
Probably that they were really very simple. What looks like a toxic blend of drugs, jealousies and guilt-free pathologies.
But more importantly, do they even matter? Does the prosecution have to PROVE a motive, lurid or otherwise?
Actually, no.
Here is an excellent take on this vital point by Michael, one of the very knowledgeable moderators of the Perugia Murder File forum.
The fact that in this case, we still do not have a ‘proven’ motive, nor do we have a proven and logged episode of the three suspects being together before the murder, is irrelevant.
It is the fact that the crime itself was carried out clearly by more then one individual, that all three can be shown to have been there either during, or very shortly after the crime, finished off by the fact that there was a clean-up/staging of the murder afterwards by someone who was ‘not’ Rudy Guede, that provides the necessary proof to convict Guede and refer the other two to trial.
One ‘starts’ at the crime scene itself, because that is where the ‘evidence’ proves them to have been. Not only what ‘is’ there, but also what is not..
To simply say ‘Well…we cannot prove a single time and reason before the event that all three met, therefore we must ignore and throw out all the evidence at the crime scene that indicates more then one person’ is simply ridiculous….
I’ll draw an analogy… If the ground violently shakes, causing the buildings to collapse around us, we have to say that this was an earthquake. It’s no good saying there was no earthquake because we are not anywhere even close to a faultline, or there’s no volcano nearby.
The proof of an earthquake is there. It simply means we then have to consider other possible reasons as being a cause of the quake, even if we cannot technically prove those new theories, because the quake as a ‘fact’ has happened. We then must simply take whichever of those theories is possible and the most likely and apply it as the explanation.
This indeed is what Micheli did in this case, when he said the protagonists may have met at some earlier point in the pubs and clubs. Despite the fact there are no witnesses who have come forward to relate this event, it is not an ‘unlikely’ event to have occurred, considering the close proximity of everyone to everyone else, especially as Knox already knew Guede…
Indeed, it is one of Micheli’s reasons for referring the case to trial. As he has said, a full trial may be able to answer those questions better. But still, that is not what is important, what is important is the defendants prove [now if they can that] they were not at the crime scene during the murder and involved in the staging afterwards.
Cracking story, Peter Popham. But it’s close to game over. Smarter people than you are folding their tents.
Perhaps it’s now time that you did the same.
Thursday, September 18, 2008
Why CBS Should Report Better - Way Better - On This Case
Posted by Peter Quennell
Pizzey makes at least two mistakes in this gushy little report from Rome on CBS News
- The short-form trial can normally result in a 1/3 reduction in the sentence - the 2/3 claim appears to be baseless.
- Rudy Guede “admits” to having sex with the victim - better make that “claims” to have had sex, widely disbelieved.
CBS continues its abysmal track record of being one of the most factually-challenged sources on the case.
Click here for the rest