DEEP LACK OF BACKGROUND

DEEP LACK OF BACKGROUND: We've learned through painful experience that rock bottom is a place that doesn't exist- there's always a longer and sharper drill bit in the pit.

So it's really no surprise that after more than a dozen regimes at the local newspaper over the past three decades- each, with brief respites of competency, worse than the last- the level of professionalism has plumbed new depths.

The general slipshod nature of the news-less wonder has irritated and generally disgusted residents island-wide. But many- notably us- have saved their ultimate wrath for the alleged skills of alleged reporter Leo Azambuja, whose biggest point of confusion is apparently whether he should bend over or get down on his knees in his dealings with elected officials.

But until now we never had any unpublished insight into what kind of warped thinking goes into the utter lack of accountability that Leo has made his hallmark.

Now, in a series of emails between Azambuja and Prosecuting Attorney Shaylene Iseri-Carvalho obtained by reporter Joan Conrow, Azambuja demonstrates his main concern- not informing the public but kissing up to those he covers.

Through a process she describes as tantamount to "pulling impacted wisdom teeth", Conrow requested and finally recently received some heavily redacted emails she had requested from Iseri's office regarding the testimony before the county council of former Victim-Witness counselor Erin Wilson who, according to Conrow, has won an EEOC case after being fired by Iseri.

But the Azambuja emails were not among those released and rather were obtained by Conrow through a "leak" after Iseri refused to include them in a packet.

Conrow's work on the various and sundry scandals in Iseri's office during our recent health challenges has been nothing short of essential to a community in which Azambuja's reporting has been all but non-existent.

We aren't going to go into the whole sordid tale of "Victim-Witness-Gate" here today. You can read some of our earlier coverage here
and here.

Our tale today goes back to January 10, 2012, when Wilson brought a series of charges against Iseri to the attention of the Kaua`i County Council in a letter that is part of the packet released by Iseri's office (last document in pdf).

Azambuja, and therefore the local paper, had been silent on most of Iseri's alleged misdeeds in the matter until January 14, 2012, when an article finally appeared under the headline of "Former Victim counselor fires at OPA."

Azambuja's article essentially briefly quotes Wilson's charges one by one and then quotes Iseri's extensive and detailed answers. But instead of informing readers that Iseri's response was in an email, Azambuja referred to Iseri's responses using the term "she said" over and over, never even mentioning the fact that the responses had been in writing.

That type of thing is considered a major ethical violation these days by the top news outlets like Associated Press and the NY Times. Readers should be informed and certainly should not be lied to as to the form of a response from a news subject.

But content of the leaked email shows even bigger lapses of ethical judgment on Azambuja's part.

It was apparent that Iseri's responses had been in writing and so, apparently, Wilson asked Azambuja for Iseri's full letter.

What Azambuja did next perhaps explains why no one would mistake Azambuja for a trained professional journalist.

Here's the bizarre exchange between Azambuja and Iseri. Astoundingly Azambuja tells Iseri that rather than being considered the subject of his article he was treating her as a "source" and that as such, Iseri's letter is "protected" material... and then he actually asks her if it is okay to give the letter to Wilson.

1) From Azambuja to Iseri:

Re: response to erin wilson (sic) letter Hi Shay

I got a call from Erin Wilson today and she wanted a copy of your response. I explained to her that I'm not sure if it's a public document. Her testimony was a public document but your response is just a answer sent to me through an email. I told her I would act the same if the situation was reversed out of ethics and respect. She insisted she wanted a copy so I said I told her I would ask you for permission.

No one else has seen it and no one will without your authorization. That's how reporters should treat their sources no matter who they are.

But since I told her I would ask you here goes her request.

Do you authorize me to send Eric Wilson a copy of your email

Aloha, Leo

2) From Iseri to Azambuja:

No.

Shay

3) From Azambuja to Iseri:

Ha, not a problem Shay,

See you tomorrow at council.

Aloha,

Leo

4) From Iseri to Azambuja

Thanks for the sense of humor :-)

Shay

Iseri's response certainly was a pubic document. There are no exceptions for communications with reporters in HRS 92F 13-14. Emails to constituents are virtually always public.

But the real head-shaker here is that Azambuja treats her like a "source" when what she was was the "subject" of the story. This demonstrates an amazing lack of journalistic integrity showing a basic lack of understanding of the source-reporter and subject-reporter relationships.

Azambuja's contention to Iseri that "(Wilson's) testimony was a public document but your response is just a answer sent to me through an email" shows how little understanding he has, not just of journalistic ethics but of the state's open records laws.

Anything written by a government official that pertains to their work is a public document, with some exemptions for things like privacy, working drafts and personnel matters. The fact that a reporter who covers "government beat" lack that basic understanding of a law that is an integral part of his work may go a long way toward explaining the utter lack of substance of much of Azambuja's reporting.

As a matter of fact parenthetically we can't remember ever seeing Azambuja write about making an official record request whereas his predecessor in the job created a whole section at the paper's web site regarding "freedom of information" type requests. The last entry there is by that reporter, Michael Levine, who now works at CivilBeat.com

Next Azambuja wrote "I told (Wilson) I would act the same if the situation was reversed out of ethics and respect... No one else has seen it and no one will without your authorization. That's how reporters should treat their sources no matter who they are."

Ethics? Respect? Azambuja is so devoid of ethics it's hard to know where to begin. If Leo can't tell the difference between a public document and an off-the-record remark by a source he ought not be in the profession.

In asking Iseri whether it was okay to release her response- instead of just publishing it like any journalist would normally do- he has given up control of his reporting to someone who obviously has something to hide since she refused to release the rest.

Of course, many times a reporter will have a source-reporter relationship with people he or she covers. But according to well established ethical standards it must always be with the clear understanding that when asked for an on-the-record response that person is not to be treated as a source who can go back later and say "no- you can't use what I gave you 'on the record.'"

But regardless of whether Iseri occasionally acts as a source for Azambuja he is giving up his control over the news coverage he presents. A reporter should never take a written on-the-record response and then give the subject a chance to change or refuse to release it.

Given the email exchange, the "lie" to the readers as to the written nature of Iseri's response takes on an even bigger importance. It makes one wonder whether and how this chummy relationship has influenced Azambuja's coverage in the past.

Since there is no editor at the paper there is no one to take an objective look at Azambuja's relationships with those government officials he covers. That's one of the big functions of an editor- making sure that news isn't being manipulated by the source and that any source-reporter relationship primarily benefits the reporter, the paper and the reader, not the source.

Of course unpublished materials are the possession of the reporter, and under the Hawai`i "Reporters' Shield Law," for purposes of court proceeding, many reporters will withhold their unpublished notes. Reporters should not be seen as an arm of the constabulary.

But that isn't the situation here because there isn't any "source" to protect. Azambuja has lied to his readers and then, continuing the lie, withholds materials that any reporter would be more than glad to share under just about any circumstances. While in "ink and paper" news outlets space may be a factor in publishing a document such as Iseri's reply to Wilson's allegations, on-line publications routinely post full resource documents along with an article from which quotes are extracted.

It's apparent that Azambuja lied so that he wouldn't have to release Iseri's letter due to his self-delusional, mistaken impression that she was a source, not the subject of the story.

No reporter worth a damn would even consider withholding the Iseri letter. But in the schmoozy, "please like me" world of Azambuja, relationships with elected officials (especially, as we've reported in the past, with Council Chair Jay Furfaro who has all but led Leo around by a ring though his nose) is what seems to count. As a matter of fact it appears to be the determining factor in what news the island receives regarding government and politics.

This would be a fireable offense in any legitimate news organization. With the key words here being "legitimate news organization," don't expect anything to change any time soon at the local Kaua`i newspaper.

WAITER, THERE'S A REPORTER IN MY SOUP

WAITER, THERE'S A REPORTER IN MY SOUP: Daily journalism is a tough job. As they say, the news, like rust, never stops.

Print is hard enough, but when it comes to TV news reporting- with a much more limited number of words to get the idea through, and the loss of control that comes with producers, editors and anchors all getting a stab at your work- gaffs are not only more common but inevitable.

But Kristine Uyeno's "Action Line" report on KHON's 6 o'clock News yesterday contained more than a simple mistake. It actually made the "scam" being reported upon minor in comparison with the potential for a future re-rip-off of the 89-year-old grandmother who thought she had won the Publisher's Clearinghouse Sweepstakes.

The story appeared first on Tuesday and told of how the granddaughter couldn't stop her grandmother from sending off $30,000 in order to receive her prize- an all too common scam since legitimate sweepstakes and contests do not require people to send money in order to receive their winnings- until the grandmother saw the story on the news and finally acknowledged that she had been robbed.

We were busily engaged in a Bob Morris novel and so barely paying attention to the followup report on Wednesday night but we just happened to look up for a moment (see the 1:29 mark on-line) to see a "B-roll" shot of a piece of paper with a whole page apparently containing the accounting for all the payments the grandmother had sent out to the thieves.

And thanks to the magic of the DVR we were able to go back and see where, smack in the middle near the top, there was a listing saying "Card #" with a string of numbers starting with 8100- as many credit cards do- as well as a full page containing what appears to be lists of bank account numbers as well as, apparently, grandma's other financial information.

So, for those who may not be as criminally-minded as others, the poor old lady who had gotten scammed for $30,000 now stands to be a victim of identity theft- if not direct theft- all because someone edited in a shot the videographer caught on his camera and gave no thought to what information it might contain.

It all seems symptomatic of the new "stripped down news," produced by newsrooms that are filled with half as many reporters who are being asked to do twice as much work at half the wages. Many have fled journalism for the PR field and, although those that are left are usually the best and the brightest, this kind of thing shows what happens when they're spread too thin.

It's bad enough that this has led to a dearth of investigative and enterprise journalism. But it's simply unacceptable when even the crime reporting that remains is only a watered down gravy-substitute of pseudo-news, containing not just lumps but unknown and unidentifiable substances that can regurgitate causing heartburn aplenty for the already-ill.

YOU DON'T HAVE TO GO HOME BUT YOU CAN'T STAY HERE

YOU DON'T HAVE TO GO HOME BUT YOU CAN'T STAY HERE: We could say we've been lazy. We could say we've been spending mornings writing other things. We could say that there's no politics going on with everyone away on vacation.

Anything to avoid one of our least favorite of journalistic foibles- reporting that "nothing happened" yesterday.

It's usually best expressed by the TV reporter doing a "remote" from the scene of the big traffic accident and telling the anchor that "nothing's going on right now" sweeping her arm, pointing out all the "nothing" behind her.

"But you should have seen it a few hours ago." Yes- we should have. But you're not showing us that. You're standing there showing us a big bunch of "nothing" because, well, it's TV and everyone else does it.

Then there's the cub reporter who comes back to the editor and with a lede of "Nothing happened at the council meeting today."

"Nothing?" the editor asks, before eliciting the fact that indeed "something" happened- the story behind why nothing "happened."

But our award today goes to our favorite whipping boys and girls at the local newspaper, this time in the personage of Sports Editor Tyson Alger who, even though arguably not a true "news" reporter, could be expected to have some idea of the journalistic precept of reporting the news in an active way... even if the story itself is nothing to write home about.

Of course we can't expect Renée Haines, the new editor at the local paper, to start actually reading the copy that goes into her publication. It's apparently too much of a tradition to allow unfiltered- and unedited- copy to appear in the paper's pages.
http://www.blogger.com/img/blank.gif
And so it was that when Alger was assigned this week's "Talk Story"- the local version of the "man on the street/question of the week" piece of pap/filler he decided that satisfactory answers to "Did you make a new years resolution?" include "no."

As a matter of fact, all four of them were essentially "no," the answers reading:
“I forgot to do one this year.”
“Nope.”
“I didn’t this year because I never keep them.”
“I haven’t done one because I’ve been busy traveling.”

We especially like the last one as if somehow resolutions made while traveling are exempt from taking effect when you return.

It appears that it's just the ultimate form of laziness... either that or Tyson was obviously pissed at getting the assignment and so instead of either pushing his subjects- or finding people who DID make a resolution- he came back with a report that "nothing happened."

So don't complain that we've neglected this space in favor of trying to work on a long-form tome some mornings; after four years (this month) at this we could always tell the same story again or get back up on an all-too-familiar soapbox that even those who agree with us are weary of.

Just be glad we didn't just say that nothing happened... or at least we found a cute way to say it.

AZAMBOGUS

AZAMBOGUS: When it comes to the local Kaua`i newspaper it takes an awful lot to flabbergast us.

But today's article headlining, on the basis of one unidentified source, that "Radiation feared in Airport shutdown; Airport worker: HAZMAT team was looking for radiation" might just take the cake for the all time most irresponsible piece of "journalism" (note the quotes) we've ever seen.

"Reporter" (those quotes again) Leo Azambuja quotes a single "airport worker" who apparently was speculating him or her self for the story which, if true, would no doubt make national headlines.

Who the heck would "go with" a story like this, especially with an apparent denial from the county and a lack of confirmation from the state?

Now journalists do sometimes report items from single, unidentified sources, But it is, as it should be, rare and the exception to the rule and done only under certain very strict circumstances.

If the source is well known to the reporter, in a position to know and has been extremely reliable in the past there may be a way to present the story with consultation and confirmation with the source by an editor. But publication should come only if every effort has been made to either confirm or debunk the story, especially one that could cause a panic if published.

If the call is made to publish the reporter and editor should then make every effort to inform the reader as to the reason for the single anonymous sourcing and any other information on the source that can be revealed. The information as to why the source is being protected should be included making it very clear at every point in the story that the statement is unconfirmed.

This is what a modern 21st century policy would yield at the NY Times, Washington Post or Associated Press.

In this case it sounds to us like the source just doesn't want to be identified because the story is probably bogus and based on idiotic, uninformed speculation.

But the fact that there is an apparent denial changes circumstances. Actually we have no idea whether there really was a denial from County Spokesperson Mary Daubert because Azambuja's reporting on that is so ambiguous:

County spokeswoman Mary Daubert said the HAZMAT crew tested the center checkpoint for toxic and hazardous odors and substances and found none, and found no radiation.

It's said almost as an afterthought and who knows how or even if the question was posed. You would think for something this important there would be a quote and clarity as to what was said by the spokesperson who's in a position to know.

It's no wonder that no one has picked up on this story even though the Honolulu Star Advertiser and Associated Press commonly, by agreement, re-report local Kaua`i newspaper stories. No one in their right mind would pick up a story like this without any confirmation or at least more information or other sources.

The obvious thing here is that, were this to be some stupid innocuous story like 99% of what appears in the local paper no one would care. But this has the potential to cause panic and people- especially visitors- refusing to go anywhere near the screening area or even the airport itself. Who could blame them?

And all based on a report from "an airport worker" who, for all we know is a janitor or someone who has no connection with the screening process and may have no idea what it would look like if someone was indeed testing for radiation.

Sheesh.

A LITTLE TRAVELING MUSIC SAMMY

A LITTLE TRAVELING MUSIC SAMMY: The first time it occurred to us that it had been way too long since we'd been off-island was when Hawaiian Air unexpectedly assigned us a seat.

But then, flying to the Big Island this weekend to participate in Saturday's UH- Hilo Media Symposium was all about change... in the media at least.

The "Old Media versus New Media" panel contained the mucky-mucks of Hawai`i journalism... and Andy Parx- who almost didn't get to go because one of the sponsors said with an upturned nose "he's just a blogger."

We told the story of how, after 30 years in journalism, much of it as a "columnist," we "became" a blogger as a function of choosing the "blogger" software, giving us a McLuhan-esque thesis for the weekend: there is no "new media," just one new medium after another.

The really observant in attendance saw that we were all a bunch of old media dinosaurs trying to figure out exactly what this "new media" was.

Our main observation was that Hawai`i Island has what Kaua`i lacks - a vibrant journalism community with dozens of "journalist-bloggers"- or whatever you call people like Andy Parx and Ian Lind, who shared two panels- many "aggregator" sites and seemingly dozens of local reporters that have eked out a living and in fact a career practicing their craft.

Not to mention a packed room full of J-school students expecting to make a living at it.

There's no such thing on Kaua`i. We feel all alone in a forest- along with Kaua`i Eclectic's Joan Conrow- in "news-blogging" (if you will) because there are simply no opportunities for local journalists here. The local newspaper pays starvation wages and usually hires reporters from those who are "on the circuit" on the mainland. They stay for anywhere from two months to two years and then move on to the next stop.

The few professionals who live here have long since left the trade and ended up selling anything from real estate to "activities" or waiting tables.

The Big Island on the other hand has an actual press club that has existed for decades. And, although there was quite a bit of damage in keeping it that way, the Hawai`i Tribune Herald remains the only union shop in the islands.

The result for Kaua`i is a distinct lack of available information, almost all of which is "courtesy" of the local paper where incompetence is a tradition that began with the departure of (full disclosure) our mentor, legendary editor Jean Holmes, in the early 80's.

But back to the weekend. We did manage to meet people who heretofore had been only names on a web site, including Damon Tucker who, as we wrote last month, was beaten allegedly by the cops and arrested, apparently for taking taking pictures of a melee in front of a Pahoa nightclub.

Tucker was arrested for "obstructing a government operation" and the police, according to reports, allege that he was physically getting between them and those involved in the fracas. But Tucker sat us down and shared the cell-phone video taken that night and our observation was that he would have had to have been a magician to have managed to get between the cops and their subjects.

Though the two clips are very short, the timing between the two is what caught our attention.

In the first, which is only nine seconds long, an officer can be seen telling Tucker to "stop" and that’s where it ends. Tucker says that the rest of the sentence was "taking pictures" or something to that effect.

The second clip was taken one minute and thirty-one seconds later according to the time stamp and in it you can hear the sound of handcuffs being put on Tucker and in that intervening time is when Tucker says he was thrown to the ground and beaten.

The thing is that according to Tucker, the view is of the officer standing almost directly across the street from the nightclub where the fight occurred with Tucker taking the video right in front of him. That means that in the minute and a half, if the police's story were true, Tucker would have had to have crossed the street, gotten between the police and the fighters gone back to the other side of the street and been taken down, beaten and handcuffed.

In addition Tucker had a regular camera which the police confiscated and claimed that that was what he used to take the pictures of the fight. So add "getting out the regular camera" to the list of chores he miraculously performed in a minute and a half.

Oh- and according to Tucker, the police have told his attorney that there were no pictures on the memory card of the camera.

Today according to Associated Press,

Journalist Amy Goodman, host of the syndicated program "Democracy Now!" and two of her producers will receive $100,000 in a settlement over their arrests during the 2008 Republican National Convention in St. Paul.

Many will remember how Goodman was arrested simply doing her job in reporting on the convention.

"When journalists are arrested, it is not only a violation of the freedom the press, but of the public's right to know," Goodman said in a statement. "When journalists are handcuffed and abused, so is democracy. We should not have to get a record when we put things on the record."

Getting back to the symposium, it seemed that every time we mentioned Tucker's name in close proximity to the word "reporter" it elicited an audible groan and a rolling of the eyes from the professionals there.

But the fact is that when someone is acting in the capacity of a reporter and has the means to distribute the story and has done so in the past, that person becomes a reporter by performing the act of reporting.

And that may be the crux of why many in the old guard of the old media insisted on there being reporting standards of professionalism for bloggers, especially those who do reporting and opinion in the same piece.

We maintained that there's no need because critical readers will be able to sort out who is reliably reporting events even if it is intermixed with opinion. And of course those without those skills will not.

It's really no different than it's ever been. When we were growing up you could either read the New York Times or The New York Post. Some people can't tell the difference and for them their lack of critical reading and thinking skills will never allow them to distinguish between the two. Even with time showing the reliability of the Times and their reputation for veracity that comes with it, those who lack those skills will see the Post's material as factual no matter how often they are proven to be purveying false information.

The lesson we took from the symposium is that the "new media" is simply a function of the new technology- nothing more and nothing less. There's no need for new rules of journalism on the part of the writers because the readers and their skills will be what determines the viability of each publication in the future.

As it was half a century ago, the medium is still the message and no new gizmo is going to change that.

PRESSING MATTERS

PRESSING MATTERS: Big Island blogger Damon Tucker's first court appearance after apparently being beaten by a Hawai`i Island Police Department (HiPD) officer for photographing a fight in progress outside a Pahoa bar didn't yield a plea after his attorney asked for a jury trial and the case was remanded to circuit court, according to coverage by Big Island Chronicle (BIC) reporter Tiffany Hunt Edwards.

Tucker was arrested for "obstructing police operations" even though he claims he was across the street from the police activity he was recording on his iPhone

The big news is, however, that Tucker now has possession of the confiscated phone and the video he took and apparently it shows he was 10-15 feet away, across the street from the altercation, as he had claimed.

But the police report may hold the key to the disposition of the case.

Edwards quotes the report as saying:

“This after officers upon responding to an affray of approx. 10 to 20 adults fighting at the Pahoa Vllg Club, deft [defendant] repeatedly refused to stop physically pushing himself between officers while they were engaged in interviewing witnesses and suspects, and appeared to be very intoxicated. Deft then shoved his camera into the faces of victims at the scene while they were interviewed, and propelled them to become irate. Furthermore, Deft then proceeded onto the roadway placing officers and himself in danger of being hit by passing vehicle. Deft cited he was representative with the Media, however deft was unable to produce proper Media Credentials, (emphasis added) thereby deft became combative and was subsequently arrested.”

Edwards writes that:

Tucker, in responding to the police report’s assertion that he was intoxicated in the incident involving police, shared a statement from a bar bouncer that Tucker was “buzzed” but not drunk. The recovered footage seen by this reporter is pointed toward three police officers and at least one bystander standing at the entrance to the Luquin’s Mexican Restaurant parking lot, across the street from Pahoa Village Club. One of the officers emphatically tells Tucker he is being warned to stop videotaping.

But the statement that stands out to us is that "Deft cited he was representative with the Media, however deft was unable to produce proper Media Credentials" because, according to a recent ruling by the First Court of Appeals in Boston in allowing a civil case to go forward, the public has the same right as a reporter to photograph police in a public place.

According to an article in New American "Simon Glik, a Boston attorney... was arrested on the evening of October 1, 2007 for using his cellphone to record police officers making an arrest on the Boston Common."

But in rejecting the officers' claim of immunity the three-judge panel not only unanimously addressed the reporter vs. public issue but realities in an age of cell phone cameras, "new media" and bloggers.

The ruling says, in part:

The First Amendment issue here is, as the parties frame it, fairly narrow... Is there a constitutionally protected right to videotape police carrying out their duties in public? Basic First Amendment principles, along with case law from this and other circuits, answer that question unambiguously in the affirmative...

(C)hanges in technology and society have made the lines between private citizen and journalist exceedingly difficult to draw. The proliferation of electronic devices with video-recording capability means that many of our images of current events come from bystanders with a ready cell phone or digital camera rather than a traditional film crew, and news stories are now just as likely to be broken by a blogger at her computer as a reporter at a major newspaper. Such developments make clear why the newsgathering protections of the First Amendment cannot turn on professional credentials or status.

The video evidence apparently shows that the claim that Tucker was interfering with a police operation is shibai and certainly under any circumstances beating someone to stop them from taking photographs is not the proper response of police.

As we noted previously, although we haven't been able to ascertain the current procedures on the Big Island, most other jurisdictions stopped issuing official police press passes- which usually solely enabled reporters to go behind police lines at crime scenes- many years ago. That is the case on Kaua`i and in Honolulu and has been done across the mainland specifically because the proliferation of news sources in the age of the internet made distinctions much too vague and arbitrary for a legal differentiation to hold up in court.

If, as is apparently the case, the HiPD is going to try to claim that any part of the case hinges on whether Tucker is indeed a "member of the press"- whatever the heck that is these days- they’re going to be digging themselves a hole in which they will eventually be buried.

LESS FEAR, MORE LOATHING

LESS FEAR, MORE LOATHING: Though you'd never know it via statewide media, the biggest trial in years on the Big Island has not only the corporate Hawai`i Tribune Herald's attention but that of various news-blogs that have had blow by blow daily coverage by cannabis activist Matt Rifkin and others.

The two sides have rested in the trial of Rastafarian Rev. Nancy Harris of the Sacred Truth Mission on marijuana cultivation charges after Harris presented a defense based on her religious practice under the federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act.

But the trial took a turn yesterday that ought to concern not just journalists but everyone when Deputy Prosecutor Ricky Damerville subpoenaed Tiffany Hunt Edwards, a free lance journalist who hosts the Big Island Chronicle (BIC) "blog." and has reported for various Hawai`i Island publications including the Big Island Weekly (BIW).

Early yesterday Edwards wrote:

From newswoman to newsmaker — Deputy Prosecutor Ricky Damerville “rush” subpoenaed me to testify in the religious use of marijuana trial.

This is a first in my journalism career.

I’m to appear at Third Circuit Court this afternoon to testify in the trial of Nancy Harris who is accused of commercial promotion of marijuana and is using a religious marijuana defense.

At issue is my June 2009 coverage of the case, specifically a free-lance article I wrote for the Big Island Weekly.

Although the trial ended without Edwards testifying the subpoena itself appears to be a blatant violation of the Act 210, the Hawai`i State News Media Privilege law, commonly known as the reporters' "shield law."

As summed up in last year's legislative extension of the law:

Session Laws of Hawaii 2008 (Act 210), established a limited news media privilege against the compelled disclosure of sources and unpublished information to a legislative, executive, or judicial officer or body, or to any other person who may compel testimony.

What that means is that other than the actual article itself the provision of anything the reporter may have seen or heard, including facts recorded in notes, cannot be "compelled."

That type of wording has been interpreted to mean that reporters in jurisdictions that have such shield laws cannot be subpoenaed or "compelled to testify." The article speaks for itself.

Edwards, who herself has also been attending the trial and has written about it on her BIC web site, was not on the original list of witnesses. She told us that she had consulted with two attorneys before the subpoena was withdrawn but didn't say what she would have done had it not been canceled.

The point here is that the very issuance of a subpoena can only be seen as pure harassment on the part of Damerville, especially given that Rifkin's coverage at BIC has been supportive of Harris' defense as was Edwards 2009 BIW article.

While this incident may not be quite as egregious as the 2008 locked-door interrogation at the "cop shop" of journalist and blogger Joan Conrow by Kaua`i Police Department Deputy Chief Clayton Arinaga asking what she saw in covering the "Naue `Iwi" protests, it is equally as offensive to anyone who values a free press.

The law is there for a reason. Journalists should not be acting as volunteer police for many reasons. Not only would credibility- not to mention their safety- become an issue if people think reporters are simply the eyes and ears of the police, but in fact reporters are there to do a constitutionally protected job that requires them to occasionally grant anonymity to those sources who would never talk to reporters if they thought their identities were going to become public.

When police and prosecutors- people who are expected to know the law- ignore it, they can only be seen to be harassing and intimidating journalists causing them to have to think twice as to not just how but what they report.

Will Edwards file a complaint with the attorney general's office or the state bar? We certainly don't know yet but we certainly urge her to follow-up on this matter so as to make sure that it doesn't happen again.

A HOLE IS TO DIG

A HOLE IS TO DIG: If we ever have cause to need a really good pick and shovel- aw heck, make that a backhoe- we know just where to turn.

We'd just call the worst reporter at the worst newspaper in the state- arguably in the country although we haven’t read them all- because it would take heavy equipment to bury the lede the way our little buddy does it in our local Kaua`i newspaper.

Today, while sifting through the recent thin gruel of council activity, he decided to preview tomorrow's "special" council meeting to name yet another "sister city" in Japan- a program designed to increase tourism, presumably both ways.

The first clue that Kaua`i denizens might think twice about taking a trip to Iwaki was the location- the Fukushima Prefecture. But it takes until the sixth paragraph, over 200 words into the story before we find out for certain that Iwaki "is less than 30 miles away from Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant, badly damaged in the 9.0 magnitude earthquake and subsequent tsunami on March 11."

That "clue" assumes you're going to make the connection between Iwaki and the massive radiation still permeating Fukushima Prefecture. The final words of the article come closer, saying

Because of the March 11 earthquake and subsequent tsunami, Iwaki’s government closed the city’s swimming beaches for the entire year.

Iwaki government has also said that it doesn’t expect many visitors to the city’s beaches due to the accident at Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant.

Nowhere in the article does the word "radiation" appear.

But, as the saying goes, "you knew darn well I was a snake before you let me in."

You'd expect better from the former editor of the Rocky Mountain News and current editor of the on-line Civil Beat news outlet.

John Temple's opinion piece today echoed some of our concerns about the spate of police harassment of local reporters for taking photographs of police in action, saying that the rest of the public should also be protected when taking photos of police.

Good point. But in setting up the piece he writes of "two recent incidents, one involving the publisher of a Maui weekly newspaper and the other involving a Big Island blogger."

And this is how he describes them.

The first incident came on Maui this spring, when an officer hit Maui Times publisher Tommy Russo's camera when he was filming from a public place. The officer is heard telling Russo: "I don't want to be filmed, and if I don't want to be filmed, I don't have to be filmed....

"The other Hawaii incident came on the Big Island, where earlier this month blogger Damon Tucker was arrested while he was taking photos and videos of police arresting people from a public sidewalk. He says police confiscated his iPhone and camera and he now faces misdemeanor charges of obstructing government operations."

And, although he links to Tucker's posts he fails to let readers know that Tucker alleges he was severely beaten by police in making the arrest.

And that makes exactly zero coverage of that fact in the mainstream, statewide Hawai`i "print" media, although Channel 9 did have one feature on the event the next day.

The "lede" of a story is generally what the the reporter determines is most important and "newsworthy" thing in the story. In the "inverted triangle" of newswriting it is contained in the opening words of the story.

Good reporters take a breath when sitting down at the keyboard and try to come up with the core information that makes the news news.

They don't "save it" for later in the story or even "forget" to mention it.

It's understandable when, for the umpteenth time our local paper bungles it. But when the pros do it it's gotta make you wonder what they're thinking.

DO YOU SMELL THAT?

DO YOU SMELL THAT?: They say that justice delayed is justice denied but what about news? Well, they also ask, who needs yesterday's papers?

While it's widely acknowledged that our local newspaper is, um, shall we say, "content challenged," perhaps their worst feature is the lack of timely reporting of government doings unless it's a spoon-fed and regurgitated press release from the county's public information officer.

This "when we get around to it" style of journalism is not just an affront to those who have a need to be informed but makes it particularly difficult to get involved in government when, say, there's an article on Tuesday about a bill that passed out of a council committee at the previous Wednesday's meeting and is due for final approval the following day- leaving less than 24 hours to arrange to be there to give testimony.

But while today's Kaua`i newspaper is devoid of coverage of yesterday's meeting, real journalism is happening- not just the next day but item by item in real time- not far away.

And wouldn’t you know it? It's none other than our old friend Micheal Levine, late of the Kaua`i press corps who has taken up residence at Honolulu Hale and is using 21st century technology to do his reporting for "Civil Beat".

A look at his daily "Inside Honolulu" column shows no less than 9 blurbs in covering and posting the actions of the Honolulu City Council at various times throughout the day, with the headings:

10:36 a.m. The 'Million-Dollar Baby Toe'
10:51 a.m. Godbey Confirmed As Corp Counsel
11:19 Council Sends Ag Property Tax Bill To Mayor
12:26 p.m. Council To Defer Laie Hotel Vote
12:49 p.m. 'You Got Shafted, I Got Shafted'
3:06 p.m. Laie Hotel Deferred One Month
3:54 p.m. Mililani Senior Development Gets OK
4:22 p.m. $1 Million Settlement Approved
5:38 Council Advances Campaign Sign Rules

Why even the lowly Hawai`i (Island) Tribune Herald has an article today about a controversial bill taken up at their council's Wednesday meeting.

But it’s a rare occurrence when we get coverage of Wednesday's meeting by Friday with the usual routine being a Saturday or Sunday entry... usually a muddled attempt by a certain story-telling-challenged individual- whose name rhymes with Slazumbuja- apparently trying to make sense of what he saw.

It gets worse by the day. For today's news of a $215,000 settlement of a sexual harassment suit filed by PMRF firefighters against ITT one had to turn to the pay-walled Honolulu Star-Advertiser.

And for news of the scandalous allegations of misconduct on the part of the "old" Kaua`i Independent Foodbank- made by the "new" Hawai`i Foodbank- you had to turn to Bob Jones' last two columns in "Midweek." Or you could check out Joan Conrow's "heads up" on the story where the news that the reason for the non-coverage may just be that the publisher of the local paper sits on the "old" foodbank's board of directors.

All we got today was a confusing account of some plea agreement- from who knows how long ago- in what appeared to be a dispute between Kilauea neighbors that resulted in threats.

At least the local paper does serve one constituency- the fishing community is happy to have something in which to wrap their catch. Either way, if you leave your catch lying around for a few days the fact that it stinks is bound to be evident.

--------

Note: While the local newspaper remains silent on their naming of victims of crime as we discussed on Monday, we did receive the following comment purported to be from Prosecuting Attorney Shaylene Iseri Carvalho:

I have no idea how the paper's new police beat reporter Tom LaVenture got the list, although I suspect it was from the indictment, which by law, is public record.

As you correctly noted, the victims' names did not appear on any official county press release page or the prosecuting attorney's page at the county web site. It is for those very reasons that you state below:

"It's bad enough to list the victim of a burglary, letting potential crooks know who might might be making themselves a good target for another burglary. But to list the name of an abuse victim and potentially subject the person to the unwarranted taunts, ridicule and shame that many times unfortunately accompany such situations, is just plain professional misconduct"

that the Office of the Prosecuting Attorney(OPA) has NEVER released victims' names to be published.

Thank you for addressing this issue, as the OPA strongly seeks to protect against the revictimization of victims.

Mahalo,

Shaylene Iseri-Carvalho

Kauai Prosecuting Attorney

THERE''S NO BUSINESS LIKE NEWS BUSINESS

THERE''S NO BUSINESS LIKE NEWS BUSINESS: It's not as bad as we expected it to be to skip the Honolulu Star-Advertiser (S-A) when their paywall went up today because we realize now how little information we actually got from our morning perusals.

But that reality has spurred the realization that the one thing that the "newspaper of record" accomplished is to lose that status and throw itself into an all-out "NewsWar" with the nascent on-line news provider Civil Beat (CB).

Presumably the S-A started charging for their on-line version in an attempt to capitalize on what they thought was the fact that they are the 'real' newspaper. But, with the addition of their own "breaking news" section linked to the neighbor island papers and the AP feed, Civil Beat has positioned itself to go head to head with the S-A.

And, it's no contest. The group of young eager journos at CB actually like where they work and it shows in their work. But the old line "survivors" that populate the news desks at the S-A have all been to hell and back recently after the so-called "merger" made jobs in reporting scarce. They all no doubt resent the sword of Damocles hanging over their heads- the unspoken fact that "you can be replaced chickie-baby."

It shows in their work. It's rote and formulaic. There's very little depth and there's nary a link to any additional information. The S-A's coverage hit only the surface of the news like a flat stone skimmed across the water.

While over at CB the writing is lively and inventive and the reporters seem to have the attitude that even coverage of daily events should be treated as "enterprise" journalism that digs into the subject and provides the kind of full perspective that comes from writing for on-line consumption.

For CB reporters, space is unlimited and not just the result of a "news hole"- a term used for what is left over for content when the advertising is laid out in a print newspaper.

But the S-A isn't taking things lying down if yesterday's "Anything You Can Do I Can Do Better"- or at least do too- moment during the Sou trial in any indication,"

CB reporter Sara Lin, in the Annie Oakley role, had unsurprisingly taken the initiative weeks ago in making the enterprising move of asking Chief U.S. District Judge Susan Oki Mollway if she could "live blog" from the human trafficking trial of Aloun Farms owners Mike and Alec Sou.

Mollway okayed the request after a much published discussion and said that Lin could do it but would be the only one and had to share her information with the rest of the press in a "press pool" arrangement.

Then S-A courts reporter Ken Kobayashi in the Frank Butler role decided that, a week into the trial, he wanted "in" on the action in a seemingly day late and dollar short decision that reeks of a distinct "what exactly are we" through process from the S-A publisher, sent a letter to Mollway asking to join Lin in live blogging.

Mollway told Kobayashi that essentially that boat had sailed and that she would have to think about a fair way to do it again in the future should she or others in the federal court decide to do it at all.

That came with a caveat on Mollway's part as to whom she would consider in the future for such blogging, noting that requests would have to come from "authorized" or "credentialed" press because she didn't want, for instance, the defendant's "spouse (to) set up a blog to advocate the party's case."

She also noted that a "one blogger only" policy would likely be imposed so that the U.S. marshals could keep track to make sure that there were no recordings or pictures, which are forbidden by federal law.

That of course brings up the matter of who would be considered for this pool assignment.

Because while Lin and Kobayashi might think they are the only marksmen in town, "I'm just a blogger" Larry Geller of Disappeared News might just stake a claim as the new gun in town.

Apparently Geller has also been attending the trial and giving his account after he gets home every day. We're sure he would like to be considered to be part of that "pool"- if not THE live blogger.

But although Lin said that CB has emailed each blurb to various news outlets before she hit the "post" button we seriously doubt any bloggers were included.

The fact is that while the winner in the S-A's decision to charge for the on-line news is undoubtedly Civil Beat- which is now a direct competitor whereas yesterday they weren't- it also opens up the field for other news providers, even if they are "just bloggers."

When Blogger Geller comes to Chief Sitting Bull Mollway and says "I'm An Indian too," in light of today's leveling of the table, he's as entitled as anybody to be "Doin' What Come Naturally."

HOME HOME ON THE RANGE

HOME HOME ON THE RANGE: It didn't take long for the other shoe to drop after the eyebrow-raising buyout of the Goliath Honolulu Advertiser by the David Star Bulletin.

But the reasoning for the new pay wall for on-line readers of the new Star-Advertiser (S-A) had us in stitches as Publisher Dennis Frances claimed they were just following the lead of the New York Times, as if the two had anything in common journaistically other than the fact that both call themselves newspapers.

It kind of reminded us of when our own local Kaua`i newspaper informed readers of their then-owners by printing a blurb on the masthead saying "A Pulitzer Newspaper"- as if they were actually somehow associated with the prize instead of the chain of small fluff and pap publications.

But if a story in today's S-A is any indication news seekers may not be missing much if they eschew the "newspaper of record"- because if you're the only newspaper in town you are, by definition, the newspaper of record- in favor of other news sources.

While the S-A was busy telling it's readers about how the APEC will conclude at Ihilani resort in Ko Olina and wondering how the sharing of the wealth with out of town facilities might effect traffic, those who turned to KITV's web site got the real story.

In an un-bylined report, they repeated their exclusive from yesterday's 6 p.m. telecast saying that

APEC's two most important events with 21 world leaders attending will not be held at the Hawaii Convention Center in Waikiki.KITV4 first reported in May that law enforcement officials raised security concerns about the glass throughout the convention center. If a bomb was detonated even fairly far away from the building, shards of the glass ceiling and glass walls could injure people inside and outside the building, sources said. As a result, security experts recommended against having APEC leaders' meetings at the convention center involving President Barack Obama and heads of state from APEC's 21 countries, sources said.

The worst part is that the exorcizing of the real news wasn't because the KITV report was too late in the day to make the morning paper but rather because the S-A either intentionally ignored or didn't bother to seek out the KITV's earlier May and January reports on security- which, given the history of these kinds of gatherings should be issue number one.

That or, more likely, they simply regurgitated a pre-packaged press release without, as they are wont to do, any attribution- a lapse of ethics that neither the Times or even the local Kaua`i paper would allow.

If the S-A insists on being a paper where never is heard a discouraging word there are few, if any, that are going to pay the $120 a year for very long especially if all they get is a watered down product that reports only what their advertisers and the Chamber of Commerce want readers to know.

The worst part is that the reasonable rate of $1.95 a month is available to mainland subscribers.

Some may say that $10 a month is not a lot of money to pay for news. But the problem is that those who read news on-line don't read just one source. And if this trend continues it will be ten dollars and ten dollars and ten dollars and... well you get the point.

There has to be a way for newspapers to reap revenues for the on-line versions of their newspapers. But having all the individual publications each charge their own fee for their limited coverage isn't it.

We've long advocated for an "all you can eat" pricing for a massive consortium of newspapers including those with a national readership such as the NY Times, Washington Post and Wall Street Journal as well as the vast number of city and community newspapers... all for one reasonable fee, perhaps to be distributed via a "per-click" system.

Systems like ASCAP and BMI have been working for music publishing and radio play for decades and nascent music subscription services are cropping up everywhere and will soon be ubiquitous, as the large record companies as well as the independents come around to a business model of necessity.

But apparently the "news industry" feels like it has to go through all the wrong moves that the music business did rather than learning from them and creating a business model with will serve everyone going into the future.

All that will happen as medium sized newspapers like the Star-Advertiser become providers and aggregators is that the number of independent news sources will be diminished. And of course each one thinks that they will be the sole survivor of a war like that. And in the S-A's case that would be to ignore their own history wherein the size of the publication had nothing whatsoever to do with who "won" the contraction of Honolulu newspapers.

We fully expect the quality of the Star-Advertiser to diminish further with this pay wall as they become even more alienated from their readers. And if today's coverage is any example that inexorable march has already begun.

AND WE WERE GOING TO TAKE THE DAY OFF

AND WE WERE GOING TO TAKE THE DAY OFF: When is news not news? When it's in our local newspaper in an article penned by journalism’s worst enemy, Leo Azumbuja.

Yes we're tired of criticizing his "work" (note the quotes)- it's too easy.

But today’s article proclaiming that the SuperFerry bill that has been hanging around the legislature is still alive is so disturbingly inaccurate that it constitutes journalistic malpractice.

If you're going to cover the legislature the first rule is to know something about the process and then look at the legislative calendar.

Because despite Azumbuja's lede proclamation that "(t)he economic crisis that refuses to leave the Hawaiian Islands has not been sufficient to sink the idea of a state-run interisland ferry system" the fact is that today is what is known as "Second Decking Deadline" when as "Civil Beat" put it today

The House and Senate must get their respective bills in final form today in order for the measures to be voted on next week and make second crossover April 14.

The deadline to get bills to the House Clerk is 10 p.m., but the Senate Clerk had not announced its deadline as of late yesterday.

Next up: conference committee, which will pretty much consume the last two weeks of the month.

If Azumbuja had bothered to look at the status he'd have noticed that on March 23 it was referred to the Senate Ways and Means (WAM) Committee where it died after failing to be scheduled for a hearing. And since hearings must be noticed 48 hours in advance the bill will not receive an okay from WAM.

He would have also noticed had HE had read the bill, as he accused 16th District Representative Dee Morikawa of failing to do- he'd have noticed that the current bill was amended by the house with a "defective date" of July 1, 2030.

Of course like any bill it can be pulled by the full body for a vote. But that virtually never happens, with last year's civil unions bill being an exception that had even long time legislative correspondents scrambling to find the last time it had happened.

Of course most anyone who really cared about the SuperFerry Bill had, most likely, received a notice from anti-SuperFerry Activist supreme Dick Meyer of Maui last week that the bill was apparently dead after not showing up on the final WAM hearing notice. But for those who rely on the Kaua`i "newspaper of record" to record the actual record it's the same sad story written by a man seemingly incapable of telling one accurately.

ANOTHER PRICK AND THEIR WALL

ANOTHER PRICK AND THEIR WALL: As a news junkie- in recovery or at least reducing consumption to a more reasonable ration of late-the hammer came down for us on Monday when the NY Times started charging for on-line access.

Not that we really have time to read the Times much but they do host the Associated Press wire which we peruse as time permits. In the past three years since we've started concentrating on more local news, a quick glance down the AP wire- which is nearly impossible to find at the main Times page- has given us the basics of national and international news so that if we ever get to more "alternative" news providers we have the background to get past the "explanatory" paragraphs and gnaw on and digest the meat.

So, caught unawares, we got to our 20th article of the day on Monday rather quickly and were told we'd have to pay almost a buck a pop to read any further articles.

We say this not to whine too much but to point out that we found the solution to the problem rather quickly because blaringly and glaringly we couldn't help but notice a bunch of beckoning headlines every time we logged into our Yahoo! mail account.

And, of course, one click away were all those self-same articles "aggregated"- along with some Reuters- for free.

Now being a journalist we have sympathy for our brethren who are victims of the mammoth downsizing of the newsgathering business and the "everything you ever wanted for free" nature of the internet. The question of who pays for all that first hand newsgathering in that age is a perennial stumper and has led the Times to decide to erect their pay wall.

But geez guys- what the heck are you thinking?

The only thing that the Times is accomplishing is to drive the eyeballs that they had, to other sources, And although the amount that on-line advertising brings in is miniscule compared with the ad revenues that newspapers have traditionally reaped, they're doing nothing but directing those eyeballs to the aggregator sites like Yahoo!, Google and the like.

People searching for a workable business model to support newsgathering need to think about the only workable solution- to form a consortium of all news providers and charge a small monthly amount- maybe five or ten bucks or whatever happy medium price point wont discourage readers/customers- for access to all on-line "newspapers"... national, state or local.

The model is similar to one that's existed since the first days of radio. The ASCAP/BMI model provided music artists a small amount per play for many years and, although the profits are less now- and their tactics in achieving it have pissed off many a customer- it has remained, if not as successful in an on-line world, at least as viable with subscription services and on-line radio beginning to thrive.

The Times has picked the easy and thoughtless was to protect their intellectual property. You'd think people that smart would be smart enough to see that it's an experiment bound for failure.

WEARING PROTECTION

WEARING PROTECTION: The reporters’ shield law passed by the legislature last year has quickly become an essential tool in the dissemination of information. It has allowed us to give the same confidentiality to sources this year that we have given in past decades only without the fear of having to go to jail for protecting the identities of whistleblowers.

Although we were never put in that situation it’s something that has happened to reporters across the country in states without a shield law. And there is no federal shield law for cases in federal courts.

The new law has allowed us to turn what used to be sometimes agonizing decisions into no-brainers, not just for we reporters but for sources as well who can now pass on information without fear of repercussions.

Of course we’d prefer to always name our sources but, especially on a small island like Kaua`i, we understand some people’s reluctance to come forward and attach their names. It does make our job a little bit more difficult since it often requires extra diligent double-checking for anonymously reported information, especially if there is no document involved.

But in their infinite lack of wisdom legislators put a “sunset date” of June 30, 2011 on the law meaning it must be passed one more time this year without any sunset date.

The good news is that House Bill 1376 passed out of the House Judiciary Committee yesterday with a unanimous vote and seems destined to move over to the Senate where it should have clear sailing.

But the bad news is that, as Civil Beat’s Sara Lin reported yesterday:

The final decision on any proposed extension of the law could ultimately lie with Gov. Neil Abercrombie. We've noted that he was the only Democrat in the U.S. House to vote against a bill that would have protected the confidentiality of reporters' sources in most federal court cases.

It’s hard to imagine his objections but it’s more important than ever that the bill pass both the house and senate with veto-proof majorities. Although no other hearings are currently scheduled it can’t hurt to send letters of support to all representatives (reps@capitol.hawaii.gov) and senators (sens@capitol.hawaii.gov).

Though the law has perceptibly helped us in our reporting over the last year, the assurance of a shield law is doubly important for sources who are now assured that a reporter will not have pick between spending weeks in jail or caving to prosecutors bent on digging out their sources, as has happened in some cases recently.

Help us help you and support HB 1376.

YOU’VE GOTTA BE KIDDING

YOU’VE GOTTA BE KIDDING: The departure of local newspaper “reporter” Paul Curtis- apparently for plagiarism- is a two-edged sword. While Curtis manipulated his reports to protect friends and go after enemies- and do so in the laziest manner possible- now we’re stuck with the oft unintelligible Leo Azambuja on the cops and courts beat.

Today’s attempt to clarify the facts surrounding the recent alleged murder of Aureo Arick Moore did anything but, demonstrating that our student Leo is ready for lesson two in his on the job j-school.

After you’ve learned the 5 W’s and determining and writing a “lead”- or lede as it’s spelled on the inside- you need to be able to, as editors across the world ask their reporters to do, “tell me a story.”

But instead, today’s hodge-podge of fact and fiction was more like a spaghetti cooking contest with a pasta-splattered wall attesting to the “toss it all and see what sticks” methodology of journalism Azambuja prefers.

One thing that beginners fail to recognize is that sometimes, when your hunch turns out to lead nowhere you don’t need to tell the story of how hard you tried to track down the immaterial facts.

Seems that, according to the article,

On Dec. 19, Carrie Ann Robson, 39, of Kilauea, was arrested and charged at 11:30 p.m. with second-degree attempted murder. Her bail was set at $100,000.

But when Azambuja finally clarified with Prosecutor Shaylene Iseri Carvalho that the case had nothing to do with the Moore murder, rather than moving on he insisted on including a lengthy explanation of how much work he did to find out that it was irrelevant to the story.

He also seemed compelled to lay out his confusion over the dribs and drabs of information released by the county. But rather than clarify it all in a narrative it’s simply laid out in a chronology with little or no explanation of the relevancy.

But the inability to tell a story- combined with the inability to “find the lede”- make for an exercise in incomprehensibility.

Toward the end of the article he tries to delve into the relationship between the alleged October robbery of Moore where a shot or shots were allegedly fired and the upcoming trial of Kyle Akau, 24, of Anahola who is accused of firing the shot(s) and robbing Moore of cash and drugs.

Way down at the bottom- 2184 words into the 2660 word piece- we finally get some information on why alleged killer Vicente "Vinnie" Hilario might have murdered Moore.

After discussing the various charges and reports on the Safeway robbery of Moore we read:

The coconut wireless over the latest murder case on Kaua`i has inundated blogs and Internet discussion forums with many rumors.

Some have claimed Moore was set up by an unidentified woman. Others allege he was murdered because he was dating Hilario’s mother. There were drug connections spread all over the Internet. Moore was also said to have been killed for being a witness in a court case.

While most of these are purely rumors, the prosecution was able to add the more serious first-degree murder charge because the crime involved the killing of an officer or a witness related to a crime.

Iseri-Carvalho said the prosecution added the first-degree murder because Moore was a witness to a court case pending against Hilario.

Huh? What “court case pending against Hilario”? Charges were in fact dropped against Hilario after he was arrested with Akau in the Safeway robbery of Moore.

As we speculated the day Hilario’s name was released it appeared Hilario might have killed Moore because he was a witness in Akau’s trial which had been scheduled for Dec 27 at the time of the murder.

Our conjecture was based on past newspaper reports that said that Hilario was one of the two who were released after being arrested in connection with the robbery.

But while for some reason Azambuja was reluctant to report that two plus two equals four- instead telling us that it equaled a number somewhere between three and five- the Honolulu Start Advertiser didn’t mince any words.

In a “corrections” in today’s edition they write:

Prosecutors charged Vicente "Vinnie" Hilario with first-degree murder involving the shooting death of Aureo Arick Moore. Prosecutors allege the fatal shooting was related to Moore's status as a witness against Hilario and another man involving a robbery case. Prosecutors had amended their complaint to add the first-degree murder charge. A B2 story that ran on Friday reported Hilario was charged with second-degree murder.

That is the story today- not the thousands of words about what KPD, the prosecutor and the public information officer put Azambuja through in trying to track down the facts.

Not only was the lede buried toward the end of the article it wasn’t even written in a plain straightforward manner but rather, like we’re playing a game of 20 Questions where we’ve used up 19 and have to guess what the news is with our 20th.

MY OH MY WHAT A WONDERFUL DAY

MY OH MY WHAT A WONDERFUL DAY: The oldest trick in the shyster book is the standard “cease and desist” letter.

So when Big Island blogger Damon Tucker emailed us over the weekend that he’d gotten one from Midland, Texas attorney Robert K. Whitt after he posted a story on December 8 quoting two co-owners of a “zip-line” company- replete with pictures of rusty cables- there saying that,

the (other) owner of The Umauma Experience (Cleo Carlile) installed substandard cable on the course and it started to fail…It has worn down from round to flat and then the tension broke the cable as it became too thin. I immediately closed down lines 1, 2, and 4. The owner will replace the cable that guests ride on, but has refused to replace the guy wires which hold the whole thing up, platforms etc.

We suggested that he

tell him to go f**k himself and take it up with the people who said it. All you did was quote them. These kinds of letters are bluffs. They don't want a lawsuit- all that would do is put the guy's quote in the mainstream media.

suggesting he send a reply to the effect that he would

"welcome a lawsuit where we can air the issue of the safety of your ziplines before the community and in the mainstream press."

The letter demanded that Damon essentially put the toothpaste back in the tube with retractions and deletions.

But while the mainstream press hasn’t picked up the story yet this morning journalist and blogger Ian Lind went to town on the story saying

Attorney Whitt also provided an official-looking “Certificate of Inspection” issued by “Zipline Canopy Creations” and signed by “Julianne Lester”, apparently certifying that the ziplines have recently passed a “safety inspection”.

According to state business registration records, Lester is the registered agent for Kauai-based Zipline Canopy Creations, which was registered to do business in August 2010, and the president of Just Live, Inc., a recreation company also based on Kauai.

Apparently safety of the unregulated zip line business is sort of like getting a “deal” at a car dealership with rotating salespersons playing the part “manager” for the others to give the illusion of a discount- in this case zipline companies signing “Certificates of Inspection" for each other.

Ian also noted that

(a) quick search yesterday left me with the impression that zipline engineering and safety are largely unregulated by the state or counties, beyond the need to get routine building permits, so the status of this “certificate of inspection” is seems questionable.

And it didn’t end there.

After Ian’s post Disappeared News’ Larry Geller picked up the ball and ran with it regarding how these ziplines

cry out for regulatory control. Anything with allegedly rusty cables that could be described by Wikipedia as a “death slide” ought to catch the interest of state or local government you’d think.

Larry also noted that

Damon and Ian have provided a public service by posting information on their findings. At least those who Google for information on ziplines in Hawaii will possibly hit one of the articles.

But more important than those who google “ziplines in Hawai`i” might be those who google “The Umauma Experience” or “Midland, Texas attorney Robert K. Whitt.”

Now they’ll get at least four “hits.”

With the advent of “bloggers” the question is whether, when they engage in the act of reporting, they are de facto journalists. While many of the more stogy practitioners may argue for all sorts of self-serving and exclusionary rules for what a journalist is or isn’t, there’s still “no license required. ”

In fact, after much debate our own Hawai`i state reporters’ “shield law” essentially defines a reporter by the act of reporting- something bloggers do every day whether, like Ian they consider themselves journalists or, like Damon and Larry, not.

In this case Damon simply reported on the situation, citing and naming his source. Whether or not “The Umauma Experience” is actually safe or not his report is true in that the story is that two co-owners are alleging they are not safe.

And in libel cases, truth is the ultimate defense.

But to compound the report, rather than try to show that his operation is safe, Carlile chose to try to put the Genie back into the bottle and squelch the information, leading people to believe that, despite the industry’s claims, safety may not be their primary concern.

Not only that but, should they proceed with the lawsuit it will the become open season for the corporate press whose lawyers normally have their hair on fire over reporting anything of this nature unless and until a suit is filed.

The two-fold lesson here is that 1) the best way to make sure that information you wish would just “go away” gets out to a wider audience than the original report could is to try to squelch it and 2) if you file a lawsuit, even more people will know of the claim and even of you win, all people will remember is the allegation.

The other lesson may be that, even if you’re from Texas, don’t mess with Hawai`i bloggers.

THEFT, SCHMEFT

THEFT, SCHMEFT: The plagiarism- as we depicted it yesterday- of blogger Charley Foster’s summarization of a lawsuit over the Hapa Trail in Koloa by local newspaper reporter Paul Curtis, elicited a mysterious comment by prolific Big Island blogger Damon Tucker (who also uses the “P” word in a post today) which read “Tim Ryan?” and included this link.

It leads to a little know discussion page of the “go to” information repository Wikipedia and a January 2006 article entitled “Wikipedia editors expose journalist's plagiarism.”

Michael Snow writes:

Sleuthing Wikipedia editors have found several cases of apparent plagiarism over the past two years by Tim Ryan, a reporter for the Honolulu Star-Bulletin. It began with the discovery of an article last month containing language that closely matched a Wikipedia article, and more investigation found earlier articles that seemed to borrow from additional sources without attribution.

In response to these reports, the Star-Bulletin acknowledged the situation by adding corrections or editor's notes to some of the articles. Star-Bulletin Editor Frank Bridgewater took these actions after investigating the incident and also met with the newspaper's publisher, Dennis Francis, about the situation. However, Bridgewater said last week that he considered the issue of whether any action would be taken against Ryan "a confidential personnel matter."

Apparently Ryan was a serial plagiarist who not only lifted Wikipedia sections unattributed- that essentially being the difference between a “fair use” reference and plagiarism- but also passages from the Sacramento Bee newspaper and the NPR radio program All Things Considered, according to Snow.

But you’d think they’d have learned, especially Bridgewater who continued on at the new Star-Advertiser when the Star-Bulletin “bought out” the bigger and stronger Advertiser.

While we’ve reserved a special place in journalism purgatory for much of what’s presented by the current crop of people at our local newspaper they do one thing that Bridgewater’s Star(ved for real news) Advertiser apparently refuses to do- attribute their press release rewrites.

One of the staples of a daily “newspaper of record” is the rewritten press release, especially those emanating from local and state government public information offices.

Editors, usually those on the “night shift” of larger papers, avoid plopping the copy directly in their news hole- the place left for news when the predetermined advertising is laid out.

In order to avoid charges of plagiarism they re-write the releases shifting the sentence constructions and using other wordsmithing techniques.

But while you’ll always find the words “according to a county release” or another appropriate credit in our local Kaua`i newspaper, when the identical release is rewritten in the Honolulu paper that attribution is never to be found.

Plagiarism has become a serious problem at many publications of late. The NY Times Jason Blair case and other have spurred policies that are designed to eliminate not just the lack of attribution but much more serious lapses.

Are we really that far removed from the mainland that the Honolulu daily thinks it doesn’t have to join the 21st century when it comes to accuracy and full disclosure?

Apparently the answer is yes, as long as the notoriously thin-skinned throwback Bridgewater is in charge.

NOTHING LIKE BEING THERE

NOTHING LIKE BEING THERE: And speaking of getting “quitted” it appears the brief tenure of the worst reporter in the local newspaper’s annuls (yes, even Lester Chang) has ended after a week or so’s absence of the name of Leo Azambuja from the paper’s pages and today’s coverage of yesterday’s council’s organizational meeting by council neophyte Vanessa Van Voorhis.

For the record Editor Nathan Eagle did not return multiple emails seeking information on Azambuja’s job status.

Although the pedestrian coverage appeared adequate we can’t help wonder whether it’s a disease or a habit of the paper’s reporters to use the kind of “lede” that first day J-school students are warned against.

Professor: They know there was a meeting yesterday because you’re writing about it. Pick something that happened there- the most important thing- and put it at the top, in 25 words or less. Then follow the “inverted triangle” format- Don’t report events chronologically but by order of importance.

But speaking of neophytes- at least as far attending or even watching council meetings- Joan Conrow has her own first hand account today.

It’s nice to occasionally have the two newspaper experience on Kaua`i but someone was obviously having a bit of fun with both Van Voorhis and Conrow on the subject of having the meeting open to the public.

As we wrote last week, a few councils have actually done their organizational business in open session. The issue is always whether they appear to have been scripted.

But Van Voorhis wrote that “(o)fficials said the meeting was unprecedented in that it was the first time a Kaua`i County Council held such a caucus open to the public” while Conrow said “in a nod to 'transparency and open government' — words rendered as meaningless as pristine and sustainability — the new County Council did its organizing for the first time in public”.

Oh well. If either decides to attend on a regular basis they’ll get the hang of not believing a word of what they’re hearing and only half of what they’re seeing.

But we were especially taken aback by this quip from Conrow whose malice toward Tim Bynum has been hardly concealed of late:

Tim said he was expecting Councilmembers to have “equal and equitable access to the key documents that are theirs” before going on to say he wants to structure the Council so that decisions made in Executive Session are made public. That way, you see, he won’t have to risk violating executive privilege by leaking them to a certain blogger.

Ah, engaging in libel per se now, eh Joan?

For the record our report on the Margaret Hanson Sueoka suit last month was based on having attended council meetings for many years which enabled us to go back to our notes and decipher the background of the Margaret Hanson EEOC harassment case, without any conversation whatsoever on the subject about it with Bynum.

Seeing recent executive sessions listed to evaluate Nakamura’s performance right after one to consider the Hanson settlement helped tip us off. Then, upon hearing the council’s discussion of the plethora of harassment suits including an oblique reference to a case “right here” in council services- and knowing that deputies in the county attorney’s office serve both the administration and the council- we realized that perhaps Hanson’s suit may not have had anything to do with her experiences with the administration, as we had previously theorized.

Years of leg work- something our bum back prevents us from doing these days- paid off.

We remembered the incident with Nakamura years ago and sure enough when we checked our files from the era, it turned out that it was Hanson that was the deputy county attorney assigned to the council at the time- the one who was harassed by her then-boyfriend County Clerk Peter Nakamura, according to many council regulars and employees of council services at the time.

As they say, we deny the allegation and we deny the alligator- we did not seek, receive nor use any illegally obtained information in our report.

It’s all especially strange considering Conrow’s final statement:

In the end, Tim got what he wanted in terms of committee assignments, and so did JoAnn. The question now is whether they’ll also get something else they want — an executive search firm to find a new County Clerk. Mel and Derek said they like current Clerk Peter Nakamura and Nadine had to recuse herself because he’s her brother-in-law.

I know why Tim doesn’t like Peter, but I’m not sure what JoAnn has against him. I’m pretty sure he had to go through Seven Habits when he was her planning director.....

Maybe that search is because Nakamura’s actions in harassing Hanson cost the county the $250,000.

Actually JoAnn wasn’t enamored with Steve Covey and “The Seven Habits of Truly Disingenuous and Irritating Assholes” when she was mayor. As a matter of fact it was because of her 180 from the micromanaging of where every paperclip went as mayor to seeking to become the consummate politician when the voters threw her out of office, that she turning to Covey.

Funny story here- at the actual first “public” organizational meeting of the council when Yukimura returned to elective office after a hiatus, we actually asked Yukimura whether she was going to support Nakamura’s reappointment and she replied “why wouldn’t I- he was my planning director”... which we always thought to be a strange statement in and of itself because the planning commission appoints the planning director... which of course reinforced her penchant for micromanagement reputation.

So Round and Round the Mulberry Bush they go and it helps to see every council meeting for a decade plus and report on county government for 25 years if you want to be able to tell the monkeys from the weasels.

AND ALL FOR UNDER A BUCK

AND ALL FOR UNDER A BUCK: We’ve come up with a formula that perfectly describes the treatment of information consumers on Kaua`i.

Yesterday’s Papers + Everything Old Is New Again = Our Local Newspaper.

This kind of “when we get around to it... and if we’re forced to” journalism results in things like the way someone decided to tip off the Star(ad)vetiser to the story today of the $38 million sale of the Aston Kauai Beach to JMI Realty of Texas rather than tell the Kaua`i paper because they knew the S-A would not just publish the story in a timely manner but actually get the story right.

So we were not surprised by the “day late and a dollar short” story that appeared in Wednesday’s local paper that must have been a head-scratcher for anyone who had not read our report almost a month and a half ago that Mayor Carvalho’s Administrative Assistant Gary Heu was warning people that alleged “Westside serial killer” Waldorf “Wally” Wilson was spotted on Kaua`i riding a bike in Puhi.

But of course the newspaper danced around the whole story by leaving out the fact that Wilson was identified as the suspect in two killings and an assault many years ago, according to Chapter 8- The Serial Killer in the book KPD Blue by Anthony Sommer (see left rail to read the entire book).

Seems police beat “reporter” Paul Curtis must have missed one of the “5 W’s” in J-school classes- the one where, after covering who, what, when, and where, they cover “why”- leaving out the fact that Wilson was a suspect in those killings.

Instead Curtis wrote that “a widely circulated e-mail came just short of accusing an innocent man of murder”.

Innocent? Well, maybe just short of it according to Sommer.

The article essentially repeats Joan Conrow’s report a few weeks back regarding the KPD and AG’s office contention that they checked and Wilson “is still living in Kane`ohe” although later in the article it says that “(i)f visiting another island for more than 10 days, (registered sex offenders) must register in person with the county police department on that island within three days of arrival” implying that no notification is needed to visit for 10 days so it doesn’t mean Wilson was never here as Curtis strains to imply.

Our favorite part of course is where Curtis writes:

“Word spread from as high up as Mayor Bernard Carvalho Jr.’s No. 2 man, Administrative Assistant Gary Heu, to as low as blogs written by local residents saying Wilson may be living in Puhi”

Well if Heu is “high” and we’re “low” we suppose today’s publication means the story has finally hit rock bottom.

So why would the local newspaper fail to report the core of the story? Well it wouldn’t be the first time they failed to touch the story with a 10 foot pole.

Sommer tells us why that might be, writing:

On Sept. 12, 2000, the KPD announced it had arrested a convicted rapist on a parole violation. The man’s name and mug shot were released through the mayor’s office.

The press release was almost instantly followed by another insisting the parole violator was in no way a suspect in the west side attacks and his only crime was violating the conditions of his parole.

The KPD was so vehement in pointing out that the man was not the serial killer, every editor in the state bought it. Except for one Honolulu television station, which used his name and broadcast his picture, all the “news executives” were frightened by the KPD’s threat of libel suits.

The next day, the KPD, through the mayor’s office criticized the lone television station that identified the arrested man for “irresponsible reporting.”

The television station was correct. It was the KPD that was lying. And the mayor’s office knew it but lying to the press was pretty much standard operating procedure. Next, Inspector Mel Morris, head of the investigations bureau, began dragging a red herring claiming, “KPD has not ruled out the possibility that there may be more than one person responsible.”

He said the man arrested is “unrelated to any of these cases. Any impression that might have been given that these cases are close to being solved is flat-out wrong.”

The arrested man was, of course, KPD’s primary, in fact only, suspect and (off the record, of course) they were certain he was the killer but they couldn’t prove it.

His name was Waldorf “Wally” Wilson, and his name and picture were all over the west side on anonymously printed flyers.

But the Honolulu media executives would not publish his name until two years later—and then only because Wilson filed a lawsuit against KPD, a newspaper and a magazine.

Wilson was convicted in 1983 of a brutal rape on Oahu. He was paroled on Jan. 9, 1999 and in January 2000 moved to Kauai. The attacks began three months later.

Wally Wilson’s brother was a KPD officer, Buddy Wilson, a long-time member of the Vice Squad known for his somewhat less than subtle tactics in investigating narcotics cases.

(Once again the circle that began with the Randy Machado trial looped back. Kelly Lau was a witness for Machado at his trial. Lau indicated quite clearly she was a confidential informant working for Buddy Wilson.)

All the while, KPD insisted Wally Wilson was not a suspect. For the next two years, the KPD engaged in tactics that Wally Wilson later claimed in his lawsuit violated his Constitutional rights.

But he was kept off the streets without ever actually being charged with any crime.

And there were no more attacks.

According to Wally Wilson’s lawsuit, KPD “coerced” him into taking a polygraph test on Sept. 12, 2000 and then “strongly pressured” the Hawaii Parole Authority to revoke Wilson’s parole. The results of the polygraph test were not given in the lawsuit.

A judge ultimately threw out Wilson’s lawsuit but by then KPD’s tactics were pretty obvious, as was its complete inability (or unwillingness) to bring criminal charges against him involving the three attacks.

Unable or unwilling to cover news in a timely manner?.. failing to include facts not just material but central to the story?... repeating whatever those he covers tells him to without questioning and an inability to adhere to basic reporting standards?...

Check, check and check.

So much for “without fear or favor.”

That’s our Paul and that’s our newspaper- serial offenders of journalistic standards by any measure.

BALLAST OF A THIN MAN

BALLAST OF A THIN MAN: We were watching an interview with Bob Woodward about his new book on the Obama administration in which he didn’t identify any of his sources- except for the president himself- but rather used extensive interviews with White House staff to come up with what he called “the best available version of the truth”.

And that’s the true definition of good reporting.

But you’d never know it if you live in Hawai`i where the corporate creed has devolved news into a “that’s my story and I’m sticking to it” operation.

So it’s no surprise that, typical of almost all of yesterday’s reporting on the “auction” of the two Superferries, this morning’s Starvetiser said that the reason for the endeavor’s demise was that “the company encountered major problems, including legal challenges and inconsistent service.”

But as anyone with an unjaundiced eye knows Hawai`i Superferry (HSf) Inc. imploded due to a business plan- or more accurately a lack of one- that was designed to fail, many think intentionally since the whole venture was only a demonstration project for the current military use of the design.

But to our shock and awe, while watching the six o’clock broadcast of (what passes for) Hawaii News Now(adays) the usually banal and particularly uninformative Howard Dicus came on for his jittery Skype segment (not available at their web site) and reported some semblance of the “best available version” of the Superferry debacle.

After noting that most people think the HSf shut down due to the lack of an EIS and court rulings he conspiratorially leaned into the camera and, almost whispering as if letting a select few into the club of the informed, told the audience that what most don’t know is that they were unable to meet expenses and had been from the start.

News is often referred to as the first draft of history. But when history is written by lazy sycophantic corporate shills afraid to state the obvious, the need for a second draft and a better “version of the truth” is compellingly self-evident.