[ exact phrase in "" • results by date ]

[ Google-powered • results by relevance ]


News Home

Subscribe to RSS feed

Add NWW headlines to your site (click here)

Sign up for daily updates

Keep Wind Watch online and independent!

Donate $10

Donate $5

Selected Documents

All Documents

Research Links


Press Releases


Publications & Products

Photos & Graphics


Allied Groups

Inaccurate criticisms  

Credit:  The Times Record, www.timesrecord.com 7 September 2010 ~~

My colleagues and I at the Maine Center for Public Interest Reporting are happy to take criticism of what we write. We hope our stories about Maine government provoke debate, which is an essential component of a robust democracy.

Recently, though, a letter and an opinion column in The Times Record criticized my reporting about the governor’s task force that shaped the state’s wind power policy by asserting that I had written things that I hadn’t.

Richard Jennings, in his commentary, writes that “Unfortunately, it seems at the end there was apparently a failure to keep minutes, but there were no ‘secret’ meetings.” (“Windpower series sows seeds of confusion,” Aug. 27). Jennings’ use of quotation marks around the word “secret” implies that I used the word “secret” to characterize those meetings.

Suzanne Sayer, a member of the task force, writes in Sept. 1 letter-to-the-editor: “Her characterization that the task force meetings were closed or secret is wrong.” (“Articles were biased,” Sept. 1).

I never wrote that the task force’s meetings were secret. Rather, I wrote that minutes were not kept of two of the most crucial of those meetings, at which a map was drawn up designating areas in the state where regulations would be eased in order to site wind power projects.

Further, Mr. Jennings asserts in his commentary that, in consulting with two members of the task force about my story, they told him “that their statements were taken out of context, leading to a very different meaning from what they intended. One added he would not again consent to an interview by her.”

These accusations are based on anonymous sources, something that we would not do at the center. The reason we don’t use anonymous sources is because they lack credibility. If critics want to come forth and use both facts and their names, I’d be happy to respond to them.

Naomi Schalit, senior reporter, Maine Center for Public Interest Reporting, Hallowell

Source:  The Times Record, www.timesrecord.com 7 September 2010

This article is the work of the source indicated. Any opinions expressed in it are not necessarily those of National Wind Watch.

The copyright of this article resides with the author or publisher indicated. As part of its noncommercial effort to present the environmental, social, scientific, and economic issues of large-scale wind power development to a global audience seeking such information, National Wind Watch endeavors to observe “fair use” as provided for in section 107 of U.S. Copyright Law and similar “fair dealing” provisions of the copyright laws of other nations. Send requests to excerpt, general inquiries, and comments via e-mail.

Wind Watch relies entirely
on User Funding
Donate $5 PayPal Donate


News Watch Home

Get the Facts Follow Wind Watch on Twitter

Wind Watch on Facebook


© National Wind Watch, Inc.
Use of copyrighted material adheres to Fair Use.
"Wind Watch" is a registered trademark.