HA: 4 yr gap "vexing" - USM Forum -- Message Board

Date: Dec 13, 2004

HA: 4 yr gap "vexing"

Date: Dec 13, 2004

Yep, the gap is vexing, all right, but the fact that NOBODY IN THE CURRENT ADMINISTRATION SEEMED TO NOTICE THE GAP FOR TWO AND A HALF YEARS is pretty dang vexing, too.

Date: Dec 13, 2004

If the feds moved in here and looked at what happened to overhead money, in the past at least, I believe they might be surprised. Maybe even unhappy.

Date: Dec 13, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Person of Interest
"If the feds moved in here and looked at what happened to overhead money, in the past at least, I believe they might be surprised. Maybe even unhappy."

I posted this on the wrong thread. I will respost now on the correct thread.

Date: Dec 13, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: ram
"Yep, the gap is vexing, all right, but the fact that NOBODY IN THE CURRENT ADMINISTRATION SEEMED TO NOTICE THE GAP FOR TWO AND A HALF YEARS is pretty dang vexing, too."

What is vexing is that the Hattiesburg American continues to parrot the party line. There is more than likely no "gap." This is the Thames spin machine's strategy for shifting the blame. This isn't that all-fired important now anyway, except that Shelby is dead-set on proving that it was all Horace Fleming's fault.

He's got Joan Exline "spinning" her wheels when she could be doing something worthwhile. She needs to be commencing to begin to get ready to start with some heavy duty work. She doesn't need to be out chasing wild geese.

Thank you, Hattiesburg American for your inability to dig deeper than the scum on the surface!

Date: Dec 13, 2004

Invictus,

It's perfectly understandable to be frustrated with what we all know is Thames and Mader "spin," but honestly it's pretty hard for journalists to dig for information and know that it is correct and from credible sources the week after this news came out. And think, who really is willing to be quoted in the paper? Most people on this board don't use their real names.

Kevin Walters is a great reporter and smart. No doubt he is well aware the information he's getting from Thames, Mader, and other administrators is spin, but what option does he have but report the information he gets, asking appropriate questions along the way to find out the truth and eventually uncover the spin? That's takes time. I mean, Lisa Mader gets paid $70,000 a year to make sure there are no holes in the "spin."

Let's give them some time and keep digging ourselves.

Date: Dec 13, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Andy
"Invictus, It's perfectly understandable to be frustrated with what we all know is Thames and Mader "spin," but honestly it's pretty hard for journalists to dig for information and know that it is correct and from credible sources the week after this news came out. And think, who really is willing to be quoted in the paper? Most people on this board don't use their real names. Kevin Walters is a great reporter and smart. No doubt he is well aware the information he's getting from Thames, Mader, and other administrators is spin, but what option does he have but report the information he gets, asking appropriate questions along the way to find out the truth and eventually uncover the spin? That's takes time. I mean, Lisa Mader gets paid $70,000 a year to make sure there are no holes in the "spin." Let's give them some time and keep digging ourselves. "

And . . . as you yourself already know -- the editorial folks are different from the reporters. I think Kevin has got the bit on this -- and he wants to get at the truth if he can. I'min full agreement with Andy.

Incidently -- for everyone on the board.The best reporters aren't on anyone's side. The best ones have an innate sense of fairness, a need to find the truth about a story and a dogged persistence to tug at every loose end until there is no where else to go. They also tend to be ruthlesslessly honest and will go where the story goes, no matter who in the end gets burned. That's is exactly what any great story needs -- but the fire can burn as well as warm.

It is important to remember that Kevin is not doing us a favor -- he is doing his job. It is up to help to help him get a story any way we can.

Date: Dec 13, 2004

I pretty much agree with Andy and Stephen. Kevin Walters once did a story that I was involved with. I was not flattered. I saw him a few days later and asked him about it. His only question was, "Was the reporting accurate?" I had to admit that it was. He seemed satisfied.

Date: Dec 13, 2004

Thanks for pointing these things out!

As a former journalist from a small town, you really depend on people in the news to feel free to GIVE you the news. It is easy and tempting to end up in bed with those you are reporting against!

So, give 'em hell, HA. You will be around LONG after this dictator is gone and will have one of the best chronicles of the huge debacle.

Date: Dec 13, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Andy
"Kevin No doubt he is well aware the information he's getting from Thames, Mader, and other administrators is spin, but what option does he have but report the information he gets, asking appropriate questions along the way to find out the truth and eventually uncover the spin?"

Well, one option is not to report anything until he's sure of what he's saying. Just because dear Lisa lets out a press release doesn't mean the HA has to write a 2 column front page regurgitation of it.

But the "vexing" business is an editorial. It isn't based on reporting at all. If the editorialist had read Kevin's article, they would have known that the "missing four" was quite possibly spin. Musta been the same writer who put the headline on Walters' last article.

Date: Dec 13, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Invictus
" Well, one option is not to report anything until he's sure of what he's saying. Just because dear Lisa lets out a press release doesn't mean the HA has to write a 2 column front page regurgitation of it. But the "vexing" business is an editorial. It isn't based on reporting at all. If the editorialist had read Kevin's article, they would have known that the "missing four" was quite possibly spin. Musta been the same writer who put the headline on Walters' last article. "

Whoever writes the editorials -- maybe Adderton?

Date: Dec 13, 2004

Invictus,

H. L. Mencken complained back in the 1930s about newspaper's propensity to take some influential person's press release and pass it off as an article.

If the Hat Am reporters were being really careful, they wouldn't print anything that Lisa Mader said about USM before they got hard evidence to confirm it. And if they caught her in a lie, they'd say so.

But this would push them so far beyond customary daily newspaper practice as to make their work read really strangely to most people. It would certainly reduce the length of most of their articles.

All of this said, I'll take Kevin Walters' reporting over Janet Braswell's anyday.

Robert Campbell

Date: Dec 14, 2004

The news would never be written if reporters spent all their time re-checking information in press releases and, on the other side of that, information obtained from faculty members. I'm playing a bit of devil's advocate, but I think it's important to recognize the many limitations that exist in this situation, and finding the facts can be tricky, for everyone. Although spin is frustrating, we all know it exists and can often come back to bite. Let's hope in this case it does.

By the way, Adderton doesn't work at the HA anymore. I believe the editorial page editor or the managing editor usually writes the editorials. That's always been my understanding of it. And it would be more feasible to hold off on an editorial than hard news.

Date: Dec 14, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Andy
"The news would never be written if reporters spent all their time re-checking information in press releases and, on the other side of that, information obtained from faculty members."

I'm being a little facetious here, but if LSM issued a press release stating that the sky was red, the HA would print it on the front page the next day. If someone then phoned in an anonymous tip that the reporter might go outside & look up, the HA wouldn't print it without an on-the-record statement from an astronomer that the sky might possibly be blue. One thing for sure, the reporter would never go outside & look at the sky for him or herself.

Most reporters do require corroboration on the record before they will go with a story. HA ought to apply this to anything coming out of the USM ministry of truth at the moment. Some things can be verified without a public statement from anybody if the reporter is willing to read, think & observe. What I'm saying is that the press needs to begin evaluating "official statements" as critically as it does statements made by individuals.

Date: Dec 14, 2004

4-year gap? There ain't not stinkin' 4 year gap!

THAT'S THE VEXING POINT!

Date: Dec 14, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: All vexed up
"4-year gap? There ain't not stinkin' 4 year gap!
THAT'S THE VEXING POINT!"

My original point. All Mr. Walters needed to do was ask one question. All he really needed to do was call SACS and ask: Is it typical for a school that has just completed a follow-up to a self study to file any reports other than the institutional profiles during the four year period immediately following approval of the follow-up report?

That isn't even "investigative journalism." Assuming that the answer to the question above is negative (which it most likely would be), the real investigative work is uncovering why someone would want people to think there is a gap in the records. It is not "vexing" that USM claims to have a "gap" in its records, which is what the HA editorial suggests. What is "vexing" is that someone wants people to think that there is a gap in the recordkeeping that neatly corresponds to Horace Fleming's term as president.

During the presidential "search" that resulted in Thames taking office, the HA would contact various candidates for comments & basically be told "it would be inappropriate for me to say anything right now." But they could contact Shelby & get a half page of juicy stuff. And they'd print every word right on the front page. They allowed him to use their rag as a bully pulpit from which he openly campaigned for the position. They did everything but declare him the best thing since sliced bread. They really can't take a position against him now, can they?

Date: Dec 14, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Invictus
"They allowed him to use their rag as a bully pulpit from which he openly campaigned for the position. They did everything but declare him the best thing since sliced bread. They really can't take a position against him now, can they?"

Even that legendary blind pig occasionally finds an acorn or two.

Date: Dec 14, 2004

A more interesting strategy for the HA is to dig in their heels with the administration re: their plans for resolving this problem. Okay, let's accept that we have a real issue -- it is what it is. Now then, the HA can serve the highest ideals of journalism by keeping a very bright spot light on Thames et al., continuously pressing for specific (really specific!) details on how they're planning to fix things.

A good place to start is at USM's SACS webpage (the link from the main home page that includes the various committees and "strategic plan"). Give me a break, I'm no SACS expert (just a concerned alum), but this all looks incredibly weak. Perhaps Kevin Walters should give a call to an independent SACS consultant-type or a current/former administrator at another university that had SACS issues to get their perspective on USM's reaction so far and what they ought to be doing -- e.g., some benchmarks re: necessary human capital, hours and capital investments, etc.

Just a thought...

Date: Dec 14, 2004

LSM has no credibility with the news media, nor has she ever had. Her knowledge of news and media relations is exceeded only by her arrogance and inflated sense of self-importance. She was given the job as SFT's payback to a former board member who helped him goose step into the presidency. Despite their lack of credibility, the administration's response to matters of public interest is still the response of record and must be reported. Reporters must look to other sources, however, to provide balance and ferret out the truth.

Date: Dec 14, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: ram
"Even that legendary blind pig occasionally finds an acorn or two."

From the 2nd acorn: "Thames has said he was misled by staff members who failed to tell him for two years that the university's accreditation was in jeopardy. He said he asked the right questions but got the wrong answers."

<SARCASM>Now, why in the world would anybody lie to Shelby Thames?</SARCASM>

Nobody should have had to tell SFT that the university's accreditation was in jeopardy. He should have already known the rules by which the game is played. A university president is supposed to know what a 2-year monitoring period means & it should have triggered a lot of things then that haven't started happening until now.

The fact that he keeps appointing people with little or no SACS experience to run the "recovery" tells me he still doesn't quite understand the game ... or the stakes. No slam intended to Dr. Exline here, but she's not an expert yet. (She will be in about 12 months.) USM needs some folks on this job that can show you the scars.

Date: Dec 15, 2004

It's worth pointing out to the less-than media savy board members that the two week period starting about now through New Year's is a notoriously "slow" news period -- with most reporters deparate to find anything of interest to report.

I mention this as a suggest for everyone to continue to keep the heat on Thames and the IHL with newsworthy events/comments/press releases. Also, Mr. Walters from the HA should have a little more time for a more complete assessment of USM's rather pathetic response to the SACS probation.