Comments by Kenbot-about KW - USM Forum -- Message Board

Date: Mar 4, 2005

Comments by Kenbot-about KW

Date: Mar 4, 2005

I don't think the "crowd" was exactly a rabid bunch of rednecks ready to go string up a reporter. So whether the statement was "inflammatory rhetoric" or simply stupid is open to debate, although I think it was stupid.

What was "smart" was that Kenbot spoke the words. There is no documentation that he actually said what he is said to have said. (I couldn't resist that

) Unless, of course, someone tape recorded the meeting, which I somehow doubt.

Does Malone need a visit from the FBI? I don't think so. Does he need a visit from the editor of the Hattiesburg American? Probably. Will the HA editor pay him such a visit? I doubt it. My bet is that somebody has already gotten to Rich Campbell & told him to put Walters back on a short chain. And I would not be surprised if the HA hasn't already done so.

Date: Mar 4, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Green Hornet
" Does Ken Malone’s statement constitute a “threat” to Kevin Walters? Is that statement enough to warrant a visit by federal authorities i.e. the FBI? My personal opinion is that (Malone’s) statement is the same as inflaming a crowd to “git the rope” (western-slang voice). "

Not an attorney, but I do watch a lot of Law & Order...Common sense tells me that were I in Kevin Walters' place, I'd do everything possible to make Malone's comment a matter of record. I'd do my best to document the "threat" by obtaining witness statements and then report the matter to the Hattiesburg police and the FBI. At the very least it'd put Malone on notice that Walters is on the right side of the law, and doesn't find such remarks amusing. It'd also impress Malone that Mr. Walters isn't going to be intimidated by the USM schoolyard bully. Malone is beginning to remind me of Barney Fife's evil twin.

Date: Mar 4, 2005

If I understand newspaper editing correctly, NOTHING gets printed unless the managing editor approves its insertion into the publication. If that is the case, then Campbell would look rather foolish to put a short chain on one he had essentially authorized to say publicly what has been said. Ultimate accountability lies with him, not the reporter. If something is deemed inappropriate for publication, that text gets trashed (or at least shelved) at the "final copy" meeting (I'm sure there is a more technically correct name).

Date: Mar 4, 2005

By the way Kenbot said, "before this is all over." Before what is all over?

Date: Mar 4, 2005

It would be nice if a reporter for another paper (say, the CL or the Independent) would interview KM and ask him explicitly whether he made the comments attributed to him. Then he would either have to deny them or attempt to explain them.

Date: Mar 4, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: USM Sympathizer
"It would be nice if a reporter for another paper (say, the CL or the Independent) would interview KM and ask him explicitly whether he made the comments attributed to him. Then he would either have to deny them or attempt to explain them."

Any one will to contact Stringfellow at the C-L?