View Full Version : The news
Is it me or is the section on reporting on here just harmful gossip giving way to many details into peoples lives? It's like what I imagine reading an episode of OK magazine is like.
Very distasteful stuff.
David Banks
08-Feb-11, 17:20
Is it me or is the section on reporting on here just harmful gossip giving way to many details into peoples lives? It's like what I imagine reading an episode of OK magazine is like.
Very distasteful stuff.
Do you mean Doanalsin's diary ?
I think you are complaining about the reporting of court cases? These are public record. Courts have to be public to be seen doing justice.
Do you mean Doanalsin's diary ?
Yip thats old 'Not News'... a legend in his own living room.
Im kinda thinking that maybe 'Not News' is Councillor Fernie's spin doctor???? The Groat isnt exactly holding back any punches in his ineffectivness now that he has more than a nodding dog job with HRC, and Noel perhaps wishes he was still employed by NOSN, so put the 2 together and what do you get?
Answer:
One 'Journalist' trying to beat the Groat with stories, while never mentioning anything about the High school shambles which I would say is by far the biggest farce since the CHaP heating system, and one Councillor maybe hoping people wont have to buy the Groat thus preserving his slim chance of re-election?.....;)
I think you are complaining about the reporting of court cases? These are public record. Courts have to be public to be seen doing justice.
Obviously, I dont condone anyone who has carried out a criminal offence, particullary against another person and or property. And also that its been a centuaries old tradition that law breakers are 'shamed' by some means of public knowledge.
However, look at it from a different prospective, the victim. A victim of crime has a harrowing enough expierience to go to court, give evidence and have a part of his/her life they wish never happened for all to read in the local paper. But todays newspaper is tomorrows chip wrappings..... the web is forever.
And yes, I realise not everyone buys a paper but even the papers websites dont print all the court items unless it has a significant enough importance to be worthy. i.e in the greater public interest..... not for armchair 'googling' experts who can trawl items up for eternity. Not everyone has a bebo/facebook lifestyle where they must let the world know when their next holiday is, or show pics of their new house, car, dog, hat, hairbrush etc.
With all respect to the said Journalist, its hardly 'The Cook Report' catagory. If for instance he'd used his 'skills' to uncover why theres a near organised crime element in Wick that seems to be untouchable by authorities from the Council to the DHSS right up to the Police, now that would be a story worth printing. That would be a public service. However sitting in Court writing who said/did what to who is pretty basic stuff.
The long term consequences of this type of web voyuerism far outweighs any short term gains.
David Banks
08-Feb-11, 18:58
Yesh, Yesh I do
There has already been a lot of ventillation on the org of the merits and demerits of "local reporting" and I will only add that, being across the pond, I find in gives a flavour of local news without having to have the Groat sent over here.
PS: Was writing this while posts 4, 5 and 6 arrived ahead of me. Slow at the keyboard, ain't I?
oldmarine
08-Feb-11, 19:01
Is it me or is the section on reporting on here just harmful gossip giving way to many details into peoples lives? It's like what I imagine reading an episode of OK magazine is like.
Very distasteful stuff.
My impression of the Org is it was not intended to report the news. There is a lot of gossip that appears on here, but you have to take that exactly what it is - GOSSIP. People do like to express their views on different subjects. I believe that is what the Org is about.
I myself do not have a problem with Doanalsin's Diary.
John Little
08-Feb-11, 23:04
"With all respect to the said Journalist, its hardly 'The Cook Report' catagory. If for instance he'd used his 'skills' to uncover why theres a near organised crime element in Wick that seems to be untouchable by authorities from the Council to the DHSS right up to the Police, now that would be a story worth printing. That would be a public service."
You have my complete and fascinated attention...
canadagirl
09-Feb-11, 17:20
There has already been a lot of ventillation on the org of the merits and demerits of "local reporting" and I will only add that, being across the pond, I find in gives a flavour of local news without having to have the Groat sent over here.
It's hideously expensive to have the Groat sent to Canada, did it for years, and the online version doesn't have all the little interesting things. I used to share the paper with local friends and they thought all the little gossipy bits were great! So between the .Org and Noel us outsiders get a more human side of what's going on there. :)
changilass
09-Feb-11, 17:28
"With all respect to the said Journalist, its hardly 'The Cook Report' catagory. If for instance he'd used his 'skills' to uncover why theres a near organised crime element in Wick that seems to be untouchable by authorities from the Council to the DHSS right up to the Police, now that would be a story worth printing. That would be a public service."
You have my complete and fascinated attention...
Damn!! I got it wrong again.
I thought he was a reporter not an investigator.
I think you are complaining about the reporting of court cases? These are public record. Courts have to be public to be seen doing justice.
HaHaHaHaHa..................?
northener
09-Feb-11, 19:20
Obviously, I dont condone anyone who has carried out a criminal offence, particullary against another person and or property. And also that its been a centuaries old tradition that law breakers are 'shamed' by some means of public knowledge.
However, look at it from a different prospective, the victim. A victim of crime has a harrowing enough expierience to go to court, give evidence and have a part of his/her life they wish never happened for all to read in the local paper. But todays newspaper is tomorrows chip wrappings..... the web is forever.
And yes, I realise not everyone buys a paper but even the papers websites dont print all the court items unless it has a significant enough importance to be worthy. i.e in the greater public interest..... not for armchair 'googling' experts who can trawl items up for eternity. Not everyone has a bebo/facebook lifestyle where they must let the world know when their next holiday is, or show pics of their new house, car, dog, hat, hairbrush etc.
With all respect to the said Journalist, its hardly 'The Cook Report' catagory. If for instance he'd used his 'skills' to uncover why theres a near organised crime element in Wick that seems to be untouchable by authorities from the Council to the DHSS right up to the Police, now that would be a story worth printing. That would be a public service. However sitting in Court writing who said/did what to who is pretty basic stuff.
The long term consequences of this type of web voyuerism far outweighs any short term gains.
So, on the one hand you say facts regarding local goings-on should not be reported, but then say that non the other hand facts should be reported (if they are of enough interest to you personally).
Rather an odd stance.
There will always be the dimwitted and the gormless no-lifers who thrive on 'local' conflict. You've only got to trawl back through a few pages of post headers and clock the view count to realise that any squabble, whinge or dispute that involves the district of Wick will attract rubberneckers in droves.
But (big but), the world moves on - the chip wrapper days are going - everything is being recorded now and the .Org shouldn't be any different. Otherwise we'll end up with a farcical situation where world events can be discussed/disputed but not what is happening in our own locale. I understand what you're saying about 'victims' being roped in - but I'm afraid that it will be inevitable.
Otherwise we'll just be doing an online version of sitting there with our fingers in our ears and only removing them selectively.
John Little
09-Feb-11, 20:34
Damn!! I got it wrong again.
I thought he was a reporter not an investigator.
It was the organised crime that got my attention.
Da godfadder of Wick.....!
Now guys and gals....dont take this the wrong way, but.....
Im guessing here that most of the replies to this thread are by 'Orgers' who dont live in Caithness, or have moved away from Caithness a long time ago, or have only come to live here in the last 5-10 years? Otherwise youd know the consequences of internet gossip in a small community, and also have an understanding of what could really do with being reported in Caithness.
The danger of posting more or less gossip (not court cases) is very very dangerous in a small place where everyone knows everyone, and family friendship/fueds have lasted generations. Take the 'report' of the man in Wick who lost his job (of which the thread seems to have been rightly removed), are we now to have 'Not News' post a thread everytime a shop assistant, school cleaner, accountant etc etc looses their job?
Ive had loads of 'good rep' regarding my thoughts on this topic, so obviously people who dont have 1000's of posts, but are mearly here as members and dont post feel likewise. Lots of 'lurkers' I can assure you feel exactly the same.
We now even have Not News's 'Comment', I always thought that was the editors privilidge to express an opinion......;)
northener
09-Feb-11, 23:23
Now guys and gals....dont take this the wrong way, but.....
Im guessing here that most of the replies to this thread are by 'Orgers' who dont live in Caithness, or have moved away from Caithness a long time ago, or have only come to live here in the last 5-10 years? Otherwise youd know the consequences of internet gossip in a small community, and also have an understanding of what could really do with being reported in Caithness.
So you are saying that Wick is somehow unique when it comes to gossip? Don't make me laugh. Small communities are the same the world over. And I'm certainly not of the opinion that facts should be supressed just to placate some small idiot faction who insist in living in the Dark Ages. Times move on.
As for "understanding ..what could really do with being reported in Caithness":
That really does come across as being bloody pompous and patronising. There's plenty on here who are more than capable of "understanding".
The danger of posting more or less gossip (not court cases) is very very dangerous in a small place where everyone knows everyone, and family friendship/fueds have lasted generations. Take the 'report' of the man in Wick who lost his job (of which the thread seems to have been rightly removed), are we now to have 'Not News' post a thread everytime a shop assistant, school cleaner, accountant etc etc looses their job?
" More or less gossip" is neither one thing or another. If someone is reporting referencable facts regarding a court case then it is not gossip. I have no problem with that at all.
If, however, some idiot begins spouting unsubstatiated blame and accusations on the .Org - then it shoud be dealt with ruthlessly and swiftly. I'm with you there, Droopy. Which, in my experience on here, has always happened pretty quickly in the past.
Ive had loads of 'good rep' regarding my thoughts on this topic, so obviously people who dont have 1000's of posts, but are mearly here as members and dont post feel likewise. Lots of 'lurkers' I can assure you feel exactly the same.
......
I'm glad you have a huge groundswell of 'reps', I'm sure it'll make you very happy...but why did you feel the need to tell everyone that? Do you feel the need to bolster your credibility because your argument is weak?
Ive had loads of 'good rep' regarding my thoughts on this topic, so obviously people who dont have 1000's of posts, but are mearly here as members and dont post feel likewise. Lots of 'lurkers' I can assure you feel exactly the same.
....;)
We will just have to take your word for the amount of "good reps" you have received on this subject, but I can assure you, you did not get one from me.
Ill be honest. I could easily live without the Sherrifs page and even though I may have a strong argument the chances are I would be in a minority. The best I could do then is not read it. Therefore lies the problem.
" More or less gossip" is neither one thing or another. If someone is reporting referencable facts regarding a court case then it is not gossip. I have no problem with that at all.
If, however, some idiot begins spouting unsubstatiated blame and accusations on the .Org - then it shoud be dealt with ruthlessly and swiftly. I'm with you there, Droopy. Which, in my experience on here, has always happened pretty quickly in the past.
There was no mention in any reporting of the court case that the guy lost, or would loose his job, it happened roughly 3 months later after the reported details of the court case.
I'm glad you have a huge groundswell of 'reps', I'm sure it'll make you very happy...but why did you feel the need to tell everyone that? Do you feel the need to bolster your credibility because your argument is weak?
Weak, maybe in your opinion, your entitled to that. Im merely making the point that there is a silent majority that read these threads, but dont post (or Rubberneck as you put it), and that lots seem to agree with me. You for instance along with Gollach have over 10,500 posts between you and are obviously big Org/internet fans and freely post your many thoughts and opinions.
At the end of the day its a debate and we can agree or disagree or even agree to disagree......Can I just add though that my main point in all this is not the court reporting, that is the way the thread seems to have progressed though.
There's a big difference between reporting facts and convictions and reporting "gossip" about organised crime or any other accusations against people in the county.. Innocent until proven guilty and all that.
Doanalsin's diary doesn't report gossip and for that reason I have no problem with it.
The messageboard is a different matter. There was a thread, correctly removed, a while ago, where a poster fired all sorts of allegations about a named individual who had been proven innocent in court. The accusations also went further than what was in the court case and that, for me, is another reason why it was right to be removed.
I personally don't want to see that kind of thing on here. And, in most cases, I think the mods do a decent job. If anybody wants to start a "gossip" website, go ahead, I won't read it, and just realise that the website owner may be held accountable for libel/slurs.
I do doubt though, that a thread discussing the guilt of OJ Simpson would be removed in the same manner. Hypocrisy? Maybe, but where do you draw a line?
It''ll be like the story about the guy who was 'sacked' from the lifeboat then for losing his license, hopefully when he gets back driving he can resume his volunteer position and the press will report the good news.
There's a big difference between reporting facts and convictions and reporting "gossip"...
Doanalsin's diary doesn't report gossip and for that reason I have no problem with it.
Are they facts and convictions though? As far as I know they all appear to be reports of court accusations. Even the person who was accused' girl friend was brought into the last one, how embarrassing for her! She didn't even do anything.
Are they facts and convictions though? As far as I know they all appear to be reports of court accusations. Even the person who was accused' girl friend was brought into the last one, how embarrassing for her! She didn't even do anything.
The accusation is fact.
It has been brought, correctly, to the attention of the authorities.
It's the way our legal system works. Guilt or innocence will be decided by due process.
I don't deny that people may become embarresed being in such a situation but banning it from a single website wouldn't stop that. If anything, I wonder, it might stop the hearsay and gossip of "what went on in court" and set the story straight?
northener
10-Feb-11, 09:15
Are they facts and convictions though? As far as I know they all appear to be reports of court accusations. Even the person who was accused' girl friend was brought into the last one, how embarrassing for her! She didn't even do anything.
I can see your point, but unfortunately all that is happening is that the facts of an accusation - in a Courtroom - are being reported. If all that is being published is what has happened in an open Court, then there's no problem in posting it as a news item on here IMO. That info is already in the public domain. It's an electronic newspaper, that's all, Droopy is of the opinion that this info should be supressed to pander to an idiotic minority who cannot differentiate between accusation and guilt.
As long as the report does not attempt to wrap up accusation as guilt - then all well and good IMO.
. You for instance along with Gollach have over 10,500 posts between you and are obviously big Org/internet fans and freely post your many thoughts and opinions.
Do try to pay attention Droopy, I am Golach with one L
Do try to pay attention Droopy, I am Golach with one L
Sorry goolach....;)
northener
10-Feb-11, 10:37
Sorry goolach....;)
yer bein' cheeky now, Droppy.....
'Goolach'...like it!:Razz
David Banks
15-Feb-11, 14:41
Just for the record - each article (or thread) in the diary has had between 100 and 500 "views" -- except for the two or three most recent ones which will no doubt catch up.
Nice goin' Noel!
Tubthumper
15-Feb-11, 18:16
Maybe rather than suffer the embarrassment of having their names on caithness.org for breaking the law, those found guilty might think twice about repeating their behaviour. We should run a sweepstake to see how many times the same names appear for the same stupid, drunken, irresponsible, self-centered, nasty, vindictive things they seem to like doing.
Their families and friends might like to have a word with them as well.
Maybe rather than suffer the embarrassment of having their names on caithness.org for breaking the law, those found guilty might think twice about repeating their behaviour. We should run a sweepstake to see how many times the same names appear for the same stupid, drunken, irresponsible, self-centered, nasty, vindictive things they seem to like doing.
Their families and friends might like to have a word with them as well.
I like the idea of "Name and Shame" Tubs but I would put money on the fact that shame isnt in most of their dictionaries, in fact, I would go as far as to say they are rather proud of their bad behaviour !!!
C3.....:roll:
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.