Sketchy journalism & littering
December 20, 2009 8:29 PM
Sleuthing and neighbors have figured out what went on in front of my place the other day and it involves fabricating evidence for a newspaper story. I'd like suggestions on how to proceed.
On Thursday, my neighbors saw a truck pulled off on the roadside in front of my place and the driver was unloading what turns out to be a lot of debris and trash into the ditch. They couldn't get the license plate of the truck, but have a decent description. Saturday, they saw two vehicles parked on my property, with one person taking photos (they did get the plate number of that guy.) In the Sunday paper, there's an article with a picture of the scene. The gist of the article is that "boy, there's a lot of trash on the roadways, and something needs to be done."
So, I'm steamed. First of all, I'm going to have to clean up the considerable trash myself unless the perp can be identified. Yeah, that ditch filled with trash - the refuse will be mine to dispose of.... Secondly, the journalism is flawed and just plain faked. I figure a call to the paper's editor is involved, but what else?
This is in rural, eastern NC, USA.
On Thursday, my neighbors saw a truck pulled off on the roadside in front of my place and the driver was unloading what turns out to be a lot of debris and trash into the ditch. They couldn't get the license plate of the truck, but have a decent description. Saturday, they saw two vehicles parked on my property, with one person taking photos (they did get the plate number of that guy.) In the Sunday paper, there's an article with a picture of the scene. The gist of the article is that "boy, there's a lot of trash on the roadways, and something needs to be done."
So, I'm steamed. First of all, I'm going to have to clean up the considerable trash myself unless the perp can be identified. Yeah, that ditch filled with trash - the refuse will be mine to dispose of.... Secondly, the journalism is flawed and just plain faked. I figure a call to the paper's editor is involved, but what else?
This is in rural, eastern NC, USA.
You mention that the photo was "fabricated" and "faked" in some way: do you have proof of any kind that the people unloading the trash into the ditch were connected to the newspaper? Without that proof, it would probably be best to just clean it up and let it go.
posted by deadmessenger at 8:34 PM on December 20, 2009
posted by deadmessenger at 8:34 PM on December 20, 2009
Um nothing else - and not even that; write a letter to the editor, that's what it's for (If you think papers give a shit about the truth and you calling up will result in a correction, you're grossly mistaken). Unless you're implying the paper dumped the garbage itself, which seems a little left field to say the least.
posted by smoke at 8:36 PM on December 20, 2009
posted by smoke at 8:36 PM on December 20, 2009
To tag on to deadmessenger, call the reporter and tell her about your suspicions -- yes, suspicions, because it's possible, albeit unlikely, that the things aren't related. Odds are the reporter wasn't involved in any sort of "spicing up" the story, but you'll probably be able to tell based on her response.
posted by Etrigan at 8:41 PM on December 20, 2009
posted by Etrigan at 8:41 PM on December 20, 2009
Beyond the editor, one idea is to contact Sperby Piner and Sue McLaughlin (and whoever if someone is responsible for the Adopt a highway in that section) because they seem to be engaged in the issues and willing to go to bat (and have more clout) and because they might be interested in the fact that they and the adopt a highway program were used directly to 'make the story'. Sucks. Sorry.
(snarky answer: contact the journalist and tell her you're on to her and if she doesn't clean it up by -insert time frame here- you'll go to the editor and the competing news agency. No, really, don't do this, but it is tempting).
posted by kch at 8:41 PM on December 20, 2009
(snarky answer: contact the journalist and tell her you're on to her and if she doesn't clean it up by -insert time frame here- you'll go to the editor and the competing news agency. No, really, don't do this, but it is tempting).
posted by kch at 8:41 PM on December 20, 2009
My guess is that someone who saw the dumping contacted the paper, prompting the "look at all this trash" article - that seems more likely than the paper dumping the trash themselves.
posted by pocams at 8:53 PM on December 20, 2009
posted by pocams at 8:53 PM on December 20, 2009
This doesn't sound like a faked story to me. First, I'm not sure what paper has the budget to hire a truck to fake a story. If they were to fake a story, I don't know why it would be about litter.
posted by chris p at 9:02 PM on December 20, 2009
posted by chris p at 9:02 PM on December 20, 2009
Also, I don't think it is common for reporters to fabricate stories.
posted by chris p at 9:08 PM on December 20, 2009
posted by chris p at 9:08 PM on December 20, 2009
Hmmm.... is Sperby Piner planning to run for office anytime soon?
posted by amanda at 9:15 PM on December 20, 2009
posted by amanda at 9:15 PM on December 20, 2009
There are two possibilities here:
1) Some asshole dumps some garbage in your ditch because it's an easy way to get rid of some garbage. Before you clean it up someone from the newspaper sees it, thinks is a good opportunity for an easy story, done.
Or:
2) Someone from the newspaper is incapable of finding a photo of garbage in the ditch to support their Pulitzer prize winning story idea bout ditch trash. So she hires someone to dump garbage in your ditch. Then she waits several days, because after hiring someone to dump garbage in a ditch, why not wait a few days? I mean, there's zero chance that you'd clean it up, right? So, yeah, wait a few days and then go and get photos for the story, cash in on the glory.
Which do you think is more likely?
(Hint: #1 has the word 'easy' in it twice.)
posted by Ookseer at 9:20 PM on December 20, 2009
1) Some asshole dumps some garbage in your ditch because it's an easy way to get rid of some garbage. Before you clean it up someone from the newspaper sees it, thinks is a good opportunity for an easy story, done.
Or:
2) Someone from the newspaper is incapable of finding a photo of garbage in the ditch to support their Pulitzer prize winning story idea bout ditch trash. So she hires someone to dump garbage in your ditch. Then she waits several days, because after hiring someone to dump garbage in a ditch, why not wait a few days? I mean, there's zero chance that you'd clean it up, right? So, yeah, wait a few days and then go and get photos for the story, cash in on the glory.
Which do you think is more likely?
(Hint: #1 has the word 'easy' in it twice.)
posted by Ookseer at 9:20 PM on December 20, 2009
Do you have a local TV station? This seems like a perfect story for a soft news day.
It does seem faked, if not by the paper then by Sperby Piner. Why would someone randomly drive to this spot to dump trash but make sure it's nicely spread out along the ditch, then the very next day other people come to take photos for a litter story?
posted by 6550 at 9:20 PM on December 20, 2009
It does seem faked, if not by the paper then by Sperby Piner. Why would someone randomly drive to this spot to dump trash but make sure it's nicely spread out along the ditch, then the very next day other people come to take photos for a litter story?
posted by 6550 at 9:20 PM on December 20, 2009
Err, dont be so paranoid. Most likely this is a cookie cutter case of illegal dumping, not a conspiracy against you by the media.
posted by damn dirty ape at 9:26 PM on December 20, 2009
posted by damn dirty ape at 9:26 PM on December 20, 2009
Yeah, newspapers don't have money to fake a lame-ass story about some trash in a ditch, sorry. You should take off your tinfoil hat.
posted by autoclavicle at 9:29 PM on December 20, 2009
posted by autoclavicle at 9:29 PM on December 20, 2009
If Sperby is willing to put up all those signs about the project, then he's certainly willing to dump some trash for a photo shoot if the newspaper called and said "sure we'll run a story on it, but we want a picture of you by a trashy roadway; where should we meet you this saturday?"
After all, community service projects that have "kind of taken on a life of [their] own" usually have someone behind the scenes driving it. I'm fairly confident Sperby did the dump because he thought it was better for the article, not the newspaper.
Why don't you send him a quick email asking why they left the garbage there after taking the photo, when a little cleanup on the spot might have helped?
posted by davejay at 11:17 PM on December 20, 2009
After all, community service projects that have "kind of taken on a life of [their] own" usually have someone behind the scenes driving it. I'm fairly confident Sperby did the dump because he thought it was better for the article, not the newspaper.
Why don't you send him a quick email asking why they left the garbage there after taking the photo, when a little cleanup on the spot might have helped?
posted by davejay at 11:17 PM on December 20, 2009
note: I believe this is the case in large part because the trash, as shown, is spread over a distance in the ditch as if it had accumulated over a long period of time; someone dumping illegally wouldn't have bothered, they'd have just dumped and run.
posted by davejay at 11:19 PM on December 20, 2009
posted by davejay at 11:19 PM on December 20, 2009
I guess what I'm saying is this Sperby fellow is the only one who has a motive to spread garbage in the ditch in such a spread-out way.
posted by davejay at 11:20 PM on December 20, 2009
posted by davejay at 11:20 PM on December 20, 2009
Oh, one more thing: contacting the author of the article does make sense, but not to say "you faked it" but to ask "who picked the site for the photo, and when that decision was made." Assuming the answer is something like "Sperby suggested it on Wednesday" you can follow up with "That's interesting; I think you might like to know that on Wednesday there was no trash in that ditch, and on Thursday my neighbors saw someone in a truck dumping it and spreading it around like that. An odd coincidence; let me know if you want to talk to the neighbors who saw it." Then let the paper decide if they have an interesting story there or not.
And of course, if the answer is "we picked it, after such-and-such saw it on the way into work on Friday" then you can politely thank them and hang up.
posted by davejay at 11:24 PM on December 20, 2009
And of course, if the answer is "we picked it, after such-and-such saw it on the way into work on Friday" then you can politely thank them and hang up.
posted by davejay at 11:24 PM on December 20, 2009
Let me see if I've got the timeline right:
On Thursday, someone illegally dumps trash in your ditch.
On Saturday, someone from the local paper snapped pictures of it.
Wouldn't that have been a lot of work for nothing by a reporter if you'd cleaned up the trash on Friday? Or Thursday evening? Or Saturday morning? There's no way this is a conspiracy against you by the tiny local paper. If that paper is like the rest of the newspapers in this country, they've had to let go of staff just to make ends meet, which means the few people that remain are far too overworked to stage crime scenes for bogus stories.
You have every reason to be pissed that someone illegally dumped trash on your property, and I completely understand that you were embarrassed when you saw photos of it in your local paper... but blaming the paper for the trash is foolish and will backfire on you as more people than not will realize you're being foolish.
Bad things happen.
Sometimes people notice.
The notion that he who smelt it dealt it only works with farts. If you're ten.
posted by 2oh1 at 11:29 PM on December 20, 2009
On Thursday, someone illegally dumps trash in your ditch.
On Saturday, someone from the local paper snapped pictures of it.
Wouldn't that have been a lot of work for nothing by a reporter if you'd cleaned up the trash on Friday? Or Thursday evening? Or Saturday morning? There's no way this is a conspiracy against you by the tiny local paper. If that paper is like the rest of the newspapers in this country, they've had to let go of staff just to make ends meet, which means the few people that remain are far too overworked to stage crime scenes for bogus stories.
You have every reason to be pissed that someone illegally dumped trash on your property, and I completely understand that you were embarrassed when you saw photos of it in your local paper... but blaming the paper for the trash is foolish and will backfire on you as more people than not will realize you're being foolish.
Bad things happen.
Sometimes people notice.
The notion that he who smelt it dealt it only works with farts. If you're ten.
posted by 2oh1 at 11:29 PM on December 20, 2009
I know someone who lives in a rural area. Someone dumped two bags of trash by his mom's house. We went through the bag and found an envelope and an old phone bill with 2 different names at a rental house a couple miles away. Where I'm at (Ind.), you can call the sheriff about dumping and there can be a large fine for it. His mom didn't want to call it in because they were kids and she was afraid they'd harass her.
I did have a manager once who said he had called after finding a trash bag dumped in a ditch. He's the one who told me about looking for something with a name on it. The police did track down the people who had to come clean it all up. Not sure if they were fined or not. Anyway if you want some proof on who it is look for old mail, bills, etc. if they dumped trash bags.
posted by stray thoughts at 11:43 PM on December 20, 2009
I did have a manager once who said he had called after finding a trash bag dumped in a ditch. He's the one who told me about looking for something with a name on it. The police did track down the people who had to come clean it all up. Not sure if they were fined or not. Anyway if you want some proof on who it is look for old mail, bills, etc. if they dumped trash bags.
posted by stray thoughts at 11:43 PM on December 20, 2009
Sorry, I misread the timeline in the original question. I agree with those who say it's unlikely that the reporter/newspaper would dump trash, leave it there for several days, and then come back to take photos. I'd call the reporter and inquire about how she learned of the trash, then let her know what you saw.
posted by decathecting at 8:53 AM on December 21, 2009
posted by decathecting at 8:53 AM on December 21, 2009
Why not go to the newspaper website, and post a link to this AskMe?
posted by thermonuclear.jive.turkey at 10:34 AM on December 21, 2009
posted by thermonuclear.jive.turkey at 10:34 AM on December 21, 2009
It does seem faked, if not by the paper then by Sperby Piner. Why would someone randomly drive to this spot to dump trash but make sure it's nicely spread out along the ditch, then the very next day other people come to take photos for a litter story?
note: I believe this is the case in large part because the trash, as shown, is spread over a distance in the ditch as if it had accumulated over a long period of time; someone dumping illegally wouldn't have bothered, they'd have just dumped and run.
A possible explanation for how the trash became widely strewn between Thursday and Saturday was the huge wind/rain/snow event we had on the East coast, which got going on Friday in Eastern NC.
posted by gimli at 10:35 AM on December 21, 2009
note: I believe this is the case in large part because the trash, as shown, is spread over a distance in the ditch as if it had accumulated over a long period of time; someone dumping illegally wouldn't have bothered, they'd have just dumped and run.
A possible explanation for how the trash became widely strewn between Thursday and Saturday was the huge wind/rain/snow event we had on the East coast, which got going on Friday in Eastern NC.
posted by gimli at 10:35 AM on December 21, 2009
Secondly, the journalism is flawed and just plain faked.
What evidence do you have for this statement? If you live in a rural area, wouldn't it be far easier for a newspaper to fake a story where and when neighbors aren't going to see them? It's much more likely that some random jerk dumped trash and someone called the paper about it.
posted by oneirodynia at 12:40 PM on December 21, 2009
What evidence do you have for this statement? If you live in a rural area, wouldn't it be far easier for a newspaper to fake a story where and when neighbors aren't going to see them? It's much more likely that some random jerk dumped trash and someone called the paper about it.
posted by oneirodynia at 12:40 PM on December 21, 2009
No newspaper person in their right mind would do what you're accusing them of doing. They're way too busy trying not to get laid off.
posted by girlmightlive at 2:02 PM on December 21, 2009
posted by girlmightlive at 2:02 PM on December 21, 2009
Well, it's solved. My neighbor spoke with the person who dumped the trash and there is a connection. Sometimes things are as blatant as they seem. The neighbor promised that we would not expose the truth. I'm not sure I'm going to keep to my neighbor's promise. At least, I'm going to request the perp. clean up the ditch.
Sigh.
posted by mightshould at 5:51 AM on December 30, 2009
Sigh.
posted by mightshould at 5:51 AM on December 30, 2009
« Older Best digitizing options for dual-language... | Last 5 years in Tech -- Basics Edition Newer »
This thread is closed to new comments.
posted by decathecting at 8:33 PM on December 20, 2009