In today's Northwest Herald is an article about the arrest of an Ehren Sanders, 33, for three misdemeanor offenses. These offenses supposedly took place about six weeks ago; in fact, the charges were filed on May 1st.
The Northwest Herald didn't think that arrest was important enough to write about then, but today it is. What's really interesting to me about this is the way the article and headline were created.
Why would the Northwest Herald use a headline that reads, "Spring Grove chief's son faces sex charge"?
Why would the first paragraph read, "The adult son of Spring Grove’s police chief has been charged with several misdemeanors, including criminal sexual abuse."
Why would the father be mentioned again in the last paragraph?
"Sanders’ father, Tom Sanders, is chief of the Spring Grove Police
Department, a position he took in 2007 after stepping down as village
president. He worked for the McHenry County Sheriff’s Office for
decades, retiring in 2004 as a commander for the patrol division.
"Tom Sanders could not be reached for comment."
Why did the reporter conveniently omit that Sanders had run against Keith Nygren for the office of sheriff? Was that in 2002? Can you imagine what the atmosphere at the McHenry County Sheriff's Department must have been like for Sanders, after he was not elected Sheriff?
Why is Tom Sanders even mentioned at all? What do you suppose the real reason is for mentioning Tom so prominently in the headline and story, when it was not he was charged with these offenses?
The article indicates who wrote it. Was she told to write it? And who wrote the headline?
Maybe it's time to re-think my $10.00/month...
You never know who is interested…
3 months ago
6 comments:
I actually agree with you on this one Gus...What I am confused on is why you would have a issue with this, but think attacks on Nygren's or Zinke's families are cool?
Curious1, thanks for agreeing about Sanders. But now I'm curious. Where have I expressed that I thought attacks on the families of Nygren or Zinke are okay?
I think the only time I've mentioned Mrs. Nygren was when Keith tried to lay the blame on her for the Homestead Exemption application in Florida, at the same time they were claiming a Homestead Exemption in Illinois on their Hebron residence.
I found it very hard to believe that Mrs. Nygren thought that one up on her own.
OK, fair point that you have not outwardly supported the uglier of those personal attacks on their families. I guess I was reading more into the fact you act like they don't happen but decry if something similar happens to their political rivals. Zinke's letter to you was after a very personal attack on his wife's family by a blog referred to in your comments sections. To ignore that was a general response to an ugly personal attack on his family while "reporting" his response seems disingenuous and morally dishonest.
I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure that Zinke's letter to me preceded what appeared on that other blog. Zinke wrote to Cal (the attack portion in that email to Cal was not published) and then Zinke wrote to me. What I think happened was that the author of the other blog read copies of both emails and then posted what he did.
What Zinke has done is to take the lid off. I suspect he is looking back now and thinking that he should have thought twice about hitting Send.
I followed the timeline differently. Regardless, is your stance really because Zinke asked that his family be left out of the political debate his critics are given free reign to target them for personal attacks? I am really struggling to follow that logic. Personal attacks on family should be off limits, even during vigorous political discourse. I am very sorry if you feel differently.
Curious1, thanks for commenting further. I don't have a stance about what other bloggers do.
Zinke is free to ask anything he wants. That doesn't mean he'll get it.
Post a Comment