I do have a life

It just occurred to me that I've been writing a bit more about work lately than I once did. It made me question whether I had a life outside of work or not.

I do. It's pretty fruitful. It's pretty interesting. There's a lot going on with it. I just haven't felt the urge to vent about it on here.

That's probably a good thing, since I'm now aware there are more people reading this who might've been a part of that "life" thing in the past month or two who probably would rather not read about my thinking in some decisions, i.e. the decision to break up with a girl I'd been seeing for almost a month. Some things are probably best left unsaid.

Says the guy who wants people to tell him everything. I'm such a hypocrite sometimes.

Hatcing another pun-laden story

I went back to the pun factory the other day as the infamous chicken citation case came to a close. See "Judge cracks egg-cruciating controversy," or, as the headline in the newspaper said, "Judge cries fowl, dismisses nuisance case."
This story churned up something of an interesting debate in my mind. How much should you count on your local newspaper to entertain you? Is it possible to entertain and inform at the same time? Is it ethical?

These are intriguing questions. My thought is that you can't make fun of a story unless someone on either side is willing to do so too. In this case, people on both sides understand it's a silly thing about which to fight. There are larger, more important issues in the world.

But at its heart, it's a story that applies to everyone... What can you do with your own property? What rights do you give up to be a good neighbor? What rights do a village or city have to control what you do with your private property?

Personally, I'm glad I went the pun route. For one, I don't get to be funny in print very often ever since I moved out of sports. For two, I think the silliness of the writing made people read all the way through and think about the issues. If I'd played it straight, I really doubt it ever would've gotten as much statewide attention as it did.

And really, isn't making people want to read the story and learn about their world my job? If it takes a chicken pun or two to do it, so be it.

Protecting the innocent

Covering trials strikes me as one of the public services a newspaper serves for its readers. We'll keep people abreast of what's happening in their communities, so they can be aware of the dangers and threats around them.

For the first time today, I heard my publication's name directly mentioned in a court proceeding, in a rather unflattering way. It involved a mother whose husband raped their eldest child repeatedly over a four-year period, which made for three days of absolutely stomach-turning testimony late last month.

The mother, while giving a victim impact statement, brought up our paper's coverage of the trial as part of the harassment and trouble her husband's actions caused. She sent a similar letter to the editor of our newspaper about two weeks ago, criticizing our callous coverage of the event and suggesting we should have either skipped the trial or covered it without identifying her husband to "protect the innocent."

The theory is, in a small county like this, that people know one another's parents. While we never used the girl's name (she's still a minor, mind you), using her father's name and address identified her to her peers. She believed we were heartless people who couldn't resist the attention-grabbing story and selling papers.

This bothered me, and still does, for a variety of reasons. Rape is very disturbing to hear about in graphic detail, whether you know the victim or not. It didn't help that this girl had the same name as one of my nieces. I literally had trouble sleeping the week of that trial, and the girl's impact statement nearly brought me to tears as she talked about refusing to give a victim impact statement and instead wanted to give a "survivor impact statement." (And, for those who know me, moving me to tears is not easy.)

I also don't see the sense in protecting the identity of the defendant. He's been convicted of gruesome, horrid acts. There's no reason he should be protected from them.

I understand being angry and confused and perhaps embarassed about this incident. But rape is one of the few crimes in America where we still seem to hold the victim accountable somehow. I don't see how we can ever break through that belief until we begin standing up with the victims and reminding people that they're not guilty of anything. They ARE victims. They deserve the same respect as a victim of a theft, a murder or any other type of assault would get.

Another issue involving this case made it a bit ironic to me. The girl saw an episode of Oprah about rape which helped motivate her to tell someone about what her dad did. Now her family complained about her story coming out at well. I can only hope that her courage can lead to another girl's courage to help end a similar situation. If that happens, I'll proudly accept any insults the family cares to heave at the heartless and thoughtless media coverage.

I'm not dead... promise

It's been a while since I've posted. It's not so much that nothing's happened... in fact, quite a bit has. It's just been difficult to find the time -- and energy -- to opine in here. I'll try to be better.