Cosby allegations take another damning turn

Actor and comedian Bill Cosby has been accused of sexual assault by at least 30 women. The statute of limitations has passed in many of the cases, but the release of sworn testimony where Cosby admitted to obtaining quaaludes in an effort to drug women for sex lends credence to the accusers' stories, one accuser said.





Sexual abuse allegations against comedian and actor Bill Cosby, which gathered steam in November, gained even more ground Monday as testimony Cosby gave in 2005 where he admitted to obtaining quaaludes to women he was looking to have sex with was unsealed.

The testimony came to light after the Associated Press went to court to require the release of Cosby's testimony. Over the objection of Cosby’s attorneys, U.S. District Judge Eduardo Robreno released the records.

“The stark contrast between Bill Cosby, the public moralist and Bill Cosby, the subject of serious allegations concerning improper (and perhaps criminal) conduct, is a matter as to which the AP — and by extension the public — has a significant interest,” Robreno wrote, according to the AP.

The AP reported Tuesday that Cosby, 77, has dealt with accusations of sexual assault over a four-decade span and has never been formally charged with a crime. In addition, the statute of limitations for most of the alleged sexual assaults has passed, meaning that the courts would no longer have any jurisdiction to try Cosby on charges related to the alleged sexual assaults.

The records released pertained to a lawsuit filed by former Temple University employee Andrea Constand, who agreed to be identified in print by the AP, but chose not to comment. According to a timeline of the accusations that was published on Vulture.com in March, 30 different women accused Cosby of sexual assault.

Constand allegedly met Cosby for the first time in November 2002, when Vulture.com’s timeline begins, and a meeting in Cosby’s Cheltenham, Penn. home in January 2004 led to the first report of sexual assault found in the timeline. Cosby was accused of giving Constand “herbal” pills to ease her anxiety, then he “touched her breasts and vaginal area, rubbed his penis against her hand, and digitally penetrated” her, according to her civil lawsuit.

Some in Hollywood have condemned Cosby, while others, including TV wife Phylicia Rashad and Keshia Knight Pulliam, who played Rudy Huxtable on The Cosby Show, defended the actor.

“Forget these women,” Rashad told reporter Roger Friedman. “What you’re seeing is the destruction of a legacy. And I think it’s orchestrated. I don’t know why or who’s doing it, but it’s [about] the legacy.”

Maybe if one person accused Cosby of sexual assault and the truth were to come to light, it might be easily dismissed as a money grab or a play for attention. But 30 different accusations, with some women even agreeing to lend their real names to the accusations, something even the bold Victim No. 4 didn’t do during Day 1 of the trial of former Penn State defensive coordinator and convicted child abuser Jerry Sandusky back in 2012, leaves much more room for belief of each of these individual stories.

To put it bluntly, the duck test is in order. To be clear that Cosby hasn’t been found guilty of a crime as of yet, but it’s hard to dismiss 30 accusations of sexual assault as mere coincidence, or as 30 women seeking a large payday or attention.

Meanwhile, an accuser hailed the release of Cosby’s sworn testimony.

“I’ve been called a liar,” said Joan Tarshis, one of Cosby’s accusers. “I mean, he called me and the other women a liar. In the press. And now people will know we’re not liars anymore,” Tarshis said.

Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy, often the swing vote between the liberal and conservative blocs on the Court, wrote the majority decision in Obergfell v. Hodges that made marriage equality the law of the land in the United States.

Months of waiting and discussion of the United States Supreme Court's ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges, a case where the Court was debating whether or not same-sex couples were entitled to marry each other across the country, and also whether or not states where marriage equality was not on the books were required to recognize same-sex unions performed in states where the practice was legal.

In today’s 5-4 ruling, a divided Supreme Court answered yes to both questions. The decision, written by swing justice Anthony Kennedy prohibits states from banning same-sex marriages and requires them to recognize marriages performed legally in other states.

“Under the Constitution, same-sex couples seek in marriage the same legal treatment as opposite-sex couples, and it would disparage their choices and diminish their personhood to deny them this right,” Kennedy wrote in the majority decision. 

Kennedy was joined by the so-called liberal bloc of four justices (Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen G. Breyer, Sonia Sotomajor and Elena Kagan), while the four members of the so-called conservative wing of the court (Chief Justice John Roberts, Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito) each wrote separate dissents.

“Many people will rejoice at this decision, and I begrudge none their celebration,” Roberts wrote. “But for those who believe in a government of laws, not of men, the majority’s approach is deeply disheartening.”

More bothersome than this attempt at a scholarly approach to dissent was Roberts’s assertion that same-sex marriage isn’t part of the Constitution, as he included in what otherwise read as an attempt at an olive branch to the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community.

“If you are among the many Americans – of whatever sexual orientation – who favor expanding same-sex marriage, by all means celebrate today’s decision,” he wrote. “Celebrate the achievement of a desired goal. Celebrate the opportunity for a new expression of commitment to a partner. Celebrate the availability of new benefits. But do not celebrate the Constitution. It had nothing to do with it.” 

A simple reading of the Fourteenth Amendment demonstrates how wrong Roberts is with that assertion. That amendment is often referred to as “the second Bill of Rights” because it extends many of the protections of the people against Washington to protect people against overreach by state governments.

“No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States,” Section 1 reads in part. “Nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”

In making the argument on behalf of President Barack Obama's administration back in April, Solicitor General Donald B. Verrilli Jr. powerfully argued that preventing same-sex couples from being able to marry the people they love is discrimination.

“In a world in which gay and lesbian couples live openly as our neighbors, they raise their children side by side with the rest of us, they contribute fully as members of the community,” he said, “it is simply untenable – untenable – to suggest that they can be denied the right of equal participation in an institution of marriage, or that they can be required to wait until the majority decides that it is ready to treat gay and lesbian people as equals,” he said.

Kennedy said it best in the closing paragraph of his majority decision.

“No union is more profound than marriage, for it embodies the highest ideals of love, fidelity, devotion, sacrifice, and family,” he wrote. “In forming a marital union, two people become something greater than once they were. As some of the petitioners in these cases demonstrate, marriage embodies a love that may endure even past death. It would misunderstand these men and women to say they disrespect the idea of marriage. Their plea is that they do respect it, respect it so deeply that they seek to find its fulfillment for themselves. Their hope is not to be condemned to live in loneliness, excluded from one of civilization’s oldest institutions. They ask for equal dignity in the eyes of the law. The Constitution grants them that right.”

The struggle for full equality isn’t over yet. A simple look at the ongoing struggles against racism and misogyny proves it. But we’re finally one step closer to living up to our nation’s ideals as outlined in the Declaration of Independence.

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.”

For millions of Americans, their ability to pursue happiness with the life partner of their choice just became a little easier.

Riots are Just the Loudest Symptom of What Ails America

Freddie Gray

Ever since Michael Brown was shot dead in Ferguson, Mo. Aug. 9, leading to riots that turned a town that most people outside Missouri had never heard of into a household word, the nation's focus has turned to racial tensions that have simmered in the year since the civil rights struggles of the 1950s and 1960s.

Make no mistake: Brown's death and the deaths of others who shared his skin color by white police officers are nothing new. Years of discussion about police brutality and racial profiling have occasionally flared up violently, such as the Los Angeles riots almost exactly 23 years ago after a jury acquitted four police officers even though video showed them pummeling King.

The latest example of tension between rioters and police came after Freddie Gray's death April 19. Gray was arrested April 12 and, his family's attorney contends that police injured his spinal cord in the incident. Police admitted on Friday they didn't get Gray timely medical attention upon his arrest.

Anger over the incident, plus accusations of rampant race-related brutality by Baltimore police boiled over during the past couple of days. Maryland Gov. Larry Hogan declared a state of emergency and activated the state's National Guard Monday.

The Baltimore Orioles postponed their scheduled game against the Chicago White Sox Monday because of riots near Oriole Park at Camden Yards.

Major League Baseball Commissioner Rob Manfred said the decision to postpone Monday's game was made after consulting with local officials, according to Yahoo! Sports.

"We feel like we made the decision that would provide us the greatest possible security in terms of protecting the fans, the players, the umpires, everybody involved in the game," Manfred said.

More to the point, Orioles executive vice president John Angelos, the son of owner Peter Angelos, wrote a series of tweets in which he sought to put things in perspective.

"The innocent working families of all backgrounds whose lives and dreams have been cut short by excessive violence, surveillance and other abuses of the bill of rights by government pay the true price, and ultimate," John Angelos wrote, "and one that far exceeds the importance of any kid's game played tonight, or ever, at Camden Yards."

Unfortunately, the rest of reactions around the country, and even within the state of Maryland haven't been nearly as unified. Facebook posts that decried liberals, condemnations of rioters and strong statements directed at those who support or oppose police have demonstrated yet again the great divides that plague a country that seems to be ironically called the "United" States.

Look, I get the fact that many African-Americans feel disenfranchised in reaction to abuse at the hands of white cops. I recognize that too many African-Americans deal with both open and subtle racism on an everyday basis. However, that doesn't excuse violent protesting. It doesn't justify three gangs joining forces to attack cops, as Baltimore police argue is happening.

These events also don't justify police brutality or racial profiling. Baltimore City Police Commissioner Anthony Batts has refused to resign in response to questions surrounding alleged abuse, although Batts also said he wanted the authority to fire officers who perform poorly or otherwise warrant termination.

"It could have been my son at the bus stop that night that event of excessive force was used. It is unacceptable and will not be tolerated in this organization," Batts said in October of last year in response to a video of a police officer beating 32-year-old Kollin Truss in September. 

Police need to be held accountable, yes, but simply giving police the authority to fire officers is just the tip of the spear. The riots, the violence and the backlash against police are just the heaviest symptom of the wedge being driven through people in this country. Facebook statements condemning "liberals" and racist criticism of rioters are an example of our lost ability to disagree with others without resulting in enmity.

Frustrating disrespect for Jenner during a difficult journey

Former Olympic gold medalist Bruce Jenner will sit down with ABC's Diane Sawyer to discuss his impending transition to present as a female on April 24.

Some people are familiar with former Olympian Bruce Jenner's athletic accomplishments. Jenner won the gold medal in the decathlon at the 1976 Olympic Games in Montreal, turning him into a sports hero with endorsements that kept his face in front of the American public well into the 1980s.

More recently, however, Jenner became more famous as the patriarch of the Kardashians, as the former Kris Kardashian married Jenner.

If that wasn't bad enough, Jenner has borne the brunt of jokes and snide comments about his appearance as he has been seen in public with long hair, sometimes in a ponytail. Eventually, word got out that Jenner is undergoing a process to "transition" into a woman.

Both before the seeming confirmation reported by People magazine in January and in the days and weeks that followed, people poking fun at Jenner has unfortunately continued. Even questions from well-meaning people have hinted at disrespect toward the journey. On such question I've seen out there illustrates the point: "what's wrong with being a man?" in response to Jenner's transition.

For someone who isn't familiar with the journey, it's hard to imagine the emotions and the feelings involved that would lead toward the transition. I don't pretend to have all the answers. I don't even profess to have any. That said, from my limited experience, some, if not all, people who choose to take on the journey face something called gender dysphoria, also known as gender identity disorder.

Long story short: People with gender identity disorder believe they were born with the wrong gender. To use Jenner's example, TMZ is reporting that when he sits down with ABC's Diane Sawyer on April 24, he is expected to present himself as a woman for the first time. He is expected to tell Sawyer that he considered himself a female since age 5, but was not able to present himself as one.

The interview in itself may not be disrespectful, but ABC's trailer for the interview certainly is. It sensationally avoids showing Jenner's face, choosing to use a silhouette of Jenner along with the back of Jenner's head in shots in a blatant attempt to create interest in the interview.

I understand the need to drive an audience to watch a program and that ABC needs to promote the interview. I also understand that Jenner's appearance alone may cause interest in the story. However, the shadows and the back of Jenner's head bring a carnival freak level of attention to Jenner that someone going through the emotional anguish of that transition under the glare of public attention should never face.

ABC's decision to tease Jenner's interview the way it has is yet another example of far too much disrespect directed at people who deserve understanding, no matter how little we have of exactly what they're going through.

Anatomy of a failure: What Rolling Stone got wrong

Rolling Stone magazine's publication of "A Rape On Campus" last November, which purportedly chronicled a brutal rape at the Phi Kappa Psi fraternity house on the University of Virginia campus, resulted in the entire Greek life system being suspended by university president Teresa Sullivan.

The suspension was intended to allow the school to do some soul searching. It was intended to allow the university to examine its policies and for students to ponder their own responsibility to prevent sexual assault.

As we now know, there was one major problem with the narrative. Sabrina Erdely, the author of the 9,000-word story, spoke with "Jackie," the alleged victim and the sole source quoted in the account. The Columbia Journalism School reviewed the piece and recounted several failures of basic journalism. 

Rolling Stone has subsequently retracted the story and has apologized to all the real victims involved. Erdely has also apologized, but she cited the admitted difficulties of handling a story about a crime that so deeply violates its victims.

Erdely interviewed "Jackie" a total of eight times, and the Rolling Stone online account indicated that "Jackie" "proved to be a challenging source," and refused to provide the name of a lifeguard who worked at the pool on campus whom she claimed organized the rape. At that point, Rolling Stone's editors agreed to continue with the story "without knowing the lifeguard's name or verifying his existence."

Erdely, editors and a fact-checker all believed "Jackie," and the fact-checker even provided details as to why she believed Jackie.

"She wasn't just answering, 'Yes, yes, yes,' she was correcting me," the checker said. "She was describing the scene for me in a very vivid way. … I did not have doubt." Rolling Stone asked not to reveal the name of the fact-checker because she didn't have decision-making authority, according to the Rolling Stone account of the story.

After the story published, Erdely asked "Jackie" for the name of the lifeguard and assured her it would not be published. Armed with the name, she attempted to verify his membership in the fraternity and his employment at the pool. She was unable to do either.

Columbia deservedly didn't hold back in its harsh assessment of Rolling Stone's systemic failures.

"The failure encompassed reporting, editing, editorial supervision and fact-checking," Columbia's account read. "The magazine set aside or rationalized as unnecessary essential practices of reporting that, if pursued, would likely have led the magazine's editors to reconsider publishing Jackie's narrative so prominently, if at all."

Besides Rolling Stone now facing the worst possible embarrassment as the result of its lack of responsibility being laid bare before the entire country, there are, of course, myriad ripple effects. Erdely's credibility as a journalist has clearly been shot to hell. The university's reputation has been sullied, as it turns out, under false pretenses. 

I'm admittedly not the most sympathetic person toward the Greek life system, but it turned out Sullivan's suspension of all Greek life activities was a punishment for a crime that we have little to no real evidence to believe actually happened. Much like the Duke lacrosse case in 2006, in which three players were falsely accused of raping a woman at a party, the fraternity brothers in Phi Kappa Psi now will have to deal with the ramifications of being accused of sexual assault unjustly.

One of the few things Erdely did right in the wake of this failure was to express concern about the effects that her and Rolling Stone's mistakes will have on the discussion about sexual assault and rape. Make no mistake: Rape still is a serious problem and communities the world over need to do a much better job of addressing the root causes. A false account, especially one so graphic, can do untold damage to the good work that started, even under bad pretenses.

Ultimately, it will be a long time before Erdely and Rolling Stone regain lost credibility. Worse yet, it will be a very long time before all the wounds caused by shoddy reporting, editorial oversight and fact-checking are healed.

Tone deafness speaks louder than words in racist language

Oklahoma state Sen. Joseph Silk (R) said of members of the LGBT community "they don't deserve to be served in every store." 

The fallout from the drunken, racist chanting that got Sigma Alpha Epsilon’s Oklahoma chapter banished from campus Tuesday and its two ringleaders expelled is not the only race-related issue that’s causing consternation.

Univision host Rodner Figueroa was fired Thursday over comments about first lady Michelle Obama.

“Mind you, you know that Michelle Obama looks like she's part of the cast of Planet of the Apes, the film,” Figueroa said.

Taken in isolation, Figueroa’s comment is shameful. Coming so soon after SAE’s expulsion and video showing the fraternity’s house mother Beauton Gilbow gleefully singing the n-word shows how hideously tone deaf Figueroa’s comments really are.

Granted, I’ve noticed that some people are defending Gilbow, including African-Americans, especially Trinidad James , the rapper whose song “All Gold Everything” is blaring in the background in the now-infamous video.

“It’s a rock and a hard place,” said James, whose real name is Nicholas Williams, in an interview with CNN. “I can’t be as upset at that lady. I’m upset at the fraternity because what they’re saying is a chant that’s just completely disrespectful to the black race. As far as that lady goes – man, that’s an old lady, man. Let that lady be.”

The rapper told CNN he doesn’t want people getting up in arms about others using the n-word when it’s frequently used in hip-hop music, likening it to parents telling their children not to curse after hearing their parents curse.

I’m not willing to give her a pass. Not because she’s old and not because she’s using a word she’s hearing in a hip-hop track. If I’m singing a song that has the word in it, I skip it or use another word, whether it’s on YouTube or it’s at karaoke. Or I don’t even pick the song to begin with. Some people equate being old with being able to say whatever they want. Being old doesn’t take away your responsibility to know better or to do better.

One of my Facebook friends, who is black and who is the sister of one of my very closest friends expressed disappointment that the two ringleaders were expelled yesterday, saying that simply kicking out the students does nothing to educate them on just how hurtful the words they used are and does nothing to attack the attitudes that led to the use of those words to begin with.

She also noted the role alcohol played in the chants, saying, “alcohol brings out the truth.” That’s why I can’t subscribe to the notions that one or two bad apples ruined the fraternity or the notion that only the ringleaders and the people participating in the chants should have to face the consequences for their actions. In addition to those reasons, I remind readers of an Edmund Burke quote for why I believe the entire fraternity should have faced the music: “The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.”

In addition, the disgraced SAE chapter hired prominent attorney Stephen Jones, who defended Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh and plans to sue the university over its expulsion from the campus. Perhaps they could argue that Oklahoma University president David Boren overstepped his bounds by expelling the fraternity without anything even resembling due process, but the fact that they’re looking to lawyer up demonstrates a disturbing hubris.

Lost in the furor about the obviously contemptible racist chants and words in the past few days are the attitudes that still lurk beneath the surface. Attitudes that get exposed when alcohol freely flows or are laid bare in hip-hop songs that are sung along to far too enthusiastically are problematic, but so, too are the attitudes of people who try to dismiss #blacklivesmatter, either with a seemingly noble #alllivesmatter hashtag or by claiming that we live in a post-racial society. 

The latter assertion is laughable. Minority groups are still fighting for basic rights in this country. Look no further than Oklahoma, which is now unofficially the most embarrassing state in the country after people such as state Sen. Joseph Silk, a Republican, said of members of the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community, “They don’t have a right to be served in every single store.”

The state is looking to pass legislation that would allow business owners to refuse LGBT customers because of “sincerely held religious beliefs.” On top of that, the Oklahoma House of Representatives passed legislation that would restrict marriage to people of faith, completely flying in the face of the First Amendment prohibitions against an establishment of religion because it also targets people who don’t believe in any particular religion. Not only that, but it also violates the Fourteenth Amendment’s equal protection clause, as does the legislation which would allow people to refuse to serve others because of religious beliefs.

Clearly, there’s a long way to go before our country can even lay claim to being the land of the free and a place where justice is really for all. It’s a journey that’s made much more arduous by attitudes of people who harbor racist views, either openly or hidden where it takes alcohol or anonymity to expose them. 

Racist video shines harsh glare on racial divide

Photo of University of Oklahoma President David Boren by Phil Konstantin released in the public domain.

If we didn’t need Saturday’s 50th anniversary of “Bloody Sunday,” an observance of the anniversary of the day in 1965 when thousands marched on the Edmund Pettus Bridge in an effort to secure voting rights for African-Americans that Alabama was denying to them as a reminder of how far the symbolic march for equality still lies ahead, racist chants aboard an Oklahoma fraternity’s bus provided yet another example.

Oklahoma University president David Boren very quickly condemned the racist chants, which not only boastfully announced that no [n-word] would be allowed to pledged the Sigma Alpha Epsilon fraternity, but also that many African-Americans would be lynched. He also announced that the university would sever ties with the fraternity and that its members would be forced to vacate their house by midnight Tuesday.

“To those who have misused their free speech in such a reprehensible way, I have a message for you. You are disgraceful," Boren tweeted after the protest. "You have violated all that we stand for. You should not have the privilege of calling yourself 'Sooners.'" The Associated Press also reported that Boren said the university was looking into a range of punishment including expulsion.

“This is not who we are,” Boren said at a midday news conference. “I’d be glad if they left. I might even pay the bus fare for them.”

On top of that, Ben Carson, a would be presidential candidate and tea party darling who, as a neurosurgeon, should know better, claimed that homosexuality is a choice because – get this – of prison sex, a fact which Saturday Night Live rightly lampooned.

Some may be tempted to laud Boren for acting so swiftly and decisively to separate the university from the actions of a few ignorant fools. Some might argue that because Oklahoma is in the middle of the deep south, Boren had to act quickly, for much the same reason that University of Mississippi chancellor Daniel W. Jones had to act swiftly when students including Ole Miss football players heckled a performance of The Laramie Project with anti-gay and other slurs in 2013.

“A lot of students come here with less exposure to social issues than they might at other schools,” Jones said at the time. “Because of our unique history of injustice, we have a larger responsibility and opportunity to deal with intolerance in any form.”

Boren has more to contend with than just history, be it the shameful actions depicted in the movie
Selma or the ever-present stain of bigotry in Mississippi. Oklahoma Gov. Mary Fallin has made her opposition to gay equality a central aspect of her administration as the state has doggedly fought to serve as a roadblock against same-sex marriage, among other issues. He has to contend with a fraternity that has gone far beyond a sick joke or what could be dismissed as trolling if words used in the video captured on the bus were confined to the Internet.

On top of the mere words chanted by members of Sigma Alpha Epsilon and the threats inherent in the chants, the timing – so soon after the anniversary of Bloody Sunday and after President Barack Obama’s fiery speech Saturday at the site of the massacre – could not have been worse. If anyone continues to argue that America is a post-racial society, merely reading these accounts should prove otherwise.

The Associated Press report on Boren’s response to the fraternity also noted that the brothers were “not totally forthcoming” in response to the reports of the incident, which suggests both tacit approval for the virulently racist stance and the flaws of a culture that expects people to take the fall for others rather than admit to wrongdoing.

Like so many examples in years past and recently, the fraternity’s actions are a reminder that the cover-up is sometimes worse than the crime. More to the point: In this case, the cover-up only serves to exacerbate the crime.

Not only is America far from being post-racial, but the anniversary and these recent examples of bigotry that remain show how far we haven’t come in the symbolic march toward liberty and justice for all Americans.

Boren had to act quickly all right. But his immediate response should be a call to action for all who care about equality.

The university will be “an example to the entire country of how to deal with this issue. There must be zero tolerance for racism everywhere in our nation,” he said.

Boren may have spoken about his university, but his words serve as a challenge for a nation. We all must accept his challenge if we are to truly live our ideals as a nation conceived in liberty and equality for all.

Sports Illustrated with a lot less illustration

It's no secret that print journalism has faced immense challenges in the past 20 years or so.

The popularity of the Internet has grown immensely during that time. Newspapers have provided articles and photos free of charge to anyone with a computer and a web browser. Cell phones evolved from having a reputation for being the exclusive property of doctors and drug dealers to being as ubiquitous as a wallet or a purse, if not more so. The phones themselves evolved from being enormous and clunky, usable for just a few minutes of emergency communication to being portable combinations of telephone, computer and other electronic devices.

Newspapers realized all too late that providing all, or an overwhelming majority, of their content for free from the early days of the Internet's popularity was a bad decision. On March 5, 2007, the website NewspaperDeathWatch.com was founded, "chronicling the decline of newspapers and the rebirth of journalism," according to its banner. Along the left side of the front page is a list of newspapers that shuttered their doors.

Magazines certainly aren't immune to the pressures that have turned some newspapers into shadows of their former selves. A particularly unfortunate example of this happened Thursday when Sports Illustrated laid off its last six staff photographers.

"There was a decision made through the company to restructure various departments, including at Sports Illustrated," said the magazine's director of photography Brad Smith. "Unfortunately economic circumstances are such that it has cut the six staff photographers."

The photographers could still shoot photos for the magazine in a freelance capacity and the layoffs will take effect in March, meaning the six laid off photogs will still work Super Bowl XLIX in Glendale, Ariz. However, Smith's words arguing that the magazine remains committed to high quality photography ring especially hollow.

"Our commitment to photography is as strong as ever, and we will continue to create the best original content possible," he said.

Riiiight.

A small community newspaper, be it a weekly newspaper or a monthly rag may not be able to afford a staff photographer on salary and may rely on photographers who shoot as a hobby or may have retired from full time work and don't need money earned from taking photos for a newspaper to put food on the table. Even larger newspapers have seen reporters be required to take pictures while writing stories.

I know first hand that entrusting photos to someone who isn't a photographer by trade is a crap shoot at best. When I was managing editor of The Prince George's Sentinel, I was extremely lucky to have a staff photographer who put extensive thought into shot composition and getting the right mood for a photo going with a story. I was also lucky to have freelance writers along the way who took good photos. I even managed to take some photos that impressed our very talented staff photographer.

However, I also saw publications where the quality of photos taken by reporters or others who worked for the newspaper suffered enormously.

One of my friends showed me a tweet he encountered that said the following: "Sports Illustrated laid off all its photographers so the swimsuit issue will just be selfies."

The news of Sports Illustrated's layoffs of its staff photographers hits especially hard because I still have vivid memories of coming home from school as a high school student on Thursdays and grabbing Sports Illustrated as soon as I walked in the door. Before I even touched my homework, and sometimes even instead of doing my homework for the night, I read Sports Illustrated. Back then, I was a budding writer and an avid sports fan. I used to read Sports Illustrated and I used to be captivated by the quality of the writing. I even remember dreaming that one day, my words would grace the pages of Sports Illustrated.

Years later, I made that childhood dream come true in a sense. In 2010, I was a sometime writer for Yahoo! Voices, and they contacted me about writing a piece in which I profiled the sporting venues and teams in the Washington, D.C. metropolitan area. When I got the e-mail on May 26, 2010 that it was published on Sports Illustrated's online site, I was insanely happy. Even my parents -- who hate sports and don't follow sports -- realized what a big deal it was to be published by Sports Illustrated.

That's why seeing the magazine's decline in quality from being appointment reading every Thursday to being just another publication ditching an example of what it did best in the effort to save the almighty dollar is especially heartbreaking. I certainly feel for the six men who now will no longer earn a salary for their photos. Certainly, having to find another job in an economy that still carries reminders of the Great Recession is tough. But their loss is more than just one publication looking to save money. It's a symbol of the plight of far too many people who struggled to make ends meet in living their passion who end up having to find other ways to keep a roof over their heads.

If that doesn't demonstrate how far a publication that once was the gold standard for journalism has fallen, I don't know what does.

After watching Selma, the march is just beginning

Selma, a movie depicting some of the events leading to the passage of the 1965 Voting Rights Act, is not considered a history of the civil rights movement. Nor is it a biopic of the life and times of Martin Luther King, Jr.

The movie strives for none of that. And yet, a movie that so narrowly focuses on the events of the various marches on Selma, Ala. was about much more than that.

The recent tensions related to the shooting death of 18-year-old Michael Brown last August in Ferguson, Mo. plus other race-related tragedies placed race relations squarely in the forefront of American discourse. Certainly, the events depicted in Selma portrayed a shameful period of American history.

Robert Jones, Jr., writer from Brooklyn, N.Y. wrote a treatise aimed at Selma director Ana DuVernay. His open letter to DuVernay begins with imagery of black children and adults facing modern day atrocities that brought to mind the outrages that our forefathers in the fight for equality faced in simply winning the right to vote.

That battle for the right to vote was central to Selma, and brings the voter turnout of the past election into negative relief, as so many people died for the right to do something the law said they should be able to all along.

As depicted in the movie, Alabama Gov. George Wallace pointed out in a conversation with President Lyndon B. Johnson that blacks had the legal right to vote. However, poll taxes they could not afford and other demands made it all but impossible for any more than a minute number of blacks to vote.

Considering all that, is there really an excuse for voter turnout in the 2014 election to be at its lowest point since World War II?

I digress. The point behind Selma may not have been to be a history of the civil rights movement as a whole. It may not have been to depict Martin Luther King, Jr.'s life. It may not even have been specifically to demonstrate how much has changed in 50 years ... and how little has changed in that span.

So what was the point of Selma? All of the above, and much more. Performances by David Oyelowo, who portrayed King, Tom Wilkinson as Johnson and Nigel Thatch, who portrayed Malcolm X and bore an uncanny resemblance to the civil rights activist, and others in the cast showed many of the difficulties behind the scenes in planning marches, in interpersonal relationships and in the big picture fight for equality, including the differences between the various branches of the movement that threatened to tear it apart.

Selma may not have been the perfect movie -- there are disputes about the accuracy of the movie's depiction of the King-Johnson relationship and an actor in the movie said he wished it depicted "just how demented" Wallace was -- but as a power reminder of how far we've come in the fight for equal rights, and how far we haven't come, Selma certainly was worth sitting over two hours to watch.

Zimmerman arrested again, bringing more justice problems to light

George Zimmerman, 31, was arrested Friday night on aggravated assault and domestic violence charges. Photo is in the public domain.

George Zimmerman, the man found not guilty of second-degree murder and manslaughter charges in the wake of the shooting death of unarmed 17-year-old Trayvon Martin in 2012, was arrested Friday on suspicion of aggravated assault and domestic violence with a weapon.

Zimmerman, 31, was arrested at about 10 p.m. in Lake Mary, Fla. and was booked on those charges at the John E. Polk Correctional Facility.

This episode is merely the latest in Zimmerman's checkered history with the law ever since his trial and the events leading up to it gained national attention. He was pulled over in Texas on July 31, 2013, just two weeks after his acquittal in the Martin case. A few months later, he was suspected of getting into an altercation with his then-girlfriend in November 2013. He was arrested on domestic violence battery, aggravated assault, and criminal mischief charges, which he denied. He posted $9,000 bail and his then-girlfriend opted not to press charges.

On top of those charges, a man said in September that Zimmerman threatened to kill him during a road rage incident.

Clearly, Zimmerman's track record is a spotty one. Even if he weren't guilty of any of the charges against him, the fact that he's been in police crosshairs so frequently ever since he first shot Martin casts an even longer shadow of doubt over the verdict. Let's be clear. Zimmerman has been charged with crimes, but has not been convicted. With that said, each incident that causes his name to appear in national headlines casts the verdict in even worse relief.

This particular incident in and of itself may or may not be directly related to recent tragedies that have increased racial tensions to their highest level in 22 years, but justice and race relations do not operate in a vacuum. Not only that, but questions about the neighborhood watch coordinator who continually runs afoul of the law don't paint a rosy picture for Lake Mary.

Recent events have made it clear that a major overhaul is needed in the justice system and in how those who are sworn to protect our communities operate. However, laws alone won't bring the change that's needed. Citizen panels who advise the police but don't have teeth in being able to keep them in line won't get the job done.

Both those who oppose police brutality and those who say they support the police make valid points, but when New York City police officers turn their backs on New York Mayor Bill de Blasio in obvious mutiny and an Indiana officer prints T-shirts with the sloan "Breathe Easy, Don't Break The Law" in an obvious slam on those who wore T-shirts with the slogan "I can't breathe," it only aggravates the us vs. them atmosphere that exists between police and citizens.

It's going to take the community and police working together to ensure that people don't live in fear of police and the police can do their jobs without fear that a 12-year-old will wield a pellet gun, as Tamir Rice did on Dec. 5 when he was shot dead. It's also going to take a much more careful evaluation of other things such as racial profiling.

The justice system was put in place with safeguards that are meant to protect the innocent. When those safeguards result in juries getting it wrong, the problems make the system look worse than it is, regardless of whether Zimmerman is not guilty of these latest charges.

When a joke is no laughing matter

Jokes in newsrooms are often freeflowing and are frequently profane. They’re often riotously funny for the people involved in what is a stressful job.

That is, they’re funny until the jokes get into print.

That’s a lesson The News-Enterprise in Hardin County, Kentucky found out the hard way.

During the publication of Thursday’s edition, two copy editors decided to make a joke out of a quote from Sheriff John Ward about why people go into law enforcement.

In a paraphrased statement, the newspaper reported that Ward said they do so “because they have a desire to shoot minorities.”

As editor Ben Sheroan wrote in an editorial recounting the critical blunder, “Sheriff Ward is not responsible for the statement. He said nothing of the sort.”

The result of the major error is that two copy editors now find themselves out of a job, a reporter finds herself with major egg on her face through no fault of her own and, as Sheroan wrote, the newspaper blew years of trust up in a cloud of smoke.

Sheroan wrote that many angry callers demanded to know if anyone proofreads the newspaper before it goes into print.

Unfortunately, as he wrote, “that’s where the error took place.

“A function and process designed to rid the news pages of error instead added a terrible one that altered the reporter’s original sentence,” he wrote.

To his credit, he also didn’t try to offer a justification for what happened.

“No reasonable excuse can exist.”

Adding in a joke that makes it into print and embarrasses a newspaper is bad enough. Years ago, a copy editor put in a placeholder caption for a person he or she was trying to identify and wrote, “some [expletive].” Unfortunately for everyone involved, that expletive referring to the performer of an act of sexual intercourse made it into print.

Another embarrassing mistake happened when The Bucks Local News, a newspaper based in Pennsylvania, printed an insult of Philadelphia Phillies outfielder Domonic Brown referring to the unusual spelling of his first name.

“*NFP: DOMONIC IS SPELLED RIGHT, HE'S JUST AN IDIOT*”

“NFP” stands for Not for Publication. It was apparently intended for copy editors to not try to spell Domonic in a more traditional manner. Instead, it resulted in a major embarrassment, which resulted in writer Matthew Friedman writing, “the only idiot in this case is me.”

Perhaps in Friedman’s case it was. But these cases point to a critical flaw when it comes to journalism, in particular print media. Story after story of newspapers cutting jobs and some newspapers closing their doors have been rampant over the years. So, too, were directives from newspaper management to “do more with less.”

There’s a huge flaw in that directive. Too often, staffs have been cut to the bone, and in some cases, into the bone, leaving overworked reporters and editors, some of whom end up taking on added responsibilities that they aren’t trained in or aren’t good at.

Some newspapers require their reporters to take photos instead of having a photographer. Some reporters can take photos well. Some can’t. Either way, a reporter having to take photos will see the quality of his or her work suffer in the process.

If a newspaper or a chain of papers takes away a copy editor from a large copy desk, it may have a minimal impact. But if it’s several copy editors who go, it makes it much harder for the people who are left to catch mistakes or write captions or headlines facing mounting deadline pressure.

None of that excuses the horrible mistake on Thursday that resulted in an embarrassing error that looks even worse considering the state of race relations in this country. It shows an appalling lack of sense on the part of the copy editors involved to even make the joke, let alone to allow the joke to make it into print.

The impact to the newspaper itself is a clear loss of credibility, major embarrassment for the reporter involved for that mistake to appear in a story with her byline on it, and a community that is now up in arms. In an age of heightened racial tensions, the impact could have been much, much worse.

Councilman's "apology" was hardly one at all

Frederick County (Md.) Councilman Kirby Delauter backtracked on Wednesday from his threat to sue The Frederick News-Post for using his name without his permission.

Sounds good, right? Someone admitting when he’s wrong, which seems all too rare in this day and age, and doing so soon after committing the epic gaffe that turned him from locally known at best into a First Amendment villain sounds admirable.

Not so fast.

Delauter’s screed in response to the outcry he caused by threatening to sue reporter Bethany Rodgers was no apology. Hell, it wasn’t even a non-apology apology, which I’ve written about in the past.

“Of course, as I am an elected official, The Frederick News-Post has the right to use my name in any article related to the running of the county -- that comes with the job,” Delauter said in a statement.

“So yes, my statement to the Frederick News-Post regarding the use of my name was wrong and inappropriate. I’m not afraid to admit when I’m wrong.”

Not afraid to admit when he’s wrong, perhaps. But nowhere in the statement do I see the words “I’m sorry.” There’s an acknowledgement of letting his temper get the best of him, and an admission that it sometimes escalates rather than calms tense situations.

But there isn’t the most important, most basic element of an apology. The words “I’m sorry.” Hell, even “I apologize” would have been more welcome than their absence. Saying you made a mistake but then not pledging to take concrete steps to ensure that mistake doesn’t happen again is only doing part of the job.

Perhaps acknowledging the First Amendment was a good step in the right direction for Delauter, but with this statement not truly being apology, just merely a backtrack, it reads as more like a snarky response to the sudden dragging of his name through a much larger swath of mud than Frederick County, Maryland. Instead, Delauter’s statement was reminiscent of former congressional staffer Elizabeth Lauten’s non-apology in the wake of her criticism of first daughters Sasha and Malia Obama.

If there is one good thing to come from this episode, it’s the prospect that media -- both traditional and otherwise -- still can hold elected officials and those who work for them accountable. That’s something that journalists around the world need to continue doing to prevent the next Kirby Delauter from picking a fight with the media and the people he represents.

An act of terror strikes France

Two armed gunmen stormed the Paris office building of a satirical newspaper and killed 12 people in a brutal attack early Wednesday morning.


The gunmen allegedly shouted "we have avenged the prophet!" during their assault on the Charlie Hebdo headquarters, as they symbolically took aim at a newspaper that has been accused of "mocking, baiting and needling French Muslims" by a Financial Times columnist.

Obviously, they did more than kill 12 people, including the top editor and lead cartoonist. This cowardly act is an affront against the principle of freedom of expression. Even though the attack seemingly happened a world away, it is an attack against all journalists, especially ones who turn a critical eye toward religious figures.

Unfortunately, this sort of attack is far too common. Not just the act of shooting people dead itself, but the act of seeking retribution for insults against the Prophet Muhammad, be they real or perceived.

One of the few pieces I wrote in years past on this blog that remains in place is a piece I wrote when an Islamic group took offense to cartoons published by a Danish newspaper back in 2006. As much as I try to be respectful of other people and other cultures, I can't wrap my brain around being so thin-skinned as to take offense to any insults to any religious figure. That sort of hypersensitivity is far worse than any sense of "political correctness running amok." It's far more dangerous than any so-called "pussyfication" of society.

Lives are at stake. People have lost their lives due to jihad over insults. Even if Charlie Hebdo were "baiting" French Muslims, it's a satirical newspaper, possibly akin to the French version of The Onion.

Rather than take offense to any real or perceived insults to any religious faith, a far more productive response to cartoons or criticism of the faith would be defending the faith by making counter arguments in support of the faith. Might doesn't always make right.

My heart breaks for the families and friends of the victims, the 12 people who lost their lives and the five others who were critically injured. We must all take this as a call to action to ensure that people of conscience can feel free to express themselves without fear of retribution.

On Kirby Delauter and his so-called rights

Until the past couple of days, I'd never heard of Kirby Delauter.

He's a local politician in my home state of Maryland. Specifically, he's a member of the Frederick County Council.

So what did he do to become so famous (or infamous, as the case may be)?

He threatened to sue The Frederick News-Post for using his name without permission.

"Use my name again unauthorized and you'll be paying for an attorney," Delauter wrote in a Facebook post directed at a News-Post reporter As if any news outlet needs permission to use the name of public figures when they do public figure things.

I won't bore you all with a detailed deconstruction of just how idiotic this makes Delauter look. The News-Post does a nice job of that in an editorial with a brilliant piece of trolling thrown in for good measure.

I encourage you all to read the editorial itself, which I included in the link above. If you'd rather not, each first letter of the editorial spells out Delauter's name.

I won't be a copycat and do that here, but I was tempted. Boy was I tempted.

Besides the First Amendment discussion the News-Post and other outlets were so quick to trumpet as giving media the right to use his name, there's another element that makes Delauter's threat laughable. Namely, in the context of Frederick County, Maryland, he's a public figure. If someone were to write something or say something disparaging about Delauter in Montana, he might have a case because he's not a public figure there.

But this isn't about Montana or Dubuque, Iowa or Portland, Maine. This is about Maryland. This is about Frederick County, where he is a public figure, or at least a limited purpose public figure. As such, Delauter would have to prove there was actual malice on the part of the newspaper in printing his name.

Granted, the editorial might be used as evidence of such malice because of its expert trolling job. But I doubt it. It likely would be considered an act of public commentary. It would be considered part of a newspaper doing its job by being a public watchdog over those who are supposed to represent us or to pass laws to protect us.

Regardless of public figure or First Amendment issues involved, the act of threatening a newspaper with a lawsuit because they used his name simply fails the smell test. It's an attempt to intimidate the news media from doing its watchdog duty.

I hope Delauter has plenty of money if he wants to go ahead with suing the News-Post or anyone else who has suddenly decided to use his name. Now that he's made a fool of himself, he may now be a national public figure, which would make his case even more spurious than it already was.

Nice going, Kirby Delauter.

R.I.P. Stuart Scott

There are some losses that just take more out of you than others.

Stuart Scott's death after a courageous battle with cancer at age 49 is one of those losses.

Some of my friends essentially grew up watching Scott rattle off catch phrases such as "booyah!" and "as cool as the other side of the pillow. I was already in my early 20s when he made his debut on ESPN, so I didn't get the same chance as my younger friends did.

I may not have always connected with some of his catch phrases, but I did connect with his inspirational battle with cancer. As a cancer survivor myself, I rooted for him to beat the disease.

When most of us think of beating a disease, we think of eradicating its existence from our bodies. We think of living decades beyond a diagnosis. We think of succumbing only to the ravages of old age.
Scott reminded us all that merely beating a diagnosis or sending diseased cells away from your body alone doesn't mean you beat cancer. Last July, when he gave a speech at the ESPY Awards, he explained what it truly means to beat cancer and other diseases like it.

"When you die, it does not mean that you lose to cancer," he said in words that take on a whole new meaning now. "You beat cancer by how you live, why you live, and in the manner in which you live."

In 2006, I was in my first year as the managing editor of The Prince George's Sentinel, a weekly newspaper in Maryland. In November of that year, I was diagnosed with testicular cancer. In the days leading up to the surgery and then the doctor's appointment where I found out what type of cancer it was, the fear and the uncertainty held a vise-like grip over me. Realizing that I could be battling for my life was a scary thought for someone who was still in his early 30's.

I was fortunate. The cancer I had was a seminoma. Long story short: It was the best possible outcome other than not having cancer at all. I found out on Dec. 1 that year that all the markers after my surgery came back normal, meaning the cancer did not metastasize. I went through single-dose chemotherapy, and just a day or so later, had a conversation with a friend who told me I'd never seemed more alive that I was at that moment.

Normally, I'm a very private person and wouldn't think to share my demons with others. I went public with my cancer battle. I wanted people to learn my story and possibly save their lives by going to the doctor. I don't consider myself in the same category of Scott or Lance Armstrong, who also survived testicular cancer. But I am grateful that I'm still among the living.

As painful as it is to write a tribute to someone who has left this world far too soon, I do so with Fleetwood Mac's "Beautiful Child" playing in my head. It's a tiny sliver of comfort in an hour of loss.

Goodbye, Stuart. You truly were "as cool as the other side of the pillow." And now, you will always be that way.