I was too harsh in my criticism of two Kansas City Star reporters in my last post, and today I’m going to try to make amends.
I’m not going to steer away from warranted criticism of The Star and other papers in the future, but I am going to be more careful with my wording and also make a better effort to verify things I present as fact.
First, I related that a friend, a former KC Star colleague, told me that a young reporter named Ian Cummings wore a T-shirt and jeans when he went to interview R. Crosby Kemper III, Kansas City Public Library director, last week. My friend got that from a friend who is a top manager at the library.
I could easily have emailed or called Cummings and found out if that was true, but instead I went with my friend’s information. Bad move. Cummings sent me an email a several hours after the post was up, saying he had worn a Polo-type shirt and slacks.
I quickly posted a comment noting what Cummings had said — although I still questioned the propriety of wearing a Polo shirt to an interview with a person of Kemper’s stature.
Cummings was under the impression I was going to change the original paragraph in the blog, and from a later email he sent, I got the impression he was disappointed in the way I handled the “correction.”
I don’t shrink from corrections, but they often don’t look like the formal corrections you see in The Star and other papers. Most blogs have a personal, informal tone and that’s what I shoot for here.
In any event, my apologies to Ian Cummings, but, like I said in my follow-up comment yesterday, reporters should be ready to shift gears, sartorially and otherwise, depending on the nature of their assignments. Casual Fridays are not always observed in executive suites, and whatever Cummings wore to his interview with Crosby Kemper, he had library officials talking.
**
I also criticized reporter Steve Vockrodt for what I deemed to be “lazy” reporting on a weekend story about a Nevada U.S. District Court judge having ordered a former payday lender from our area to pay $1.3 billion to the Federal Trade Commission for cheating several million people out of their money.
My main objection to the story was it included no indication that the defendant, Scott Tucker, would probably never pay anything close to $1.3 billion. A lot of his profits are undoubtedly gone, and besides, first-level court judgments often get altered as the cases forward on appeal.
Vockrodt called and said he didn’t get the court ruling until Saturday (the story appeared in Sunday’s paper), when it would have been very difficult to identify and contact sources who might have offered comments tempering the prospect of Tucker ever making full restitution. He also made it clear he was unhappy with my assessment he was guilty of lazy reporting.
Vockrodt said he planned to do a follow-up story, and today he did so. Today’s story says, among other things, that The FTC has estimated Tucker’s liquid assets are $106 million. My guess is the FTC will get far less than that.
…If I had to write it again, I would not have used the word “lazy.” I would have said, simply, that Vockrodt, a veteran business reporter, should not have left readers with the impression that the FTC would be collecting anything close to $1.3 billion from Tucker. He wasn’t lazy; he just knew better.
JimmyCsays: At the juncture of journalism and daily life in KC 
FWIW and off-topic, we just received a letter from The Star saying our subscription will go up “slightly.” Actually, our 4-week payment for paper and digital access went from 30.99 to 37.96, which is a 22% increase. Gah! That is not a slight increase by any measure.
Did the letter say what you were currently paying, or did you have to look that up? Most times when The Star levels a rate hike, the letter doesn’t compare the current and new rates; they’d rather you didn’t know it was 22 percent.
The letter did not state my current payment. I compared it on my own. The word “slight” burned my biscuits.
Jim….
It’s YOUR blog, you have the right to use adjectives of your choice (such as “lazy”!). The Star disappoints me daily, but I can’t quite cut it out of my daily routine. It regularly has errors, lousy reporting, misguided information, and not much beef to most worthwhile topics and stories. Use of the word lazy is mild in comparison to some of the language I use after my daily journey through the pages!
Lisa
Those editorial employees are working in difficult circumstances, Lisa, presented to them by McClatchy and other forces beyond their control. I want to support their efforts all I can, and I also want to encourage them to give the readers their best effort. Sometimes that means being critical…I would like to think my criticism of Steve Vockrodt’s first story on the Nevada ruling helped set the stage for the excellent follow-up we saw today. It put the Sunday story in proper perspective.
This is minor, I know, but I’m curious about what Crosby was wearing when Ian interviewed him.
That is funny, Karen…Leave it to you to turn the issue on its head!
Maybe Ian would want to weigh in…
Dear Gentleman Jim,
Nice of you to take consideration and follow up your comments with a correction. However I agree with your first go as I complement you on the follow thru. As society in general dumbs down in attire and critical observations we all are poorer for it. To not appreciate a potential sartorial dynamic that would/could facilitate an interview is lazy and lacking in creativity. Hell one of these days flip flops will be de rigueur I suppose but not now thank heavens. To not comment on the typical smallish punitive damages recovered from corporate thievery these days was an airball for sure.
Thank heavens you stand in the breech. As an avid reader I always look forward to your opined musings as I read at my risk. Go you gadfly go ……..
Jayson — I think The Star needs your wit, verve and unique writing style on the editorial page…Send me your resume and I’ll pass it on to Tony…
Two months ago, the law firm I work for filed on someone’s behalf a consumer fraud suit against the cable giant Comcast . A press release was sent out and Steve Vockrodt did a story on it. Steve did an excellent job. He didn’t just regurgitate the press release. He called the attorney and got a fresh quote from him. He took complicated subject matter and put it in a context that readers could understand. And they attorney he quoted even commented to me on what a great job he did!
Fitz, it’s hard for them to ignore some one of your experience and stature. One wishes they were that responsive to other critiques.
Thanks, John.