Friday is usually a slow news day, but not today:
San Jose Inside has a detailed story about a chief suspect behind San Jose Revealed -- Phil Bump... You should definitely check it out.
(Mission City Lantern also chimes in...)
Mr. Bump: If you would like to respond to these charges, shoot Watch Dog an email...
Friday, July 24, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
SJR blogged TODAY that the info on SJI is not true~
Kathleen, are you naive enough to believe it? The denial on the San Jose Revealed site was not even a denial. It was an attack on Metro and the Mission City Lantern. The author does not say he is not Phil Bump. Read carefully. It makes me believe that San Jose Inside got it right.
Anonymous,
Not naive just waiting for the facts. You know, something the Metro doesn't always provide?
The Metro did their own great job of attacking people on SJI in their reveal of this situation.
Well the "investigation" itself was more of a hit piece than investigative journalism. None of the actual of evidence is revealed.
And the author says that they have already debunked supposed ties to labor.
Didn't you used to work at Inside, Watch Dog? What happened with that? Do you still have some connections over there to see if the claims are real?
Kathleen,
I agree that the Metro/SJ Inside story had a lot of circumstantial evidence and one suggestion of hard "electronic evidence" that was never spelled out.
However, if Phil Bump was innocent I think he would just say "it's not me." That's what Ash Pirayou did.
Non-answers from Bump and silence from Cindy Chavez and Steve Preminger suggest there's something here.
Metro won't win a Pulitzer with this story, but they clear hit something with their digging.
Anonymous,
Phil Bump has publicly denied being SJR. Cindy and Steve don't have to defend themselves to anyone, whether they are involved or not. Why should they? I respect the right of SJR and Watch Dog to remain anonymous. Who cares who run these blogs? Half the time, the Metro run SJI, doesn't name the person writing their columns, and I could care less about that too.
My objection to ousting SJR is the hypocrisy of it all. It seems like immaturity and sour grapes to me. It also seems like one person, who shall go nameless, feels threatened that they don't control the flow of information the way they once did, and is now being held accountable for THEIR bad behaviors, bias reporting, and the spreading of misinformation.
Any way, gossip might be entertaining but it can ruin lives, businesses, relationships, and careers. I personally object to this type of destructive and irresponsible media because I have been a victim of that myself upon occasion, and have had associates who have been harmed by these same kinds of vengeful campaigns. It is hurtful and has serious consequences that cannot be repaired in some cases. I have chosen not to engage in further discussions on SJI on SJR because I personally see it for the nonsense, and hypocrisy that it is. I think it is time that we all move on to more important matters.
Post a Comment