Suspicious ferry rider debacle: O'Reilly, Connelly speaking much but saying little

Posted on May 6, 2008 by Seattle Crime Blogger
Back on Veteran's Day, notorious FOX News commentator Bill O'Reilly offered his take on the "suspicious" ferry passengers we covered earlier this morning. Here's the clip (discussion of the P.I. comes in at around 50 seconds):



Before proceeding, let's be clear on a few points:
  • We at Seattle Crime Blog have a collective loathing for Mr. O'Reilly and his supposed "no spin zone";
  • the tactics of ordering cameras upon Roger Oglesby after he had already declined to comment is an extremely sleazy thing to do;
  • Jesse Waters' questions are certainly not "fair" or "balanced"; and
  • bringing in D. Parvaz's totally unrelated statement that "church is a repressive institution" when it has nothing to do with the matter at hand just makes you look like a bunch of ideology-driven assholes...which, of course, you very well may be.
But (and there's always a but)...O'Reilly was right about one thing: the paper was failing its audience by taking the "morally righteous" route. Of course, the whole debacle has got P.I. columnist Joel Connelly on a roll. In this morning's paper, he blasts O'Reilly for his handling of the Oglesby "interview." Fair enough; if Joel stopped there, we might be still rooting for him.

Instead, what follows is a sad case of misplaced judgment. He says:
No crime was committed. No illegal act by the two men was ever alleged or attributed. No effort to sabotage Washington's marine highway was ever found.

The two men were identified and photographed by a fellow passenger for a simple reason: They looked Middle Eastern.
First of all, the men were photographed by the ferry captain, not a fellow passenger. And it wasn't because they "looked Middle Eastern," as the author is so quick to suggest. It was because of what the Times calls "unusual behavior — namely that they were taking pictures below deck, in areas that don't hold much interest for most tourists."

But at this point the author is too far into his epiphany for it to matter...after all, we're just reaching the thesis:
Should a newspaper — in a free country, proud of its history as a melting pot — be stereotyping people as "suspicious" by the pigment of their skin?
Joel is missing the point completely. The newspaper isn't stereotyping at all; they're reporting (or, more accurately in this case, failing to report) on relevant local news, news that people in the community are talking about and that impacts them directly. Ultimately, such reporting should be the central focus of a respected daily paper...no matter what the political leanings of their editorial board.
Tags: , , , , , ,

Suspicious ferry riders not so suspicious after all

Posted on May 6, 2008 by Seattle Crime Blogger
Over at the P.I., they're already gloating about this:
The FBI has called off a global manhunt for two men who looked Middle Eastern and were spotted snapping pictures and demonstrating "suspicious behavior" on a Washington ferry last summer.

[...]

Photos of the pair, taken by Washington State Ferries employees, were released to the news media in August in an effort to identify and locate them, after an investigation found that they "showed an inordinate interest in the operation of the shipboard systems," the FBI said at the time.
Turns out the duo was really just a pair of businessmen from the EU, who visited Seattle last July and wanted to take photos of the boat's interior (since their home country supposedly doesn't have car ferries). So much for an "inordinate interest."

As you'll recall, the P.I. - unlike the Times - refused to run the photo of the men, due to "civil liberties and privacy concerns, which editors felt outweighed the newsworthiness of the images." We're all for those same concerns here at Seattle Crime Blog. Problem is, this isn't a civil liberties issue.

These men were photographed in a public place. There were no names associated with their faces, nor even any information as to what country they hailed from. It's no secret that the Puget Sound's ferry system is a shockingly vulnerable terrorist target, and - rightly or wrongly - two Middle Eastern men taking photos in an obscure location of the boat is going to raise questions. Such is the world we live in.

And in their haste to earn praise as a good liberal paper, editors at the P.I. got ahead of themselves: if you'll recall, the FBI wasn't saying that they knew the men were terrorists. They never claimed that if found, the pair would be locked away at Guantanamo and waterboarded 'til the cows come home. They just wanted to talk with them...and if what happened when the pair came forth two weeks ago is any indication, it would have been determined that the men's actions were innocent enough to warrant them walking free.

Sure, the P.I. was right this time. But it would be foolish to underplay the threat of Islamic extremism in the name of political correctness. And, like a certain neighborhood blog we recently called out for not doing their job, the P.I. failed to serve the public's interest by not publishing the photos in question. More concerned about the feelings of two foreigners than the safety of the community, the paper's editors allowed their political biases to impede on good editorial judgment.
Tags: , , , , ,