Letter to the editor: Disputing details of article on presentation

Posted 2/28/18

I am writing about reporter David Gilbert’s dishonest, factual errors in an article in the Feb. 8 edition of the Herald he wrote, entitled “Historical presentation sparks complaints in …

This item is available in full to subscribers.

Please log in to continue

E-mail
Password
Log in

Don't have an ID?


Print subscribers

If you're a print subscriber, but do not yet have an online account, click here to create one.

Non-subscribers

Click here to see your options for becoming a subscriber.

If you made a voluntary contribution of $25 or more in Nov. 2017-2018, but do not yet have an online account, click here to create one at no additional charge. VIP Digital Access Includes access to all websites


Our print publications are advertiser supported. For those wishing to access our content online, we have implemented a small charge so we may continue to provide our valued readers and community with unique, high quality local content. Thank you for supporting your local newspaper.

Letter to the editor: Disputing details of article on presentation

Posted

I am writing about reporter David Gilbert’s dishonest, factual errors in an article in the Feb. 8 edition of the Herald he wrote, entitled “Historical presentation sparks complaints in Englewood.”

Gilbert attended and sat through my entire lecture, which was about Lt. Col. George Custer. When I spoke, an attendee persistently talked over me and made arbitrary accusations. I responded back to him.

When that occurred, Gilbert alleged that my sponsor, Matt Crabtree, President of the Englewood Historic Preservation Society (EHPS), “took the microphone” from me, ended the talk, and further wrote that I left “moments later.” In actuality, Crabtree only verbally said to end the talk but did not “take the microphone.” I had possession of it and continued answering audience questions. Nor did I leave “moments later” when the talk did end. Instead, I stayed onsite and received people who said they liked my presentation.

Despite that, Gilbert slanted his article suggesting the majority of people resented my presentation. Yet, Gilbert quoted negative criticisms only from the two most disruptive people in the crowd. While Gilbert quoted one attendee’s misinformed views on my talk, he failed to report the latter’s attempts at disrupting my presentation. That represents Gilbert’s irresponsible neglect of reporting all relevant facts.

Gilbert also quoted the viewpoints of another person in attendance without mentioning she angrily interrupted my response to her questioning and who repeatedly talked over me.

Gilbert’s quoting of disruptive people (and not of respectful attendees who might dislike my talk) reflects his lack of credible sources and reveals his bias. His omission of the material fact they were disruptive indicates dishonesty.

Let’s hope more responsible and ethical journalists are still out there.

George Koukeas

Denver

Comments

Our Papers

Ad blocker detected

We have noticed you are using an ad blocking plugin in your browser.

The revenue we receive from our advertisers helps make this site possible. We request you whitelist our site.