|← A New Work Ethic||Police Misconduct →|
Every good story told is like a coin, it has two sides one which is a good side of and the other is the bad side of it. This arises due to the writer's way of thinking and what the writer expected to portray to the readers about the story. To support my argument above, I will focus on a story which brought a lot of critisization on the tactics the Spokane newspaper tried to proof that Spokane Mayor Jim west was luring young gay men into sexual relations.
Spokane newspaper got stories that in early 80's and 90's two adults by then children were molested and sodomized by Jim West now the Spokane mayor and his friends. In recent times the mayor have been having affairs with young boys in gay.com website. For the newspaper to prove these allegations, they employed a computer expert to disguise himself as an 18 years old guy and try to chart with the mayor. The expert did start charting with mayor and was even offered internship. This story is greatly criticized and scrutinized by Dan Richman.
On my refutation point of view I would really want to blame the writer of the story by being judgmental in his writing as reaching at conclusions without knowing what really happened. To support my point, the writer did criticize the paper for going beyond their mandate to just report what they find out.As went further and acted as investigators. He does not believe on their point that they only employed the expert to look into matters if the mayor Jim West was really using chat rooms to chat with gay men but not to disguise himself as a young gay man to lure the mayor into trap. Moreover, the writer goes further and asks questions that are meant to lure the readers to look at the matter as he himself see it instead of just writing a journal that will give readers freedom to judge the story by themselves.
The story from my view is improbable because the two adults that accused the mayor of molesting them were convicts and could be out there to ruin Mayor Jim West's name. To add on that the story is also illogical as how could the mayor support anti-gay campaign while he was a gay? On inconsistence point, from early 90's to when mayor was accused by the two men, how come there is no others accusation on him of molestation. The inconvenience is that if the expert went beyond his work duty, how come the paper published what he found out on his off duty work? Lastly, Unprofitability of the story is what was published was Jim West private life and that not any of our concern.
On my confirmation point of view, the writer did usually emphasize on the need of ethics in organizations for the benefit of all and also he goes on to point out the unethical actions that the paper did. The writer asks questions if the ruse is justified, if the mayor did misuse the office power, the reason that made this issue make the mayor a hypocrite and if Spokane paper did act ethically. Moreover he tries not supporting any side fully.
The story might be probable because the mayor agreed he do visit gay sites hence he might be a gay. On the logicality of the story, for the mayor to be going in gay sites, he must be having interest to have an affair with gays. Consistence and how proper the story is, the expert did get involved in romantic texting with the mayor and the mayor was still in gay affairs in 80's hence the mayor is a gay. The convenience of the story is that the people of Spokane needed to know the kind of a person they had as their mayor.profitability of the story is that the mayor would from that day do his work the right way as he now knows the consequences. On my conclusion, the story clearly has its pros and cons but I do believe the advantages of the story and the writer critics do outdo the disadvantages.