|
What the Editors at the Globe Had to Say
Not much, really.
Here’s the story.
Let’s go back to September 9th when I wrote of my concerns to an editor at the Globe who I thought might be able to shed some light on the fallacies I identified for him. Who, I asked, had altered the facts?
On September 11th, having not heard back, and thinking this a serious matter, I wrote another editor, with a copy of the detail.
I received a note back expressing concern and suggesting that I contact another editor, which I did, and from whom I got a phone call expressing the same concerns and promising to investigate and get back to me.
This being a rather simple matter to explore (there was a tape recording of the interview), I was concerned, when, a week later, I had not heard back. And so on September 19th, I wrote this same editor again, asking for clarification.
In his email back to me, I was told curtly that the investigation was ongoing, and that “I will update you when I can.”
Several more days passed with no response, until September 24th, when I called the reporter who wrote the article and found out that he had consulted his lawyer and was preparing to sue Oceanstone for defamation of character.
What???
Defamation of character???
It turned out that he was so incensed that we would question the credibility of the piece, that he was preparing to sue us on the grounds that his relationship with the Globe would be threatened if we questioned his credibility.
And so I pressed the Globe for an answer: politely, but firmly. First one editor, then another. But nothing was forthcoming. Not even a response.
Far out.
Here we stand, the subject of what appears to us to be a fictious story (regarded as same by friends who know our operation), caught between a cone of silence and a lawsuit.
All I want is an answer to my question.
A couple of months passed.
The flurry of inquiries died back: my emails, polite, but to the point, received no replies, but the question - a big one - lingered. Who altered the facts?
As of this update (December 28, 2008) we still do not know.
A recent letter from the Globe has offered us 200 words of editorial space in their Letters to the Editor column over which, of course, they hold editing rights...but this, with respect and gratitude, leaves us in the same box with the same unanswered question: "Who altered the facts in the article about Oceanstone?" Or, perhaps, the bigger question that is begged by this incident: "What are the ethical standards of the major newspapers in this country?"
Being unwilling to go through a legal battle with anyone, let alone the Globe and Mail, or its reporters, and having avoided such legal misadventures to this point in my life, I chose to write this note, and to unfold the situation in the court of public opinion, in which, Dear Reader, you are a juror.
Thoughts always welcome. Write me HERE if you wish.
I shall keep you posted.
RM
| 
