Comments on Advance Indiana™: Star's Ryerson Hits Back At Holladay: Labels Attack "Erroneous", "Reprehensible" and "Outrageous"

I spoke to someone who was in the newsroom when To...

2006-07-26T17:03:00.000-05:00

I spoke to someone who was in the newsroom when Tolbert collapsed who has no axe to grind and who personally likes Ruth. This person tells me that Ruth is flat out wrong on the timeline. "Way off" is how the person described it to me. In these situations, a minute can seem like hours, but this person assures me that it wasn't anywhere near 15 minutes from the time he collapsed until 911 was called. Ruth's source simply had it wrong.

The Star has a lot at stake here. I doubt Ryerson...

2006-07-26T09:31:00.000-05:00

The Star has a lot at stake here. I doubt Ryerson is totally wrong.

There are credible workplace safety issues or allegations involved here. Let's hope the proper agency(ies) investigate and publicly report their results.

Tolbert was one of those souls you hope you get to know once during your life. A true free spirit. Nothing bothered him. He'd be dismayed at the attention his death is getting. But he'd want us to find the truth.

I didn't always agree with Ruth's columns, but I always found them interesting. One of the posts earlier here, indicated she has a history of inaccuracies. I hope that's not true.

AI correctly observed that Ruth's story changed dramatically.

As for Ryerson's diatribe agianst blogs: I, too, was once a non-blog reader. My initial experiences were not good. But I've grown to appreciate blogs, and I read them for what they are: sharing of ideas. I don't expect the same level of professional conduct as I expect from mainstream media. That is NOT saying the blogs are not credible. It IS acknowledging that mainstreamers and bloggers operate form two different perspectives. I appreciate each perspective.

But I do not regularly look to blogs for the same reasons I regularly look to mainstream media. Night and day.

Sorry, but Ruth has a long history of inaccuracies...

2006-07-25T18:29:00.000-05:00

Sorry, but Ruth has a long history of inaccuracies. She rarely "checked things out" while at the Star, and was the frequent target of complaints from those who were unfairly characterized in her columns. I have no knowledge of the reasons she "retired," but I suspect she was encouraged to do so as a result of the persistent allegations of unprofessional coverage, and was hitting back at the Star as a result. I'm no defender of the Star, but on this one, I'd take Ryerson's version as far more likely to be true.

Holladay's "telling" is different from the "news s...

2006-07-25T17:37:00.000-05:00

Holladay's "telling" is different from the "news story" by the paper raises the issue about the lack of prepareness for emergency situation by the newspaper. In certain situations, a quick response may make a difference in a person living or dying.

We often believe that corporation has a worker's best interest at heart in these situations, but not always which can lead to tragic deaths.

Holladay's telling will encourage individuals in the workplace to be more proactive as first responders, in getting adequate training to make a difference the next time..that's what Katrina was trying to teach us.