Right to the truth
The goal of my letter about Ms. Kossow Nov. 8 letter was to demonstrate Ms. Kossow was factually wrong in her assertions and media bias. The definition of the word “opinion” was at the beginning of my letter and was very clear. Too bad some of you didn’t read it thoroughly.
Good op-ed pages will have opinions that promote critical thinking about a topic or issue. Sadly, the Daily Press continues to print tripe, by anyone who wishes to chime in, versus those who have something pertinent to say. Just as Ms. Kossow didn’t know about crime statistics yet she indicted “all” men with her opinions based on feelings and not facts. I claimed that was irresponsible.
Ms. Wickham wrote, “Ms. Kossow may not have articulated her opinions as clearly as intended”. However, Ms. Kossow had written, “It’s the “norm” for men to abuse, rape, degrade, defame and make women feel they are beneath them in all aspects…” How is that not clearly as intended? I pointed her statement(s) as factually wrong, but Ms. Wickham wrote, I “made her point in his bullying tone…” There is no way on earth you know how I wrote it or what I tone I intended. It’s shameful that people have to resort to labeling or name calling versus facts. Again, if you are basing your opinion on lies and falsehoods and not facts, then please keep it to yourself or get a thick skin for when people call you out on promoting falsehoods.
Saying what you want, without repercussions, is completely irresponsible for anyone. You can’t yell fire in a crowded theater. Doing so, invites a lengthy prison term, if anyone gets hurt or dies. There are repercussions for saying whatever you want and I maintain the Daily Press should participate in more fact checking completely false statements made by writers. Otherwise, it shows their bias to one side.
Ms. Viau wrote I don’t know anything. Shame on you for not knowing what you’re talking about. I used “reported” rape and assault data from the UCR. I didn’t and wouldn’t use data about “unreported crimes” as that data is unreliable to make factual conclusions. I make my conclusions based on fact known to me at the time. Go ahead and make assumptions about me and others, when you are the ones don’t who know what you’re talking about. If any of you out there think the Daily Press is not a biased media outlet then there can be no discussion, as you will not look at facts, or listen to anyone who has a differing viewpoint.
It’s not bullying to say someone is wrong in their assertions, when their facts are wrong. For those who assume I know nothing, then ask yourself this. Are 25 plus years in federal law enforcement, including 14 years in Detroit and Flint, qualifying as having seen and dealt with plenty of violent crime?
I don’t feel shame for defending anyone’s right to the truth.