Regurgitating press releases makes a reporter’s job easy. The journalist needn’t contact people to represent both sides of a story, do research, or anything. That’s what the Seattle Times and the PI did last April, when feds announced a pot crackdown called Operation Green Reaper, and the papers published one-sided articles about the heroic efforts of police, agents, and prosecutors. We called out the reporters as Stupid Fucking Credulous Hacks for giving uncommonly biased coverage specifically to the issue of pot busts. They get both sides of other stories—whaling, plastic bags, etc.—but not pot. Well, now that the defendants in Operation Green Reaper have been prosecuted, the Times has learned its lesson—not by actually asking if the busts reduced pot use, made streets safer, reduced gang violence, or hand any other achievements that would supposedly justify the war on pot—but by removing a reporter’s name from the piece. Yesterday’s article is bylined by Seattle Times Staff. They don’t want to say who wrote it, perhaps, because he or she will be called out as a Stupid Fucking Credulous Hack. Or, it appears, because the federal prosecutor’s office essentially wrote the Times article.

Compare the press release from the prosecutor’s office to the Times article…

Federal prosecutor’s press release:

Following a two and a half week trial, a federal jury today found THIET VAN TRAN, a/k/a David TRAN, 41, of Seattle, guilty of Conspiracy to Manufacture Marijuana and Conspiracy to Commit Money Laundering. TRAN will be sentenced on May 15, 2009, by U.S. District Court Judge Richard A. Jones. These convictions carry a potential penalty of 10 years to life imprisonment, a potential fine of up to $4 million dollars, a term of supervision following release of up to five years, and potential forfeiture of several hundreds of thousands of dollars of drug proceeds, inventory, and property involved in the money laundering offense.

Scribes on Fairview:

Thiet Van Tran, 41, of Seattle, was found guilty in U.S. District Court of conspiracy to manufacture marijuana and conspiracy to commit money laundering. Sentencing is set for May 15, when he could face at least 10 years behind bars and forfeiture of money and assets.

Federal prosecutor’s press release:

The charges against TRAN and Scitek Garden Supply arose in April of 2008, as part of “Operation Green Reaper,” a crackdown on suppliers and financiers of illegal indoor marijuana grows. Twelve others charged as part of Operation Green Reaper already have pleaded guilty to federal marijuana offenses.

Scribes on Fairview:

Tran was swept up last April after a 13-month federal investigation called “Operation Green Reaper.” They arrested a dozen other people and seized some 15,000 pot plants. The other 12 people have already pleaded guilty to federal marijuana charges, prosecutors said.

Federal prosecutor’s press release:

TRAN was the owner of Scitek Garden Supply, LLC, a retail and wholesale outlet located on Pike Street in Auburn, Washington. Evidence at trial established that TRAN and others, through Scitek Garden Supply, knowingly promoted the manufacture of large quantities of marijuana in indoor, residential operations throughout the region, by providing equipment, advice, and supplies, as well as other services, to marijuana growers.

Scribes on Fairview:

Federal prosecutors alleged Tran used his gardening shop, Scitek Garden Supply, to provide equipment, seedlings, supplies and advice to pot growers and laundered up to $1 million in drug money.

Reporters rewrite press releases all the time—usually about restaurant openings or events without much widespread impact. But the war on drugs costs billions a year, kills innocent people in raids, and has resulted in increased drug use. News coverage of any other miserable war would get a some scrutiny after 30 years of empty-handed results. In the service of objectivity, reporters for daily newspapers make a moral virtue of getting “both sides of the story.” The war on pot deserves more than regurgitating government press releases and some scrutiny—at least a fraction the scrutiny our reporters give plastic bags.

13 replies on “The Scribes on Fairview”

  3. But… while the information from the article all came from one source, it wasn’t like there were any judgment/value calls in there as made by the writer’s reporting. The article quotes the prosecuting attorney as saying, “We are going after the individuals behind the scenes that make these [grow operations] possible,” not “We are HEROICALLY going after these VILLIANS that make these FAMILY-DESTROYING operations possible.” The quotations were statements of intent/fact, not judgment.

    Okay, so the article had no depth, but not every story released is going to provide insight as well as straight-up information. It’s a just-the-facts rehash. I can see where you’re coming from in it being a problematic article, since it’s one-sourced, but I don’t think it necessarily makes the article biased.

  4. Holden won’t stop until every article should include a quote from someone saying the coke should be legal and people should do mushrooms on city parks.

    I do think he has his points, but he’s coming off as whiny bitch.

    Also, I fear the day the PI and Times disappears, it will actually force Stranger writers (holden and sanders) to actually do something besides read the local papers and bitch.

  6. So how are they any more stupid fucking credulous hacks than you are, Dominic?

    Someone tells you Adam Kline is ineffective and you just regurgitate that, don’t you? Futurewise and Transportation Choices tell you John Fox is a douchebag and you parrot that like a a litle robot, don’t you?

    Just because Times and P-I reporters suck on one issue doesnt make you any different than they are when it comes to a point of view that *you* want to propagandize.

    When your shit ceases to stink, maybe then you can call out real reporters and pretend to even a shred of credibility. Until such time, you’re just another little whiny brat at the Stranger, not deserving of any respect until you show some to others.

  9. Ivan, you clearly don’t understand the difference between “unbiased” journalism and advocacy journalism.

    The Stranger has always had a bias. They have never claimed to be unbiased. The Stranger practices advocacy journalism. You may not agree with their bias, and that’s fine. But they are at least honest in their slant.

    The Seattle Times, the P-I, and the 4 main local TV news programs all claim to uphold no bias. They claim to be objective. To their credit, they ARE generally unbiased and objective, or as much as they realistically can be.

    But since they hold up that claim of objectivity, I think it is totally fair when Dominic or The Stranger calls them on it when they totally step on their own dick.

    This piece was not objective in any way. It was simply regurgitating the prosecutor’s press release. It was lazy, inept, and violates their own standard of objectivity.

  10. You mean when someone is found guilty of Conspiracy to Manufacture Marijuana and Conspiracy to Commit Money Laundering, the Times should rewrite the names of those criminal offenses lest they be charged of plagiarism? SFCH.

  13. @ 9:

    After 33 years in metropolitan daily newspaper journalism, I think I know the difference between what the Stranger does and what more conventional newspapers do.

    I make no excuses for the stenography practiced by “mainstream” newspapers on the drug issue. My point is that this little pissant Dominic Holden practices the same stenography.

    Just because his medium makes no claim to be “objective” or “balanced” or “evenhanded” doesn’t excuse the shit he writes sometimes.

Comments are closed.