Comments on: Norwich Bulletin Oozes Intellectual Dishonesty in Amero Case http://www.drumsnwhistles.com/2007/03/20/norwich-bulletin-oozes-intellectual-dishonesty-in-amero-case/ ...politics, pictures, pugs and all that jazz Sat, 20 Mar 2010 04:35:31 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Local Newspapers Are NOT Dead, But They Must Evolve - odd time signatures - Blogging life, business, and the internet in 19/7 time http://www.drumsnwhistles.com/2007/03/20/norwich-bulletin-oozes-intellectual-dishonesty-in-amero-case/comment-page-1/#comment-36606 Local Newspapers Are NOT Dead, But They Must Evolve - odd time signatures - Blogging life, business, and the internet in 19/7 time Sun, 25 Mar 2007 09:04:40 +0000 http://www.drumsnwhistles.com/2007/03/20/norwich-bulletin-oozes-intellectual-dishonesty-in-amero-case/#comment-36606 [...] of this was fascinating to me, particularly in light of my recent criticisms of the Norwich Bulletin and my own local newspaper, the Ventura County [...] [...] of this was fascinating to me, particularly in light of my recent criticisms of the Norwich Bulletin and my own local newspaper, the Ventura County [...]

]]> By: Liz Ditz http://www.drumsnwhistles.com/2007/03/20/norwich-bulletin-oozes-intellectual-dishonesty-in-amero-case/comment-page-1/#comment-36450 Liz Ditz Thu, 22 Mar 2007 23:19:20 +0000 http://www.drumsnwhistles.com/2007/03/20/norwich-bulletin-oozes-intellectual-dishonesty-in-amero-case/#comment-36450 More journalistic ooze from the Bulletin: <a href="http://www.norwichbulletin.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070321/OPINION01/703210306/1014/OPINION" rel="nofollow">Our view: State needs better screening process for all school staff</a> <i> As a parent, you put your child on the school bus or drop her off at school, and you want to believe she is in safe hands. You want to believe the people you are entrusting your child to have been screened and trained. Unfortunately, the news is filled with incidences that have made it clear schools and school buses are not always the safe places we hope they are. Just last month, Norwich school bus driver Heather Powell was caught driving faster than 90 mph on Route 2 with two children in a school van. In January, Norwich substitute teacher Julie Amero was found guilty of four counts of risk of injury to a minor for allowing seventh-grade students to see pornography on her computer screen. Both women passed the basic criminal screening process, which includes federal and state fingerprint checks, to get their jobs. Basic is the problem. When adults are entrusted to care for children, they need more than basic screening. New state Department of Motor Vehicle Commissioner Robert Ward already stopped the practice of issuing school bus drivers temporary licenses while a full background check is completed. Ward also instructed department staff to use the same standards that apply to teachers and coaches for criminal screenings, allowing for less flexibility for who gets a license. Ward is pushing for legislation requiring all school bus companies to provide a monthly list of drivers to the department so background checks can become routine. It's a good idea to ensure the safety of the state's children. The changes at the motor vehicle department would ensure parity across the state with the level of screening each school bus driver has. It's a start. When it comes to substitute teachers, there is no such thing as parity in hiring procedures between districts in the state. A Norwich Bulletin survey of districts in February revealed each district has a different pay scale and a different procedure for hiring substitutes. All must adhere to the state's tiered criteria of first searching for certified teachers in specific subjects, then certified teachers, and then people with bachelor's degrees. A superintendent can determine when a candidate does not meet the criteria, but is still qualified. Many districts do not interview candidates, however. They review a resume. Training is minimal, if done at all. All districts reviewed substitutes with class visits, but how often and for how long is unclear. Connecticut is a state that prefers individual municipalities determine their own courses of action. This issue is too important. The state Department of Education has to look at the situation much like the motor vehicle department did. It must establish minimal requirements for substitute teachers and the procedures for hiring them. An interview process would seem to be the minimum requirement, as well as in-depth reference checks. Substitutes are entrusted with your children, sometimes for a full day and sometimes only for one class period. Parents, you have a right to know what procedures your school district is using to hire substitutes. And, you have the right to demand more of them.</i> More journalistic ooze from the Bulletin:

Our view: State needs better screening process for all school staff


As a parent, you put your child on the school bus or drop her off at school, and you want to believe she is in safe hands. You want to believe the people you are entrusting your child to have been screened and trained.

Unfortunately, the news is filled with incidences that have made it clear schools and school buses are not always the safe places we hope they are.

Just last month, Norwich school bus driver Heather Powell was caught driving faster than 90 mph on Route 2 with two children in a school van. In January, Norwich substitute teacher Julie Amero was found guilty of four counts of risk of injury to a minor for allowing seventh-grade students to see pornography on her computer screen.

Both women passed the basic criminal screening process, which includes federal and state fingerprint checks, to get their jobs. Basic is the problem. When adults are entrusted to care for children, they need more than basic screening.

New state Department of Motor Vehicle Commissioner Robert Ward already stopped the practice of issuing school bus drivers temporary licenses while a full background check is completed. Ward also instructed department staff to use the same standards that apply to teachers and coaches for criminal screenings, allowing for less flexibility for who gets a license.

Ward is pushing for legislation requiring all school bus companies to provide a monthly list of drivers to the department so background checks can become routine. It’s a good idea to ensure the safety of the state’s children.

The changes at the motor vehicle department would ensure parity across the state with the level of screening each school bus driver has. It’s a start.

When it comes to substitute teachers, there is no such thing as parity in hiring procedures between districts in the state. A Norwich Bulletin survey of districts in February revealed each district has a different pay scale and a different procedure for hiring substitutes. All must adhere to the state’s tiered criteria of first searching for certified teachers in specific subjects, then certified teachers, and then people with bachelor’s degrees. A superintendent can determine when a candidate does not meet the criteria, but is still qualified.

Many districts do not interview candidates, however. They review a resume. Training is minimal, if done at all. All districts reviewed substitutes with class visits, but how often and for how long is unclear.

Connecticut is a state that prefers individual municipalities determine their own courses of action. This issue is too important. The state Department of Education has to look at the situation much like the motor vehicle department did. It must establish minimal requirements for substitute teachers and the procedures for hiring them. An interview process would seem to be the minimum requirement, as well as in-depth reference checks.

Substitutes are entrusted with your children, sometimes for a full day and sometimes only for one class period. Parents, you have a right to know what procedures your school district is using to hire substitutes. And, you have the right to demand more of them.

]]> By: Liz Ditz http://www.drumsnwhistles.com/2007/03/20/norwich-bulletin-oozes-intellectual-dishonesty-in-amero-case/comment-page-1/#comment-36449 Liz Ditz Thu, 22 Mar 2007 23:17:40 +0000 http://www.drumsnwhistles.com/2007/03/20/norwich-bulletin-oozes-intellectual-dishonesty-in-amero-case/#comment-36449 More journalistic ooze from the Bulletin: <a href="http://www.norwichbulletin.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070321/OPINION01/703210306/1014/OPINION" rel="nofollow">Our view: State needs better screening process for all school staff <i> As a parent, you put your child on the school bus or drop her off at school, and you want to believe she is in safe hands. You want to believe the people you are entrusting your child to have been screened and trained. Unfortunately, the news is filled with incidences that have made it clear schools and school buses are not always the safe places we hope they are. Just last month, Norwich school bus driver Heather Powell was caught driving faster than 90 mph on Route 2 with two children in a school van. In January, Norwich substitute teacher Julie Amero was found guilty of four counts of risk of injury to a minor for allowing seventh-grade students to see pornography on her computer screen. Both women passed the basic criminal screening process, which includes federal and state fingerprint checks, to get their jobs. Basic is the problem. When adults are entrusted to care for children, they need more than basic screening. New state Department of Motor Vehicle Commissioner Robert Ward already stopped the practice of issuing school bus drivers temporary licenses while a full background check is completed. Ward also instructed department staff to use the same standards that apply to teachers and coaches for criminal screenings, allowing for less flexibility for who gets a license. Ward is pushing for legislation requiring all school bus companies to provide a monthly list of drivers to the department so background checks can become routine. It's a good idea to ensure the safety of the state's children. The changes at the motor vehicle department would ensure parity across the state with the level of screening each school bus driver has. It's a start. When it comes to substitute teachers, there is no such thing as parity in hiring procedures between districts in the state. A Norwich Bulletin survey of districts in February revealed each district has a different pay scale and a different procedure for hiring substitutes. All must adhere to the state's tiered criteria of first searching for certified teachers in specific subjects, then certified teachers, and then people with bachelor's degrees. A superintendent can determine when a candidate does not meet the criteria, but is still qualified. Many districts do not interview candidates, however. They review a resume. Training is minimal, if done at all. All districts reviewed substitutes with class visits, but how often and for how long is unclear. Connecticut is a state that prefers individual municipalities determine their own courses of action. This issue is too important. The state Department of Education has to look at the situation much like the motor vehicle department did. It must establish minimal requirements for substitute teachers and the procedures for hiring them. An interview process would seem to be the minimum requirement, as well as in-depth reference checks. Substitutes are entrusted with your children, sometimes for a full day and sometimes only for one class period. Parents, you have a right to know what procedures your school district is using to hire substitutes. And, you have the right to demand more of them.</i></a> More journalistic ooze from the Bulletin:

Our view: State needs better screening process for all school staff


As a parent, you put your child on the school bus or drop her off at school, and you want to believe she is in safe hands. You want to believe the people you are entrusting your child to have been screened and trained.

Unfortunately, the news is filled with incidences that have made it clear schools and school buses are not always the safe places we hope they are.

Just last month, Norwich school bus driver Heather Powell was caught driving faster than 90 mph on Route 2 with two children in a school van. In January, Norwich substitute teacher Julie Amero was found guilty of four counts of risk of injury to a minor for allowing seventh-grade students to see pornography on her computer screen.

Both women passed the basic criminal screening process, which includes federal and state fingerprint checks, to get their jobs. Basic is the problem. When adults are entrusted to care for children, they need more than basic screening.

New state Department of Motor Vehicle Commissioner Robert Ward already stopped the practice of issuing school bus drivers temporary licenses while a full background check is completed. Ward also instructed department staff to use the same standards that apply to teachers and coaches for criminal screenings, allowing for less flexibility for who gets a license.

Ward is pushing for legislation requiring all school bus companies to provide a monthly list of drivers to the department so background checks can become routine. It’s a good idea to ensure the safety of the state’s children.

The changes at the motor vehicle department would ensure parity across the state with the level of screening each school bus driver has. It’s a start.

When it comes to substitute teachers, there is no such thing as parity in hiring procedures between districts in the state. A Norwich Bulletin survey of districts in February revealed each district has a different pay scale and a different procedure for hiring substitutes. All must adhere to the state’s tiered criteria of first searching for certified teachers in specific subjects, then certified teachers, and then people with bachelor’s degrees. A superintendent can determine when a candidate does not meet the criteria, but is still qualified.

Many districts do not interview candidates, however. They review a resume. Training is minimal, if done at all. All districts reviewed substitutes with class visits, but how often and for how long is unclear.

Connecticut is a state that prefers individual municipalities determine their own courses of action. This issue is too important. The state Department of Education has to look at the situation much like the motor vehicle department did. It must establish minimal requirements for substitute teachers and the procedures for hiring them. An interview process would seem to be the minimum requirement, as well as in-depth reference checks.

Substitutes are entrusted with your children, sometimes for a full day and sometimes only for one class period. Parents, you have a right to know what procedures your school district is using to hire substitutes. And, you have the right to demand more of them.

]]> By: karoli http://www.drumsnwhistles.com/2007/03/20/norwich-bulletin-oozes-intellectual-dishonesty-in-amero-case/comment-page-1/#comment-36439 karoli Thu, 22 Mar 2007 20:11:43 +0000 http://www.drumsnwhistles.com/2007/03/20/norwich-bulletin-oozes-intellectual-dishonesty-in-amero-case/#comment-36439 Hi everyone, The NB Julie Amero feature is still available on their site -- <a href="http://www.norwichbulletin.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/99999999/NEWS01/70223080&template=theme&theme=JULIE%20AMERO%20TRIAL" rel="nofollow">click here</a>. I think they may have tweaked their link a bit. That said, I agree with what you two are saying. :) Hi everyone,

The NB Julie Amero feature is still available on their site — click here. I think they may have tweaked their link a bit.

That said, I agree with what you two are saying. :)

]]> By: jo http://www.drumsnwhistles.com/2007/03/20/norwich-bulletin-oozes-intellectual-dishonesty-in-amero-case/comment-page-1/#comment-36436 jo Thu, 22 Mar 2007 18:17:09 +0000 http://www.drumsnwhistles.com/2007/03/20/norwich-bulletin-oozes-intellectual-dishonesty-in-amero-case/#comment-36436 I think you are on the right track, Farsidman. The Amero case and, from what I read online and elsewhere, all the government systems in Norwich, including the school system, cry out for some good investigative reporting. Down here on Long Island, great investigative reporting by “Newsday” has led to the exposure, indictment, conviction and imprisonment of numerous public officials. In one school district, the superintendent, treasurer and others were convicted of stealing millions from the taxpayers. Just yesterday, five fire district commissioners, a fire district treasurer and two others were arrested after being indicted for theft. They are alleged to have stolen well over a million dollars from the taxpayers. It is alleged that the treasurer alone stole about $500,000.00. There is a long list of others who have been brought to justice by Newsday’s investigations. I’d like to see some of that type of investigative reporting done in Norwich. We know that the Norwich Bulletin won’t do it, but what about the Hartford Courant or others? They should recognize that in addition to performing a public service, it does sell newspapers. They might start with Robert Hartz, the Norwich school’s IT “specialist”. Based upon his testimony and his omissions in protecting the school’s computer network, he appears to have been entirely unqualified for his job. How did he get it? Who did he know when he was hired? Did he enhance his job application and/or resume? Did he have a familial, social or other relationship with any of those who hired him or with anyone who had influence over those responsible for hiring him? On the other hand, if he was somewhat qualified and DID know that pop-ups can produce pornography images or that one can be trapped in an endless pornography loop (as any real IT expert knows), did he perjure himself at Julie Amero’s trial? Would he have had a motive to do so? Well, let’s think about it. First, he had his own job to protect and probably a substantial salary to go with it. Second, he was certainly beholdin’ to those who hired him and while protecting himself, he protected them. Third, if the school district was receiving federal funds to be spent on the maintenance of the computer network, did he and the district violate the law and any regulations promulgated pursuant to it by failing to keep the system up to snuff? If so, might that have been a criminal violation? A civil fraud? A basis for the federal government to seek return of the funds and deny future funds? If those funds were received and were not spent on the computer network, where are they? Start digging Hartford Courant. Start digging Tribune. You know how to ask questions and use the Freedom of Information laws. You’ll perform a public service and at the same time sell newspapers. It sounds like Norwich might be ripe for harvest. I think you are on the right track, Farsidman. The Amero case and, from what I read online and elsewhere, all the government systems in Norwich, including the school system, cry out for some good investigative reporting. Down here on Long Island, great investigative reporting by “Newsday” has led to the exposure, indictment, conviction and imprisonment of numerous public officials. In one school district, the superintendent, treasurer and others were convicted of stealing millions from the taxpayers. Just yesterday, five fire district commissioners, a fire district treasurer and two others were arrested after being indicted for theft. They are alleged to have stolen well over a million dollars from the taxpayers. It is alleged that the treasurer alone stole about $500,000.00. There is a long list of others who have been brought to justice by Newsday’s investigations. I’d like to see some of that type of investigative reporting done in Norwich. We know that the Norwich Bulletin won’t do it, but what about the Hartford Courant or others? They should recognize that in addition to performing a public service, it does sell newspapers. They might start with Robert Hartz, the Norwich school’s IT “specialist”. Based upon his testimony and his omissions in protecting the school’s computer network, he appears to have been entirely unqualified for his job. How did he get it? Who did he know when he was hired? Did he enhance his job application and/or resume? Did he have a familial, social or other relationship with any of those who hired him or with anyone who had influence over those responsible for hiring him? On the other hand, if he was somewhat qualified and DID know that pop-ups can produce pornography images or that one can be trapped in an endless pornography loop (as any real IT expert knows), did he perjure himself at Julie Amero’s trial? Would he have had a motive to do so? Well, let’s think about it. First, he had his own job to protect and probably a substantial salary to go with it. Second, he was certainly beholdin’ to those who hired him and while protecting himself, he protected them. Third, if the school district was receiving federal funds to be spent on the maintenance of the computer network, did he and the district violate the law and any regulations promulgated pursuant to it by failing to keep the system up to snuff? If so, might that have been a criminal violation? A civil fraud? A basis for the federal government to seek return of the funds and deny future funds? If those funds were received and were not spent on the computer network, where are they? Start digging Hartford Courant. Start digging Tribune. You know how to ask questions and use the Freedom of Information laws. You’ll perform a public service and at the same time sell newspapers. It sounds like Norwich might be ripe for harvest.

]]> By: Nick4nCt http://www.drumsnwhistles.com/2007/03/20/norwich-bulletin-oozes-intellectual-dishonesty-in-amero-case/comment-page-1/#comment-36425 Nick4nCt Thu, 22 Mar 2007 13:40:51 +0000 http://www.drumsnwhistles.com/2007/03/20/norwich-bulletin-oozes-intellectual-dishonesty-in-amero-case/#comment-36425 The Bulletin in the last 3 days has brought up the Amero case both times in a negative manner and both times hiding behind "editorial opinion" refusing to attach thier name to thier attacks. This paper even goes so far to complain that: "Amero has many supporters, which should not sway the court, as most of them have formed opinions based on limited knowledge of the facts of the case, or simple hearsay." Now as of 9:00AM 3/22/07 if you try to get information from the "Julie Amero Porn Trial" Special section you get a blank page (except for an advertisement) http://www.norwichbulletin.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/99999999/NEWS01/70223080&template=theme&theme=JULIE%20AMERO%20TRIAL This is nothing short of "JOURNALISTIC TERRORISM". How can the community which this paper is supposed to serve accept this type of behavior any longer? How can the community accept it's local paper to hold someones life up to public ridicule while hiding their own identity and while removing what they have published from public scutiny? As another poster suggested... "Toyota? Chelsea Groton? Savings Institute Bank & Trust? Patriot Home Improvement? Why would you wish to have your valued branding associated with such shoddy work?.....as well as Gannett's corporate office ought to be very interested in the standards of journalism being displayed by your newspaper, editorial staff and by your reporters." The time for this is now. The saying " All that is needed for evil to thrive is for good men to remain silent" is more than ever the case with the Bulletin. The Bulletin in the last 3 days has brought up the Amero case both times in a negative manner and both times hiding behind “editorial opinion” refusing to attach thier name to thier attacks.

This paper even goes so far to complain that:

“Amero has many supporters, which should not sway the court, as most of them have formed opinions based on limited knowledge of the facts of the case, or simple hearsay.”

Now as of 9:00AM 3/22/07 if you try to get information from the “Julie Amero Porn Trial” Special section you get a blank page (except for an advertisement)
http://www.norwichbulletin.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/99999999/NEWS01/70223080&template=theme&theme=JULIE%20AMERO%20TRIAL

This is nothing short of “JOURNALISTIC TERRORISM”.

How can the community which this paper is supposed to serve accept this type of behavior any longer?

How can the community accept it’s local paper to hold someones life up to public ridicule while hiding their own identity and while removing what they have published from public scutiny?

As another poster suggested…

“Toyota? Chelsea Groton? Savings Institute Bank & Trust? Patriot Home Improvement? Why would you wish to have your valued branding associated with such shoddy work?…..as well as Gannett’s corporate office ought to be very interested in the standards of journalism being displayed by your newspaper, editorial staff and by your reporters.”

The time for this is now.

The saying ” All that is needed for evil to thrive is for good men to remain silent” is more than ever the case with the Bulletin.

]]> By: farsideman http://www.drumsnwhistles.com/2007/03/20/norwich-bulletin-oozes-intellectual-dishonesty-in-amero-case/comment-page-1/#comment-36305 farsideman Wed, 21 Mar 2007 18:05:29 +0000 http://www.drumsnwhistles.com/2007/03/20/norwich-bulletin-oozes-intellectual-dishonesty-in-amero-case/#comment-36305 Maybe someone should checkout the Norwich Bulletin's editorial board member list and compare it to the school board list, the school employee list, and other related lists. Could be a connection... Maybe someone should checkout the Norwich Bulletin’s editorial board member list and compare it to the school board list, the school employee list, and other related lists. Could be a connection…

]]> By: Nick4nCt http://www.drumsnwhistles.com/2007/03/20/norwich-bulletin-oozes-intellectual-dishonesty-in-amero-case/comment-page-1/#comment-36284 Nick4nCt Wed, 21 Mar 2007 13:51:13 +0000 http://www.drumsnwhistles.com/2007/03/20/norwich-bulletin-oozes-intellectual-dishonesty-in-amero-case/#comment-36284 The Norwich Bulletin is so bad that when I put a copy of it in my cat liter box my cat won't use it ..t jsut says "that would be reduntant. This rag (Norwich Bulletin) is beyond redemption. They claim that everyone else's opinion is based on "hersay"...yet do a search on their own website for any of the major players Loundsberry Fain Hartz any of them and you come away with zero results. How can people be informed when their local paper wont inform them The Norwich Bulletin is so bad that when I put a copy of it in my cat liter box my cat won’t use it ..t jsut says “that would be reduntant.

This rag (Norwich Bulletin) is beyond redemption.

They claim that everyone else’s opinion is based on “hersay”…yet do a search on their own website for any of the major players

Loundsberry
Fain
Hartz

any of them and you come away with zero results.

How can people be informed when their local paper wont inform them

]]> By: Liz Ditz http://www.drumsnwhistles.com/2007/03/20/norwich-bulletin-oozes-intellectual-dishonesty-in-amero-case/comment-page-1/#comment-36226 Liz Ditz Tue, 20 Mar 2007 19:52:54 +0000 http://www.drumsnwhistles.com/2007/03/20/norwich-bulletin-oozes-intellectual-dishonesty-in-amero-case/#comment-36226 The mendacity and vindictiveness of the Norwich Bulletin's coverage of this case turns my stomach. Thanks to you and to Alex Kantor for hammering away at the truth. But, sadly, it's like whack-a-mole. The mendacity and vindictiveness of the Norwich Bulletin’s coverage of this case turns my stomach. Thanks to you and to Alex Kantor for hammering away at the truth.

But, sadly, it’s like whack-a-mole.

]]> By: jo http://www.drumsnwhistles.com/2007/03/20/norwich-bulletin-oozes-intellectual-dishonesty-in-amero-case/comment-page-1/#comment-36224 jo Tue, 20 Mar 2007 14:26:04 +0000 http://www.drumsnwhistles.com/2007/03/20/norwich-bulletin-oozes-intellectual-dishonesty-in-amero-case/#comment-36224 Karoli, I wholeheartedly agree with you: the Norwich Bulletin "viewed this as a way to bump traffic and revenue again". This is precisely what I concluded when I read its most recent editorial and it is why I will not post there. The editorial board simply can't be that stupid. By now, it surely knows the facts. Rather than carry out its obligation to express a responsible opinion based on facts, it chooses to profit on the back of Julie Amero by following the Ann Coulter formula for financial gain. (Outrageous = $$$$$) The Norwich Bulletin should not be sold on newsstands; it should be sold in same aisle as Charmin and Scott toilet tissue. At least in that location it would serve a some useful purpose. (My apologies to Charmin and Scott for this suggestion) Karoli, I wholeheartedly agree with you: the Norwich Bulletin “viewed this as a way to bump traffic and revenue again”. This is precisely what I concluded when I read its most recent editorial and it is why I will not post there. The editorial board simply can’t be that stupid. By now, it surely knows the facts. Rather than carry out its obligation to express a responsible opinion based on facts, it chooses to profit on the back of Julie Amero by following the Ann Coulter formula for financial gain. (Outrageous = $$$$$) The Norwich Bulletin should not be sold on newsstands; it should be sold in same aisle as Charmin and Scott toilet tissue. At least in that location it would serve a some useful purpose. (My apologies to Charmin and Scott for this suggestion)

]]>