The Gauntlet is laid down; Time for Mr. Toad’s Wild Ride

UNPUBLISHED LETTER TO THE EDITOR OF THE SACRAMENTO NEWS & REVIEW which led to an email exchange with the author of the article commented on. 
(P.S.  Stay tuned to see the article I am working on to submit to Mr. Kempa and the SN&R next week based on my exchange with Mr. Kempa.  It hopefully will be better than Mr. Toad’s Wild Ride!)
 
 
Re “Off the mark: Three former Target employees…” by Dave Kempa(SN&R News, July 18):

As with most major news stories that the Sacramento News & Review writes, this story about the alleged discrimination at the Target warehouse in Woodland, California falls short of hitting the bull’s eye(dar en el blanco) on several accounts. While it presents the surface story very well, it falls short of the mark on the underlying details at a level that makes one question the ability of the writer and the editor(s) assigned to his piece.

If one really wants to get the full story, it would behoove one to go to the story on Huffington Post (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/18/target-diversity-document_n_3618200.html) to get the full story.

Mr. Kempa and the editors of SN&R really should print a full apology to their readers, both in the next print edition and online, for their journalistic malpractice!

Jeffery Cassity
Sacramento

Dave Kempa < davek@newsreview.com> Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 10:53 AM

To: jcassity05@gmail.com

Hey Jeff,

As is often the case with your letters, you mean well but miss the mark.

The story you’ve linked refers to a corporate-wide document on dealing with workplace diversity issues–the sort of document that EVERY large corporation has on file. This isn’t to be confused with the document acquired by the Woodland plaintiffs (which, according to Target, was only distributed at that particular warehouse). Here’s another article (written by the same HuffPo contributor) on the document I reference in my piece: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/09/target-multicultural-tips_n_3566873.html .

The document in the link you sent me wasn’t salient to the lawsuit, so I didn’t include it in my story.

Cheers,
Dave

P.S. – your use of the term “journalistic malpractice” is both telling an amusing.
Dave Kempa
Staff Writer
Sacramento News & Review
Work:
916.498.1234 x1359
Cell: 920.246.0210


 

Jeffery Cassity < jcassity05@gmail.com> Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 6:53 PM

To: Dave Kempa <davek@newsreview.com>

Not telling half the story isn’t relevant, not putting the document in question into context as well as looking at Target’s diversity awareness program isn’t relevant.  I have been in town just two months but I have learned that as much as I may like your publication and would love to write free lance articles for it, I probably would be out of place since I like telling the whole story when I write articles not the 1/2 or less that most writers for your publication are allowed to get away with.
 
Best regards,
 
Jeff C
[Quoted text hidden]


 

Dave Kempa < davek@newsreview.com> Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 8:02 PM

To: Jeffery Cassity <jcassity05@gmail.com>

It’s called news judgment, Jeff. Target’s corporate-level policy isn’t in question here. The treatment and termination of the plaintiffs at the Woodland distribution center is the story, and the document distributed at that location is a part of that story. If you want to blog about Target’s corporate training manuals, knock yourself out. I’ve got better things to do with my time.

Cheers,
Dave

[Quoted text hidden]

> **
>
> ** Dave Kempa

[Quoted text hidden]


 

Jeffery Cassity < jcassity05@gmail.com> Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 8:21 PM

To: Dave Kempa <davek@newsreview.com>

You are right.  It is a waste of time to see if the evidence shows if even the documents in question are discrimatory or taken out of context by an attorney with possibly willing clients.   Newspapers and their writers should never let the whole truth get in the way of a good story, right?
[Quoted text hidden]


 

Dave Kempa < davek@newsreview.com> Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 9:09 PM

To: Jeffery Cassity <jcassity05@gmail.com>

Oh dear, I’m not sure how many times I need to explain this, Jeff. They’re different documents–one corporate, the other, so far as we can tell, local. Perhaps understanding what’s salient to a story just isn’t your strong suit. Sadly, I’d hoped a fellow Wisconsinite would be able to follow.

There is a solution to this, Jeff: Write. Write to your heart’s content. Show the world all there is to know about Target’s corporate policies! Don’t leave anything out! Dissect the corporate handbook, page by page, until we get to the very bottom of things, until we answer all mysteries related to and not related to Target Corporation. I want the ontological, Jeff, the teleological. If a tree falls on a target, do we need to tell HR? What aisle is the bleach on? Is this lane open??

Looking forward to your work. Feel free to send links.
Cheers,
Dave

—– Original Message —–
From: Jeffery Cassity <jcassity05@gmail.com>
To: Dave Kempa <
davek@newsreview.com>

[Quoted text hidden]


 

Jeffery Cassity < jcassity05@gmail.com> Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 10:33 PM

To: Dave Kempa <davek@newsreview.com>

I welcome the challenge and will have it to you by next week.
 
 
[Quoted text hidden]

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: