Monday, June 11, 2012

Seattle Times Asks Me to Correct and Clarify My Blog

Print Friendly Version of this pagePrint Get a PDF version of this webpagePDF

Lornet Turnbull, journalist with the Seattle Times, contacted me on Friday suggesting I had misrepresented or misunderstood the intention of her story in the Seattle Times in regard to my comments concerning  the silence of activists who seek to redefine marriage following the completion of a very successful signature gathering for R-74. In fact, it was record setting.

I specifically noted the silence of Sen. Ed Murray.

I wrote the Blog on "Silence," linking this June 6 Seattle Times story. (

While I linked the Seattle Times story, I had, as I normally do, read most all of the news sources in the Seattle area and around the state and had not been able to find any comments from those who seek to redefine marriage---particularly a comment from Sen. Ed Murray, the primary sponsor of the law to redefine marriage---a Senator who has seemingly made redefining marriage his life calling.

In the "Silence" blog, I said we would surely hear from Murray and other activists seeking to redefine marriage in the near future.

On June 7, the Seattle Times revised and updated the story and included some comments by Senator Ed Murray and others. I used Sen. Murray's comment that if he should fail in this current attempt to redefine marriage, he will come back, "year after year after year," as the title of Friday's Blog. Making the point that even if he is defeated this time on marriage, he will be back as soon as January 2013 and we should prepare for that reality.

In her email, Turnbull said she felt I was, "presuming to understand why the story was revised and updated."

I told her I was not assigning any motive for her update, but merely pointing out that there were no quotes in any of the news services I reviewed from those leading the campaign to redefine marriage---thus the title about "Silence."

She felt I should clarify my statements because in her updated version of the same story, she quoted from both sides and said, "some of  your readers also read my stories." Again, the point was not about quotes from one or both sides, it was about the fact that Murray and others on his side of the issue had been initially silent in all the news sources I had read, however, I assured our readers we would hear from him and others in their efforts to redefine marriage. Which, indeed we did.

I think Lornet Turnbull tries to be fair in publishing quotes from both sides. She has always been accurate in quoting me over the years.

However, she works for a news organization whose editorial board is anything but unbiased and consistently advocates for the most far left, secular progressive positions and candidates.

You will recall that the Times editorial board said in the last election that John Kosters was well qualified for a congressional seat (District 2) but they could not endorse him because of his social--- pro-life, pro-marriage, positions.

Several journalists at the Seattle Times have told me personally that the editorial board does not influence  their news stories. I want to believe that, but sometimes it is difficult, knowing the extreme position of the board and others within the organization.

Lornet asked if I would clarify my comments, I hope this helps.

Be Vigilant. Be Discerning. Be Prayerful. Be Active. Be Blessed.