A column long article by an Intell reports that a member of the board of the School District of Lancaster is applying to have her record expunged under the Accelerated Rehabilitative Disposition program.
WATCHDOG: The extensive coverage at the time of the event was bad form, since the charge was highly questionable (the accused picked up a $100 bill found lying on the casino floor) and the coverage was way out of proportion and unsympathetic.
The current article is an example arm chair journalism whereby a reporter reads a government report and then rewrites an article from a year earlier, not because it is particularly news worthy but because it is convenient.
In defense, one could assert that the desire was to publicize the Accelerated Rehabilitative Disposition program. But if that were the case, the article would be far shorter and contain more examples.
Are the reporter and editor to be blame? Or is this a manifestation of the decline of the news media due to financial adversity and resulting cut backs in reporting not just in Lancaster, but everywhere?
But cut backs are no excuse to twice vilify a school board volunteer. Better they report last year’s weather
