In a column, John Baer writes of Joe Paterno:
“His reputation and success collapse under evidence that Joe was party to and, in one critical instance, instigator I nkeeping the truth about Sandusky’s sickening crimes hidden.”
WATCHDOG: Growl: This is an example of columnist using secondary sources or failing to read accurate the original source.
Baer is likely referring to the accusation that Tim Curley met with Paterno and then was reporting what Paterno had to advise. Not true. We will never know what paterno said about the situation. NewsLanc has written about this in the past, as follows:
“CNN had accurately reported an excerpt from a 2001 e-mail that Penn State’s athletic director Tim Curley had sent to Penn State’s president Graham Spanier about the ‘shower Incident’:
“‘ ‘After giving it more thought and talking it over with Joe yesterday, I am uncomfortable with what we agered were the next steps.’ Curley allegedly wrote to Spanier. ‘I am having trouble with going to everyone, but the person involved.’”
Joe Paterno did not write the e-mail. Nor does Curley say that he and Paterno had shared the same view. If he were speaking for Paterno, why didn’t Curley say “we” instead of “I”?
It is not our purpose to defend Joe Paterno. However, our mission is to defend accuracy in reporting.
The point is that he goes into the meeting wanting to do something about it and leaves the meeting with a sense of caution.