Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 25

Thread: News using anonymous sources. Most recently Ch2 and a Sanchez tape

  1. #1
    Member sharky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Amherst
    Posts
    2,183

    News using anonymous sources. Most recently Ch2 and a Sanchez tape

    I jsut saw on ch2 that they have a tape of a phone conversation between sanchez and his wife while he was in jail.
    the source "didn't want to be identified"
    jeeze, maybe be cause they likely broke the law?

    I hate it when news outlets won't name the sources, too easy for lies to get propagated as truth
    Vote for freedom, not political parties.
    Politicians need to cut spending

  2. #2
    Member cookie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Over where the sun rises
    Posts
    3,592
    I'm kind of on the fence about naming sources. I can see both sides views. What I really find disturbing is their running of that story PERIOD.
    That woman has been through hell. Leave her alone so she can pick up the pieces of her life and move on.
    That was a disgusting thing for channel 2 to do. I think they misread the "popularity" of Bike Path rapist stories when deciding to run that. They sure pulled it from the website in a big hurry when people left comments about how outraged they were.

  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    10,873

    What about channel 4

    They run story's when their source was from a person who received a anonymous tip??


  4. #4
    Member slothrop's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    105

    I just posted this on their blog

    The corporate media strikes again. The Fourth Estate is dead. You have victimized his wife and children even beyond the horrors her husband has inflicted upon her. Posting private phone conversations is beyond disgusting. It is immoral.

    This post is the last time I will watch Channel 2 or visit the web site unless you publicly apologize to Mrs. Sanchez. I will also go out of my way to tell my entire family and everyone who works for me at my law firm to not watch your filthy station!

    I is bad enough when your "Red Coats" sensationalize trivial matters in government and forgetting larger picture stories (yeah, government cell phones are the reason our region is in trouble! geez!). Your ethics are nonexistent and you continue to do a disservice to this community. You have betrayed the public trust.

    I hope your owners like the money you made for them, but As Bob Dylan wrote in "Masters of War," - "All the money you made will never buy back your soul!"

  5. #5
    Member raoul duke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    soup line
    Posts
    4,292
    Anonymous sources serve a really useful purpose (think: Watergate) when used and published correctly.
    One beautiful thing about having a government of the corporations, by the corporations, and for the corporations is that every disaster is measured in terms of economic loss. It's sort of like getting your arm sheared off in a car accident and thinking, "Damn, now it'll take longer to fold the laundry" as blood spurts from your arteries. - The Rude Pundit

  6. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Amherst
    Posts
    6,426
    Quote Originally Posted by 4248
    They run story's when their source was from a person who received a anonymous tip??

    No legitimate news agency uses a story based soley on an annonymous tip. Just doesn't happen. Reporters need some way to verify the information. TV news stations, especially the local ones, do cheat sometimes, though. I don't know why: overly ambitious reporters? Or a desperate attempt to pump up ratings?

    Anyway, annonymous sources have a role in news gathering. But it's a narrow one that requires several things. How well does the reporter know the source? Does the source have a reliable history? Does the source have an axe to grind? Does the source have documents to back up his/her story? Is there a way to verify what the source says with another source. Even the Watergate reporters were required to have at least a second confirmation -- and a third or fourth, if they could manage it.
    Using annonymous sources is a slippery slope. Reporters and their editors know that. Plus the use of those sources causes a lot distrust in the community, with good reason.

  7. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Amherst
    Posts
    6,426
    Quote Originally Posted by sharky
    I jsut saw on ch2 that they have a tape of a phone conversation between sanchez and his wife while he was in jail.
    the source "didn't want to be identified"
    jeeze, maybe be cause they likely broke the law?

    I hate it when news outlets won't name the sources, too easy for lies to get propagated as truth
    If it was a tape, though, it was legitimate.

    I don't know if it was really a story or not. It seems like the public has an endless interest in Sanchez, and his wife as well. So I guess it is a news story. But it shouldn't be. I say leave the poor woman alone.

  8. #8
    Member sharky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Amherst
    Posts
    2,183
    Quote Originally Posted by atotaltotalfan2001
    If it was a tape, though, it was legitimate.

    I don't know if it was really a story or not. It seems like the public has an endless interest in Sanchez, and his wife as well. So I guess it is a news story. But it shouldn't be. I say leave the poor woman alone.
    the tape would be legitimate in the sense that it really was sanchez talking and not hearsay, but I'd be willing to bet some money that the person releasing it broke a wiretapping/recording law of some sort which is why they didn't want to be named.

    there are a lot of unanswered questions here:
    who was this person? where'd they get the tape? under what authority did they have access to it? under what authority did they think they could release it to the media?
    Vote for freedom, not political parties.
    Politicians need to cut spending

  9. #9
    Member Daisy H's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    2,059
    I couldn't believe they were playing that tape...gave me chills just to hear his creepy voice talking to ANY woman, much less his wife.

    Thank God she's getting out of that nightmare (legally anyway), if only the press would leave her alone to move on with her life. God forbid.

  10. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    ~~some where out there~~
    Posts
    35

    sanchez's wife

    I'm sorry, I think the women deserves what she gets. Please, she didn't even suspect? She should have thrown his a** out years ago when he was using prostitutes!! She is nothing more than an enabler. Whatever their lifestyle/ work/ hours/ were, they were married! All the clues, was she that naive? I don't think WGRZ should be reporting any more about the scumbag in prison either, but they'll do it for the ratings of course. And if she's divorcing him , good for her, then she should move out of town . Good luck to her.
    ~~~ Dance like no one is watching~~~

  11. #11
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    910
    Quote Originally Posted by countrygirl
    I'm sorry, I think the women deserves what she gets. Please, she didn't even suspect? She should have thrown his a** out years ago when he was using prostitutes!! She is nothing more than an enabler. Whatever their lifestyle/ work/ hours/ were, they were married! All the clues, was she that naive? I don't think WGRZ should be reporting any more about the scumbag in prison either, but they'll do it for the ratings of course. And if she's divorcing him , good for her, then she should move out of town . Good luck to her.

    So you are saying, from your high horse, that because this guy bought a prostitute, his wife should have known, with certainty, that her husband was a serial murderer.

    I am pretty sure that you are single, or soon will be.
    I made a lot of money and spent most of it on booze, fast cars and loose women. I blew the rest.


  12. #12
    Member Daisy H's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    2,059
    Quote Originally Posted by countrygirl
    I'm sorry, I think the women deserves what she gets. Please, she didn't even suspect? She should have thrown his a** out years ago when he was using prostitutes!! She is nothing more than an enabler. Whatever their lifestyle/ work/ hours/ were, they were married! All the clues, was she that naive?
    You can't be serious...you've never heard of a marriage where one (or both) parties were unfaithful but they chose to stay together for whatever reasons (particularly if there were children involved)?

    Hugh Grant was caught with a prostitute too, does that make him a potential murderer too? As you say, the signs were all there. Get real.

    Perhaps you have your own reasons for sounding so bitter.

  13. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    10,873

    Wink Not so - they get manipulated too

    Quote Originally Posted by atotaltotalfan2001
    No legitimate news agency uses a story based soley on an annonymous tip. Just doesn't happen. Reporters need some way to verify the information. TV news stations, especially the local ones, do cheat sometimes, though. I don't know why: overly ambitious reporters? Or a desperate attempt to pump up ratings?

    Anyway, annonymous sources have a role in news gathering. But it's a narrow one that requires several things. How well does the reporter know the source? Does the source have a reliable history? Does the source have an axe to grind? Does the source have documents to back up his/her story? Is there a way to verify what the source says with another source. Even the Watergate reporters were required to have at least a second confirmation -- and a third or fourth, if they could manage it.
    Using annonymous sources is a slippery slope. Reporters and their editors know that. Plus the use of those sources causes a lot distrust in the community, with good reason.
    Your hoping these statements are true - maybe in journalism school - not in our Politically charged world.

    Lets see what happens to Mr.Clark - once the elections over - will the press - if he is found innocent of illegal wrong doing - expose the source - No !

    If the person charged is - found innocent - how often does the press go back and say , with equal enthusiasm and print volume ,
    "Well Mr.Morretti received a tip from the Party Committeeman and just figured it was valid " - we were wrong -
    can you say ,
    -
    LAWSUIT ! or how about END OF YOUR CAREER !

    Give me a break - if you believe that second third witness crud - you never have had to deal with the press on these type events.

    You must also believe , "Mr.Keane isn't a career Politician."
    or the "Moon is made of cheese"



    Anty M. - Anty M. - I had the strangest dream !

  14. #14
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    ~~some where out there~~
    Posts
    35
    I am not single or soon to be. I am married for 30 years. I have my opinions and they are that>mine. I believe that any woman (or man if the case may be turned in that direction), is a fool if forgiving a cheating spouse is the best course of action. This scumbag didn't do it once , he did it many times.
    I said this sanchez woman was an enabler. Meaning she is no better than any one who turns a blind eye to someone doing something wrong and potentially harmful. No different than a wife who finds out her husband has been caught at seeking sexual favors from young people, male or female, and forgiving him. No not me. Yet I have wittnessed that type of situation personnaly. That scumbag gets arrested and still she forgives and stays married to him. This may be way off, but I can draw a similarity to it. If the scumbags are forgiven and allowed to remain in their comfort zone, as did this sanchez scum was allowed to, living his perfect double life , than they can become even more dangerous. Had he been kicked out of his house he would not have had the ease of the schedule that he had with her. Doing his deeds when she worked.
    As for the high horse comment, so be it, your opinion. I can gaurantee you, though, that if my husband strayed with a hooker more than once he;d be out on his a** so fast his head would spin. Same goes for me though. If I were to be doing something like that, the same should be for me. So judge me and my comments. That is what they are, my comments. My opinions.
    I just can't believe that after , AFTER, this scumbag is in prison for raping , torturing, and killing women, that she (his wife) still goes to see him and has a conversation where he calls her "honey" and she doesn't have the balls to just get up and leave him to rot! What is wrong with this woman? It can't still be denial! He confessed! He's garbage. He should be raped and tortured himself. Not be visited by his "loving" wife.
    ~~~ Dance like no one is watching~~~

  15. #15
    Member Daisy H's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    2,059
    Countrygirl: The soon-to-be-ex Mrs. Sanchez advised the defense attorney that she would see his trial through to the end but that she planned to divorce him. That is exactly what she is doing. The papers have been filed.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •