Comments for The debate that wasn't: here's what went down at http://www.theind.com , comment 1 to 8 out of 8 comments http://www.theind.com Wed, 19 Jun 2013 11:48:55 +0100 FeedCreator 1.7.3 http://www.theind.com/news/indreporter/11657-the-debate-that-wasnt-heres-what-went-down#comment-27311 A person with a genius I.Q. would never understand any other vista or contemplate any concrete objective without being in the inside looking out and to negate and/or not allow this journalist professional manner of presenting a thorough openness of the issues, " would be a crime ! - Ciano Leal Sun, 14 Oct 2012 14:02:44 +0100 http://www.theind.com/news/indreporter/11657-the-debate-that-wasnt-heres-what-went-down#comment-27307 The wrongdoing was in your minimal attempted fact-checking, and your interest in perpetuating a misunderstanding further for the purpose of dramatic reading. If that's your goal, write for the Enquirer. Anybody with half of a brain can read your 'story' and identify a clear framing of the program in a negative light. This attempted influence on how the public views an issue is most certainly irresponsible, especially by the SPJ. You can't honestly say that you didn't have these frames in mind when authoring this piece, as an accusation like that is guaranteed to get you more publicity. Distractions like these are part of the reason why some Americans (IND readers) have no idea what is going on in the political spectrum, they are captured by journalists fantasizing on irrelevant issues that should have been left alone when the initial mistake was identified. - Kyle Skaggs Fri, 12 Oct 2012 16:11:16 +0100 http://www.theind.com/news/indreporter/11657-the-debate-that-wasnt-heres-what-went-down#comment-27302 Kyle, Nothing in the article is inaccurate. The email transcripts are faithfully reproduced. Moreover, the emails were exchanged between a public university and the U.S. House of Representatives, hence they are public record. Clearly there was a woeful lack of communication between the political science and journalism offices on campus, leaving the Boustany camp feeling as though he was being set up. That, too, was accurately reported. I'm sorry if the sequence of events leaves a sheen of incompetency and casts UL Lafayette in a poor light, but there's nothing "rogue" about this story. It's not the media's job to wipe egg off anyone's face. If you want to assail the journalism behind this article, and you're certainly welcome to do so, be substantive. What facts are wrong? Where does the research falter? My breath is bated as I wait for your response. - Walter Pierce Fri, 12 Oct 2012 04:34:49 +0100 http://www.theind.com/news/indreporter/11657-the-debate-that-wasnt-heres-what-went-down#comment-27300 Ryan, I don't believe you! - Michael A. Moss Fri, 12 Oct 2012 03:35:45 +0100 http://www.theind.com/news/indreporter/11657-the-debate-that-wasnt-heres-what-went-down#comment-27299 Actually, this information could not be more incorrect. There were also several graduate and advanced undergraduate students assisting in the set-up and PR surrounding Monday's proposed debate. The involvement of multiple students from varying political and ideological backgrounds makes these unsubstantiated claims of being "set up for a fall" less and less feasible, especially when you consider the reputation that the IND has accumulated for journalism short on ethics. This race has been bloody enough without the help of an instigator with an email thread and a laptop perpetuating negative media surrounding Louisiana politics. Additionally, considering the importance of the relationships between UL and Lafayette political media, including the IND., the irresponsibility of publishing this article without proper research or fact-checking warrants community and professional reaction. This journalist has tarnished the reputations of two highly-regarded and ethical educators at the most important academic institute in Lafayette through unsubstantiated claims. The departments responsible for spearheading this proposed service to our voters will now likely give deeper consideration into the necessity of including a publication that doesn't abide by the SPJ guidelines for ethics in journalism, or require that their rogue journalists even consider fact-checking. Our support of the IND. stops today until serious changes are made. - Kyle Skaggs Thu, 11 Oct 2012 17:13:53 +0100 http://www.theind.com/news/indreporter/11657-the-debate-that-wasnt-heres-what-went-down#comment-27297 Hi Walter, I was a bit surprised to see the article regarding a UL debate that was published yesterday, primarily due to the fact that I was never contacted with regard to the content or to check the information provided. In no way was the debate any kind of partisan move in an attempt to trap either candidate; it was, and has always been about providing information on the candidates and their positions to all of the voters of the 3rd Congressional District, nothing more. There is no agenda from the Tea Party, the Democratic Party or the Republican Party behind the debate’s organization or cancellation. The article also uses e-mails to suggest more than they actually do and create artificial divisiveness between the candidates and entities at the university. To reiterate, the reason for the cancellation of the debate was miscommunication, and maintenance of communication between all parties involved. It would not have been fair to either candidate to organize something without making sure every single entity involved was on the same page. I would appreciate a retraction on the claims made in the article and consultation to check facts and allegations in the future. - Ryan Teten Thu, 11 Oct 2012 04:53:49 +0100 http://www.theind.com/news/indreporter/11657-the-debate-that-wasnt-heres-what-went-down#comment-27295 Whoever was doing the emailing clearly knew or should have know Boustany was left off. You only had two people to include: Landry and Boustany. It's not like you are emailing a committee of 25 people and you inadvertently miss one. For a guy who claims to not be a politician, Landry sure has a lot of moves like a politician. All the best, Soop - Tom Reagan Thu, 11 Oct 2012 03:59:36 +0100 http://www.theind.com/news/indreporter/11657-the-debate-that-wasnt-heres-what-went-down#comment-27296 Whoever was doing the emailing clearly knew or should have know Boustany was left off. You only had two people to include: Landry and Boustany. It's not like you are emailing a committee of 25 people and you inadvertently miss one. For a guy who claims to not be a politician, Landry sure has a lot of moves like a politician. All the best, Soop - Tom Reagan Thu, 11 Oct 2012 03:59:36 +0100