Is there a reason you mention "divorce" and "drinking problem" and "tragic failure" in the headline yet not cite a single fact about these things? "Perception is reality" is not a valid justification to spread innuendo about cabals and conspiracies. If you find out actual facts about unethical doings, go ahead and cite them.
You have so much to share to readers who'd like to learn more about the goings-on of local and state government; the recent post on "Crossover Day" was a good example. Stick to things you are willing to support with facts, or with quotes from people with names.
I agree and I’ve commented the same thing about several of Barry’s articles. Many feel disjointed, like an AI mash-up of details that aren’t always relevant or fully explained to the reader. I too clicked on the story because of the headline - The Divorce, The Drinking Problem, The Tragic Failure - but none of these things are fleshed out in the article.
Barry isn’t making anything up. There are sources of information, just not anyone who is willing to speak publicly on the record. Here’s some additional Trone coverage that could help.
The reader should not have to go outside of the article for the supporting facts. The author should cite sources AND explain its relevance in a cohesive way that readers can follow. This is Journalism 101.
So you aren’t a journalist in the professional sense but there still is a responsibility to report the facts with logical, cohesive support, no? Otherwise, your posts could come dangerously close to “churnalism” and “clickbait”.
Thank you thunder. I give my opinion. I talk about what I think. Sometimes I tell people more than is probably sensible to tell them and other times I stop short of telling them everything. They'd like to know. If they read me then they must find me interesting. If they don't read me, that's okay. Your article on David's donation Network I suspect could result in indictment and prison time if they wanted to investigate. But if I were to say that he's creating straw donations through family members and friends, then I could be sued. I think he is but I can't be sued for what I think. I think he's a drunk. I think his wife finally had enough of him and divorced him and I think his children don't respect him enough to even follow his religion. But if I start declaring things like that in public, he might sue me. Actually, if he sued me it would be humorous because I would not worry about the case. I would focus on the depositions. Could you imagine the fine? A guy like me could have in depositions with a Trump empire? Could I find somebody to testify that he never gives a speech without six to eight shots? How betcha I could but I don't feel like pushing it that far today. Do I think that all the members of his family that automatically donate in unison as indicated by your article? We tell more truths about a certain billionaire than most people would ever be willing to and yet people get mad at me for not spoon. Feeding them my own destruction.
By the way, I am disgraphic which means that when I'm dictating I often make mistakes and sometimes I don't catch them till after I'm done. For instance, I didn't mean fineI meant fun here. I think conducting depositions where I could subpoena his staff and family members would be almost insanely humorous. You get people testifying and you have to ask the question. Are you willing to go to prison if you lie. Anyway, depositions would be fun. Also, I called trone, Trump. It's an innocent mistake. There's so much alike. If you spot any other mistakes in my answer just understand. I'm doing the best I can. Oh come to think of it. I didn't capitalize Thunder. Sorry about that.
Is there a reason you mention "divorce" and "drinking problem" and "tragic failure" in the headline yet not cite a single fact about these things? "Perception is reality" is not a valid justification to spread innuendo about cabals and conspiracies. If you find out actual facts about unethical doings, go ahead and cite them.
You have so much to share to readers who'd like to learn more about the goings-on of local and state government; the recent post on "Crossover Day" was a good example. Stick to things you are willing to support with facts, or with quotes from people with names.
I agree and I’ve commented the same thing about several of Barry’s articles. Many feel disjointed, like an AI mash-up of details that aren’t always relevant or fully explained to the reader. I too clicked on the story because of the headline - The Divorce, The Drinking Problem, The Tragic Failure - but none of these things are fleshed out in the article.
Barry isn’t making anything up. There are sources of information, just not anyone who is willing to speak publicly on the record. Here’s some additional Trone coverage that could help.
https://mdbaynews.com/tag/david-trone/
The reader should not have to go outside of the article for the supporting facts. The author should cite sources AND explain its relevance in a cohesive way that readers can follow. This is Journalism 101.
Thank you, if I ever become a journalist I'll keep that in mind.
So you aren’t a journalist in the professional sense but there still is a responsibility to report the facts with logical, cohesive support, no? Otherwise, your posts could come dangerously close to “churnalism” and “clickbait”.
Not arguing with you. I just saw your comment and thought I could offer something additional.
Thank you thunder. I give my opinion. I talk about what I think. Sometimes I tell people more than is probably sensible to tell them and other times I stop short of telling them everything. They'd like to know. If they read me then they must find me interesting. If they don't read me, that's okay. Your article on David's donation Network I suspect could result in indictment and prison time if they wanted to investigate. But if I were to say that he's creating straw donations through family members and friends, then I could be sued. I think he is but I can't be sued for what I think. I think he's a drunk. I think his wife finally had enough of him and divorced him and I think his children don't respect him enough to even follow his religion. But if I start declaring things like that in public, he might sue me. Actually, if he sued me it would be humorous because I would not worry about the case. I would focus on the depositions. Could you imagine the fine? A guy like me could have in depositions with a Trump empire? Could I find somebody to testify that he never gives a speech without six to eight shots? How betcha I could but I don't feel like pushing it that far today. Do I think that all the members of his family that automatically donate in unison as indicated by your article? We tell more truths about a certain billionaire than most people would ever be willing to and yet people get mad at me for not spoon. Feeding them my own destruction.
By the way, I am disgraphic which means that when I'm dictating I often make mistakes and sometimes I don't catch them till after I'm done. For instance, I didn't mean fineI meant fun here. I think conducting depositions where I could subpoena his staff and family members would be almost insanely humorous. You get people testifying and you have to ask the question. Are you willing to go to prison if you lie. Anyway, depositions would be fun. Also, I called trone, Trump. It's an innocent mistake. There's so much alike. If you spot any other mistakes in my answer just understand. I'm doing the best I can. Oh come to think of it. I didn't capitalize Thunder. Sorry about that.