May 16, 2013

This blog is written and posted by Catherine Samardza
Since my last blog concerning the news media, I have sent the New Castle County independent audit report to a number of reporters. Two responded to my e-mails conveying the report - Rachel Swick Mavity and James Fisher. I was surprised, since they had both stopped contacting me, which led to the blog.

Mr. Fisher contacted me thanking me for the reporter, and then interviewed me over the phone on 5/15.

Ms. Mavity contacted me on 5/13 acknowledging that she received the report, also noting that she had been continuing her research regarding the Animal Welfare Task Force.

On 5/15 Ms. Mavity e-mailed me again. It seems she found this blog, and was not happy about it. I have been accused of using "cloak and dagger" techniques, and of not being sensitive enough. She also seems to feel that it is significant that I didn't send a letter to the editor of the Cape Gazette. She also says I'm not clear in making my points and puts quotes around a phrase that I cannot find in the earlier blog.

Hmmmm....I publish a blog using my own name. I post on FB using my own page and a page that I am the known administrator of. I made comments about her article on various pages, including below her original AWTF article for the Cape Gazette. I attend public meetings and stand up and speak. If that's her definition of "cloak and dagger" then we are obviously not using the same dictionaries.

Re sensitivity: If Ms. Mavity means I'm not as personally sensitive to criticism as she seems to be, she's right. I have actually been called a number of things during this journey, and I just move on. I simply criticized her lack of diligence and accuracy.

I didn't send a letter to the editor of the Cape Gazette, because I contacted Ms. Mavity directly, and then posted on FB and this blog concerning my experiences. I tend to run longer than 500 words, the letter-to-the-editor limit. I'll give it a shot, but I'm not sure why Ms. Mavity feels it so significant. She isn't happy that I criticized her on this blog, seen by less than 50 people at that time, but she wants me to send a letter to her newspaper for publication?

Anyone feel I'm not being clear in my writing? And "quoting" a phrase that isn't in the blog - there's that thing called accuracy again.

Ms. Mavity ended her last e-mail to me saying to go ahead and post it online, because she was sure I would anyway.

So, here it is.

I recently came across your blog post - as I am doing research that you claim us journalists do not do - http://newsmediaandtheawtfrecommendations.blogspot.com

I find it interesting that you want our help; you want us to write the stories how you believe them, yet you publicly decry any efforts made.

You say there has been no follow-up but obviously both Mr. Fisher and I responded to you - we heard your complaints. We do follow up. Articles continue to be written, but I'm sorry that nothing is good enough for you. Likely, this is why no one "covers animal welfare in the state" as you claim. Why would anyone want to take on an article when his or her good name is then mocked across the internet?

Sure, maybe I am sensitive. Maybe you are not sensitive enough. And, maybe you aren't very good about getting your exact points across. All this cloak and dagger does nothing to support the actual animal welfare work being done in the state.

And you can go ahead and post that online as I am sure you are going to do.

Interesting to note that we have not received a Letter to the Editor with any of your complaints.

 Rachel Swick Mavity
Reporter and Page Designer
Cape Gazette newspaper
Lewes, DE 19958

And, since Ms. Mavity seems to feel that a letter to the Cape Gazette is necessary, here is what I sent out today (5/17):

Letter to the Cape Gazette:
On May 1, I commented on the Animal Welfare Task Force article by Rachel Swick Mavity, both online and on FaceBook. But it really bothered me, so I contacted the reporter directly. I told her someone should have done a better job fact-checking the article, because there were inaccuracies. I also felt that it was unbalanced, only using quotes from the one member of the Task Force that was lobbying against the recommendations. Ms. Mavity responded, excusing herself as having made a “slight slip up” in dates, and justified quoting the KCSPCA leadership as factually accurate reporting of their statements. This lack of attention to detail, let alone the bias of the article in only reporting what the KCSPCA has to say about the recommendations, does not engender confidence in the quality of this reporter’s work, or the Cape Gazette’s editing staff.

I was impressed, however, that she took the time to contact me right away. So I e-mailed her back. But her responses, while appreciated, continued to include excuses. And when I did not hear from her after a few days, I posted a blog about our correspondence, my similar experience with a reporter from another newspaper, and my overall experiences with the news media and elected officials in Delaware on animal welfare and control issues.

On May 13, I e-mailed the New Castle County independent audit report on their dog control contract to all the reporters I have had contact with over the last 18 months. Ms. Mavity and one other reporter contacted me. But it seems that by May 15, Ms. Mavity read my blog and was not happy. In fact, she seemed to feel that I was engaging in “cloak and dagger” behavior (all of my internet posts and e-mails identify me by name), dragging her good name all over the internet. She also seemed to feel it was significant that I had not written a letter to the editor of the Cape Gazette. At that time, the blog had been viewed by fewer than 50 people. But since Ms. Mavity wants my comments and criticisms made to her newspaper directly, here they are.

The Animal Welfare Task Force recommendations concern statewide issues of animal welfare and control. Animal welfare is a humanitarian issue; animal control is an enforcement issue and opens the door to civil rights concerns. Lack of accuracy, research and balance in reporting on the AWTF recommendations – and making excuses for it afterwards – is a poor standard for a newspaper that serves the largest county in Delaware. In addition, Ms. Mavity’s sensitivity to criticism and objection to having her name posted on the internet is, in my opinion, immature and unprofessional.