March 2017

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
      1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30 31  

« Reconquest | Main | Band of Bros »

Aug 09, 2010

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Roch101

Do I understand correctly that "[Thompson] waved a thick stack of nearly 200 reports of what he called 'indecent behavior' at the Central Library during the first six months of the year" was not aligned with the facts within that article?

Also, can you clarify what you mean by the images that "might" have been blocked in Charlotte?

Ed Cone

Roch, can you restate the first question? I'm not sure I take its meaning.

I say the specified images at the link might have been blocked because of this: "Sometimes, the automatic filter programs make mistakes, [Char/Meck material manager Linda] Raymond said. They’ve had to review things like a racy lingerie online catalog (it was revealing, but made the cut) and a breast cancer website (its drawing of a breast should not have been blocked)."

Roch101

Sorry for the confusion. The portion of the article I can read in your screen shot contains the paragraph I quoted above. I am wondering if, anywhere else in the article, what Thompson "said," was put up against the facts, i.e. what was really in those 200 reports.

Ed Cone

Later in the article: [O]f those nearly 200 reports that Thompson held up at the council meeting, the city’s contracted security guards reported 21 involved people viewing pornography or “inappropriate” sites.

"Few of the reports mention what website the person was viewing, although one was looking at a naked man on a Craigslist ad and another was looking at inappropriate images on a social networking site.

And of course the A2 story also looks inside the big sheaf.

Roch101

OK, thanks, and that's good to know. Kudos to Amanda for including that.

The comments to this entry are closed.