- I think Missy Smith needs to enroll in Journalism 101. Lesson A: Never allow yourself to get duped by your sources.
- Toys for Troops’ Christmas Gifts for Soldiers event is this Sunday at the Worden Martin dealership in Champaign from 1 p.m. to 4 p.m.
- It’s been a bad year for Champaign-Urbana “institutions” — add Dom’s to the list of restaurants in business for years that have closed this year, albeit for a variety of reasons. That includes the Jolly Roger and Carmon’s. You won’t find me crying for the loss, but I feel for the employees who have dedicated their lives to the place.
12 responses so far ↓
gamera // November 30, 2007 at 4:41 pm
Wow—I think Missy got her “journalist” credentials out of a cracker jack box….
goinglikesixty // November 30, 2007 at 4:43 pm
Thanks for the heads up on the puppy mill story. I blasted her in their comments.
What a lame story.
Mark J. // November 30, 2007 at 8:51 pm
You didn’t really expect integrity and factual reporting from the DI, did you? This is the rag that called the home of the girl who was hit by the bus last year on the very day she died. They reported that there was no comment, but that crying could be heard in the background.
Ya think?
LD // December 1, 2007 at 3:14 pm
Ok– so I don’t at all respect the DIs journalism at all, nor do I think that mall pet stores are a good idea, but I’ve gotta wonder who in their right mind pays $1000 for a dog and then a day later decides it’s too much to handle?? The whole original expose sounded like a big old set up to me.
greymatter // December 2, 2007 at 3:13 pm
Minneci’s is better than Dom’s or Manzella’s, but it was always cool to have the three of them located in that little area. I can’t believe it’s gone.
Nonentity2u // December 3, 2007 at 9:36 am
The story in The Daily Illini is a feature story, not a hard news story. A source is quoted—that is not the writer’s opinion. I agree that the writer could have done more to investigate the complaints about the store and the kennels to make it a more complete story. But the article is what it is—the puppy store owner’s side of the story. You may not agree with the store owner—but she has a right to state her side when asked.
I believe the first thing taught in journalism 101 would be objectivity, fyi, and the second might be using attribution in stories. These rules journalists (student or otherwise) are taught to follow are things some bloggers (though you are pretty fair) and those who post comments on blogs often don’t feel they have to follow.
lbotp // December 3, 2007 at 10:27 am
Nonentity — thank you for your well-thought out response. However, you prove my point when you say that the first thing taught in journalism 101 would be objectivity. This article, feature or not, shows very little of that.
LD — I have been wondering the same thing about people who spend a fortune on a dog only to hand it over. Unfortunately it happens all the time. People buy breeds they don’t know much about and then when the reality hits of what it takes to take care of them, they dump the animal. There is a regular poster on this blog who rescued a dog — a very popular “designer” breed — in which that very scenario took place.
SR // December 3, 2007 at 10:37 am
“That may be true for some puppy stores, but the Lucky Puppy Boutique and Barkery in Marketplace Mall is different. I should know, I saw it first hand.”
This is a quote from Missy’s article, in her voice: the ‘I’ in the quote refers to Missy. I’m fairly certain that constitutes and opinion. It is not Pryor’s opinion, it is Missy’s opinion.
Although, I agree with Nonentity that this is not a piece of journalism, it is PR fluff. I wouldn’t be surprised if there were some kickback from Lucky Puppy in exchange for the favorable review.
There was an interesting passage:
“The breeder in question is Puppy Haven Kennels, who is not certified by the American Kennel Club, one of the most well-known dog breeding registration associations…
Puppy Haven’s Web site said it feels loss of its certification was a personal attack on the kennel because it had stopped dealing with the Kennel Club due to defects with its dogs. ”
Defects with its dogs??? Let’s just say hypothetically that Lucky Puppy wasn’t getting it’s animals from puppy mills–even so, charging $1000 for a dog that comes from a line with KNOWN DEFECTS is irresponsible and, if the price includes the cost for a purebred, AKC dog, could constitute fraud.
It would be like selling cars with a history of manufacturing problems without disclosing them.
Wally Fenwick // December 3, 2007 at 12:10 pm
The Jolly Roger is gone.
*sniff*
bettycat // December 5, 2007 at 8:04 am
Yes, Missy’s article was horribly written. But for something truly appalling, jump over to IllinoisHomePage.net and read the Lucky Puppy commentary they’ve got going….geesh! Vegan-bashing, pro-lifers, Humane Society sting operations…but Lucky Puppy rules in their world.
Golden // December 5, 2007 at 4:10 pm
Yes, I was over at that site today and it is just unbelievable! JustMeAgain just can’t be real but someone that is enjoying playing devil’s advocate. Or at least I hope so.
lbotp // December 6, 2007 at 10:18 am
It’s not even worth responding to someone like that.
Leave a Comment