Thursday, January 20, 2005

Post Standard's Blind man's defense

Although, Richard Lindsay of North Syracuse NY has never attended Dr. Dhafir's trial he has read enough of the Post Standard's coverage to know that their reporting has been "fair and balanced". Mr. Lindsay reminds me of the blind man that said, when his wife put on a new dress, that he had never seen a prettier dress.

I still can't figure out whether the Post Standard is being cynical and humorous--or is it just showing its own ignorance in printing Mr. Lindsay's letter as a confirmation of the public's perception that their coverage of the Dahfir trial has been "fair and balanced".

Dhafir trial coverage fair and balanced

To the Editor:

The Jan. 9 letter by Katherine Hughes, "Dhafir trial coverage has prosecutorial tune," could not be more in error.
She says this newspaper's reporting of Dr. Dhafir's trial heavily favors the prosecution's side of the case. She also feels this paper is denying the right to be held innocent until proven guilty. She bases her assertions on her two-day-a-week attendance at the trial since it started in October.

Although not attending the trial, I have read all the reports on the proceedings since October, and disagree completely with Ms. Hughes, finding the reporting fair and balanced.

Finally, Dr. Dhafir's lengthy trial flies in the face of Ms. Hughes' question, "Doesn't he (Dr. Dhafir) deserve the right to be held innocent until proven guilty?"

Richard Lindsay
North Syracuse