Photo: via Facebook, Thumb via brianrosenthal.com
In the two days since the Daily published a feature on the Evanston “brothel law,” the paper has been accused—both publicly and privately—of taking quotes out of context and publishing incorrect information. At Tuesday’s off-campus town hall meeting, Jeff Murphy, Evanston’s division manager of building and inspection services, said, “There was a lot of material in the Daily article that was not truth, that I didn’t say.” The city of Evanston echoed similar sentiments in its press release yesterday: “There has been discussion in the press that on July 1, 2011 the City will change this strategy. This statement is incorrect.” We sat down with the Daily’s editor-in-chief Brian Rosenthal to discuss the accusations and the aftermath of brothel-gate. Our Q&A, after the jump
Did you guys expect this much outrage from the student body when you published the story?
I think that when we learned that the city was going to be definitely stepping up enforcement on July 1 and that Northwestern administration was focusing on dealing with that reality instead of fighting that reality, we knew our feelings, which were that we knew what our friends would think—this is ridiculous and this would negatively impact students. I guess we did have a feeling. We didn’t know it would become as big of an issue as it did, but knew that it was an issue that needed to be reported and brought to attention of community.
What do you think about Betsi Burns as well as the city saying that they were misquoted or misconstrued?
No officials are claiming to be misquoted. A couple have claimed that their quotes were taken out of context. We stand by the story 100 percent. I think that’s all I’m gonna say. We stand by the story 100 percent, and that everything in there has been only confirmed by other things that have happened over the past couple days.
Like what?
The town hall meeting and the tone and subsequent comments from officials were exactly in line with what our reports said. I think that if, for example, the city had not decided they were gonna step up enforcement on July 1, and that if that was incorrect in our story, and Jeff Murphy—at the forum in front of 500 angry students—would have said that. It would have quieted the angry students. That would have been very easy for him to do if it was true. The fact that he didn’t indicates to us that we were right, and they were planning to step up enforcement.
Who confirmed July 1 deadline?
Jeff Murphy.
What do you think about Evanston saying that flat out isn’t true?
I’m writing a letter from the editor addressing that for tomorrow’s paper. We stand by our story 100 percent, and we understand that issues are often complicated and that there are often pressures in the community that can change people’s opinions real quick and make people defensive real quick. It’s very easy to blame the media. And other than that we stand by the story 100 percent.
Has this affected morale in the newsroom at all?
No. Cause we know we’re right.
Anything else to add?
I think this whole debacle was an example of the importance of holding officials accountable and making information widespread and we are…we’re happy to have participated in that and will continue to look out for our readers and the whole student body and the rest of Evanston.
You know you are allowed to correct errors in your reporters notes before you type them up and try and turn them into an article, right? Otherwise good perspective to ‘brothelgate.’
And aren’t you supposed to let readers know when you append an article to keep your journalistic integrity?
@Trevor
We only notify readers of edits when there are fact changes. So little grammar and spelling mistakes on non-proper nouns don’t get corrections.
[...] Daily editor discusses the aftermath of coverage on the brothel law [...]
[...] Daily editor discusses the aftermath of coverage on the brothel law [...]