To: Prof. Thomas Moran, Visiting Lecturer of Writing,
School of Communication, University of Central Arkansas
School of Communication, University of Central Arkansas
BCC: Parents of Murdered Children, Arkansas
Arkansas Governor, Lt.. Gov, Atty. Gen., & their staffs, boards & commission members
Arkansas House, Senate and all staff
2024-2025 Chapter Officers & Board Members, Arkansas Chapter, Society of Professional Journalists
Arkansas Press Assoc.
Media throughout Arkansas
Arkansas College Media Association
Arkansas Journalism/Communications Depts. and Colleges
Arkansas Secretary of Corrections Lindsay Wallace, staff and board
Arkansas Prosecuting Attorneys Assoc.
Subject The Death Penalty: A Professors Abandonment of Journalism Standards?
Reference: your email below
From: Dudley Sharp, independent researcher, death penalty expert, former opponent, 832-439-2113, CV at bottom
Professor Moran:
Preface
Sadly, you, intentionally, missed the, only and obvious, points, which is that journalist Philp Martin, intentionally, failed to fact check and vet and eschewed critical thinking and pro death sources, the points in every rebuttal of Martin.
Sadly, unsurprisingly, you acted in the same fashion, as Martin. As I stated, this is very common by both journalists and professors, within this debate.
Somehow, you are unaware how important those points are within your "university (and your) courses" and within journalism.
Moran equates fact checking, vetting and critical thinking with "shutting up". He could not be, more, far gone.
======
Instead of utilizing fact checking, vetting and using critical thinking, you ignored them, as Martin, and you, personally, attacked me, with points that you have no proof of. You just made things up. That is how professional you are. Do better.
All of my factual and rational corrections of Martin, had back up, with all sources. They are still there.
Your email had none;
Fact checking, vetting and critical thinking are all necessary, fundamental and, hugely, important practices in journalism, which Martin avoided, not just once, but twice, as did you. I suspect, like Martin, you fact checked and vetted, nothing, because it, never, entered your mind, as your email suggests.
Those were my, only, topics.
Both Martin's opinion piece and his reply, to me, were filled with facts, all of which I rebutted, with sources. Likely, unnoticed by you, as those topics, somehow, evaded your mention, comprehension and/or interest. Which?
Opinions are, only, as good as the facts and reasoning behind them.
Your suggestion to Martin's irresponsibility is not for Martin to become more responsible, but that readers should not read such irresponsibility.
Is that how you cover factual errors, non vetting and non critical thinking, within your lectures? You make that an obvious question.
Do you not see your abandonment of journalism standards? I see it, very often, with no effort, to do better.
In Closing
I am more than happy to present all of this material, inclusive of our exchange(s), to all your students, this semester and then you and I can have a thoughtful discussion with all of your students or, better, in a conference hall, with an invitation to all students and professors, with the subject title:
Is The Death Penalty the Canary in the Journalism Mineshaft?:
Are Fact Checking and Vetting Vanishing in Journalism?
I am ready. Let's do it.
Note: Media ethics and best practices include the importance of accuracy fairness, fact checking, vetting, deceptions, minimizing harm, diversity, different perspectives, accountability and transparency, among others
Sincerely, Dudley Sharp
