Read Long Isand Press Letter to the Editor Today-------

[Jane D'Amico Rides Again]

She slams LI press; they slam her back. A real dopey lady I dare say! READ IT

[hard working employee]

Maybe Petersen should take a page from Jerry's book...HOW TO BEAT THE INCUMBENT WITH THE FACTS...with little time to campaign plus being thwarted at every step ...the little guy is winning. As a local 830 member I will soon be safe again and able to sleep better..Bring back Tim Carter as my grievance rep!!!

[WHISTLE BLOW-UP]

WHISTLE BLOW-UP

Dear Editor:

Since its inception, I have been an admirer of the Long Island Press and the quality of the journalism it has brought to Long Islanders. However, your May 26 cover story, headlined "The Whistleblower," was a sad example not only of shoddy journalism but of blatantly biased reporting as well.

The story was shoddy because of the reporter's wholesale disregard for the facts. It was biased because of his willingness to write a story without first ascertaining, as reporters must always do, the veracity of the statements made to him. Through his eagerness not to let the facts get in the way of his preconceived notions, CSEA [Nassau Local 830 of the Civil Service Employees Association Inc.] was, indeed, victimized by the Long Island Press.

Although the story contained many obvious journalistic blunders, I will address only those that pertain directly to those affecting the credibility of my union.

Reporter Christopher Twarowski reported that Georgina Morgenstern's lawsuit contained allegations that "her union is in bed with the administration—to the detriment of its members." It is obvious that he never read the lawsuit and unprofessionally and naively reported this false information without ever checking its veracity. In fact, the lawsuit contains no such allegation against the union. Moreover, the accusation itself is devoid of the truth.

Twarowski reported the lawsuit claimed that "CSEA did not challenge or even investigate Morgenstern's dismissal." This statement is blatantly false and a total misrepresentation of the facts. The union did, in fact, reach out to Ms. Morgenstern after she reported her problem to us. After a meeting with two CSEA union representatives, she failed, as requested, to ever report back to us with critical information needed to take further action on her case. Instead, she immediately went to her private attorneys and filed this lawsuit against the county and CSEA, which is why union officers could not comment on the case.

The most damaging and offensive aspect of Mr. Twarowski's article is his implication about CSEA's representation of our membership. We are a union with a stellar reputation for backing our members' rights, individually and collectively. We stand by that reputation, as the facts will underscore in this litigation.

I continue to admire the Long Island Press and, for the most part, its high-quality alternative to other local print media. However, I think your reporter needs to take a course in basic journalism, where he will learn that stories destructive to the reputations of both individuals and institutions must be thoroughly investigated and verified before reaching print.

Sincerely yours,
Jane M. D'Amico, President, CSEA Local 830




Long Island Press News Editor Edith Updike replies:

Wow. Guess we touched a nerve.

It's true that many sources don't mention inconvenient facts. For example, nowhere in your gratuitously insulting letter do you mention that Mr. Twarowski contacted the union, including your office, and spoke with you directly. Admitting that would interfere with your self-portrait as being "victimized."

That phone call was your opportunity to explain that the union "...did, in fact, reach out to Ms. Morgenstern...." Instead, you and your staff declined to talk. If you want to hide behind legalistic fictions, that's your choice, but absent a direct order from a judge not to discuss a case (which is always made to both sides), the mere fact that an issue is before a court does not prevent either side from talking about it.

It's popular these days for officials to refuse to comment on issues of public concern and then complain that their side isn't represented, that the journalist in question is "biased" or "unprofessional" or does "shoddy" work. It's much better for officials to make the discussion focus on the media than on themselves.

Now let's get to the "facts." Perhaps when the CSEA School of Journalism opens, you'll enlighten us all to the "many obvious journalistic blunders" that you think are in the story. But as we read it, your letter makes just two factual claims.

First, that we incorrectly reported that the lawsuit "contained allegations that 'her union is in bed with the administration—to the detriment of its members.'" You misread the story. The suit does not make a legal charge of collusion (and it certainly doesn't contain the phrase "in bed with"), nor did we quote the lawsuit as saying that it does.

As to your second point of fact, Ms. Morgenstern flat out disputes your claim that you "reached out" to her. Let's allow your after-the-fact defense. Now it's a she said/she said situation. It's easy to see why you'd make such a claim, even if it were untrue: You face a tough election and might lose your job if union members see you as not representing their interests. But you're suggesting that Morgenstern nearly bankrupted herself to hire a private attorney, even though the union was prepared to defend her for free. Doesn't make much sense, but it's not for us to decide. You'll both get your day in court.

As to the vituperation directed at our reporter: Mr. Twarowski has done a number of hard-hitting stories for the Press, taking on Long Island's powerful regardless of political affiliation. He has been recognized with numerous awards, both local and national, for his groundbreaking investigations of many subjects, including Newsday and our local parks. He always includes as many sides of a story as he can and always gives his subjects every chance to respond. Oh yes, one more thing about him: He never gives up.

[Put a fork in it!!]

It's done...Jane is gone. New life and new blood and people who will work for US!!

[Nursery Rhyme]

London Bridge is falling down, falling down, falling down
London Bridge is falling down;
my fair D'Amico!