Looking at it another way, the newspaper’s own lack of factual verification raises questions about the presumed nature of “innocent until proven guilty,” which is rapidly jeopardizing my trust in the state of the newspaper.
In short, if the newspaper can’t get the information it desires pertaining to Officer Humphrey, then what it has been printing in the absence of such verification must, by definition, be non-factual innuendo. It isn’t clear to me how this is helping anyone or anything, but then again, the newspaper’s forays into investigative journalism are about as rare hereabouts as a registered Democrat who actually voted for Barack Obama.
The newspaper is unhappy because its questions are not being answered? Maybe it should ask questions more often … and not routinely accept the glib answers it gets in return. Is city (and county) government guilty of stonewalling, reticence and a serial unwillingness to proffer information unless it is pried away? Pretty much, although the time it has taken for the newspaper’s editorial board to grasp this fact does nothing to strengthen the paywall’s grip.
OUR OPINION: New Albany needs transparency from NAPD
Recent events involving a New Albany Police Department officer and the reassignment of the chief and assistant chief have raised questions about the state of the department.
Many of those questions remain unanswered, jeopardizing the public’s trust in the NAPD.
The city’s administration is doing a poor job of communicating with you, our readers, and it’s not from a lack of asking questions by the media — including this outlet.
