Yesterday I wrote about a contentious online conversation about News Sentinel court reporter Jamie Satterfield's Twitter coverage of the Christian/Newsom trial. Part of what prompted the blog post was Satterfield's justification for the sometimes-casual tone of her coverage: "To suggest I am making light of this crime is simply wrong. BTW the
families follow my tweets and tell me they enjoy them. And that opinion
is the one that matters most to me."
Last night Satterfield clarified her position with a follow-up post: "As far as the families' reaction, I only meant to convey that if the people who are suffering most in this case are not offended, I don't think the occasional sprinkle of humor is all that offensive, if at all. But again, some love it, some hate it."
Last night Satterfield clarified her position with a follow-up post: "As far as the families' reaction, I only meant to convey that if the people who are suffering most in this case are not offended, I don't think the occasional sprinkle of humor is all that offensive, if at all. But again, some love it, some hate it."
Comments » 0
Be the first to post a comment!
Share your thoughts
Comments are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. You agree not to post comments that are off topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be banned. Click here for our full user agreement.