The newspaper headline:
Sex-change officer recovering after being hurt at checkpoint
Sometimes, I wish the media would just report the news, and not try to sensationalise it. The officer was just doing her job, and her gender status had nothing to do with the incident, afaik.
[Click the headline to read the story.]
This story should have been reported as: “Police officer hurt at checkpoint.”
Fortunately, the lowlife perpetrator was caught. I hope they throw away the key.
Earlier story, with Constable Larajud's photo: Man charged after officer dragged by stolen police car
Press Sensationalism
Comments
Did anyone hunt the bugger down?
This is so assinine? !!!!
So, did any of you who read this bother to hunt the source down and verbally abuse him/it/her? It took me about 10 minutes but I did manage to find a way to contact the News staff there. The only way that change happens is if we force it. NOW, get off yer butts and go do good!
Khadijah
SENSATIONALISM !!
ALISON
I'm with you Gwen----I just sent Jarrod Booker,the so called Journo,an e-mail reminding him (or whatever) that the report was on an injury to a Police Officer,nothing more or less.
I also,among the nice things I said,told our intrepid reporter
that it was a gross invasion of privacy----and not to give me any crap about 'freedom of the press'.
If any one wants to lend their weight to protest,go to the bottom of the article and there is a notice "E-mail Jarrod Booker".Click on that and go.
ALISON
In the UK
...it would have been headed "Sex Pervert causes violence at police checkpoint!"
Be grateful your national press isn't as bad as ours.
Constable Larajud's Story
Her story from early in 2008:
Constable who changed sex tells story
Police Switch
Bike Resources
I let him know what I think
I let him know what I think as well. in a nice way.
I used to be broken, I used to be lost. Unsure of what I was, until he found me...
Never be afraid to push yourself to new limits. While you might not see the path, you will be amazed at what you can achieve.
On the other hand...
The article appears to be written from a supportive viewpoint, aside from the attention-grabbing headline (which is, after all, what newspaper editors are trained for) evidently for later edition, or a late change for the online version to milk a few extra google hits and page views from the story.
All in all, the story appears to respond to a "teachable moment," of which there are few enough, and none at all if the subject is never mentioned.
Think of what a transgended young person might draw from the story, lured in (as will be so many others) by a headline that addresses his or her interests; the New Zealand constabulary is fully supportive of their transgendered officers, and treat her (apparently) as they do every other officer.
There is no extraneous editorialising, the reporter didn't beat the bushes to dredge up hateful commentary to substitute for journalistic or editorial courage, and the story is simple and factual.
Would it be better if this apparently successful woman with responsible position of authority were ignored for the sake of never revealing her "terrible secret?"
Is it better to simply report that so and so was injured? This may be big news in NZ, but is hardly worth the trouble to print elsewhere, much less the worldwide web, and does no one any good at all, unless they want to send flowers.
Cheers,
Puddin'
-
Cheers,
Puddin'
A tender heart is an asset to an editor: it helps us be ruthless in a tactful way.
--- The Chicago Manual of Style