Miller separated from his wife

selam hi This sounds fascinating sıcak sohbet I’m going to read that tracing articlekısa aşk şiirleri when I have a moment.
Wow. erotik film izle is
şifalı bitkiler zayıflama de
çet sohbet fer
netlog ger
müzik dinle err
şarkı dinle
cüneyt arkın filmleri kk
isyan sözleri fer
hikayeler er
islami çet ff
adet sancısına ne iyi gelir hh
escort bayanlar der
bedava chat dd
chat odaları der
liseli kızlar derf
kızlarla sohbet fder
kızlarla chat
sohbet err

Ryan, Bill, I agree with the dome Brad Miller's marital status is newsworthy...to a point of just mentioning it.

Maybe he's really celebrating...like a lot of separated people!

Ryan, I enjoy the Dome and I think you strive (and usually succceed) to balance your coverage between a multitude of competing perspectives and interests, but these answers you and Krueger have provided to questions about this story's relevance just don't wash.

Word about a public figure's marriage is printed as human interest in the most positive sense of that word (or so I've asssumed). That is, a marriage is usually an occasion of celebration, and by sharing the word of the event, readers are brought into a sense of celebration that I think most would agree is a positive and healthy affirmation of community.

That's not exactly what you're going for when you print word of something as negative and personal as a separation or divorce. Further, marriages are typically advertised by the participants, either by dissemination of invitations or publication of pictures in the paper, etc . . . . Most people try to keep word of separation and divorce private. You should respect that absent a compelling public interest -- something more than "readers are interested."

If Krueger's rationale, "readers are interested" is truly your standard, then again, your biographical profiles should include all kinds of other details that voters are likely to weigh, such as religion and ethnicity.

Seriously -- you guys blew this one.

I hate playing language police here, but I try to let you guys know when you're using language that's a little too blue. I can just go ahead and delete your comments without a warning, you know.

On the other issue, I think my editor has clearly stated our policy, but let me suggest a hypothetical. Suppose a politician got married. Would that be news? Should that be public? 

No one would disagree. Some might even want a nice little story about when and where it happened, who attended, etc.

Obviously, the opposite situation is not as pleasant, and we're not delving into the details of a private matter, but certainly it's worthy of a brief mention.

— RTB 

That;s your only thought on the issue? If only that "no crap" rule was spread Bill's way as well....

Please watch your language. Thanks!

— RTB 

Bill if this is part of the basic biographical information as you say, then it should be part of the full profile of a candidate not a stand alone post. This is sad day for the news and obersever. I urge everyone to cancel their subscription to this rag that is appreantly turning to yellow journalism for its headlines. The readership that keeps this paper afloat is intelligent and highly educated, we dont need to read this crap.

What if your readers wanted to know if any of your reporters or editors are having similar problems?

reposted elsewhere

For goodness sake, if the statement is "it's painful and it's private", why on earth would the Dome feel it necessary to print it. Who is writing this blog anyway, Ryan Seacrest?

To think I used to visit this site to find its useful and important news. It has successfully become a caricature of itself. Congratulations on becoming the Rudy Giuliani of news blogs.

Seems to me that by that standard, "voters want to know," you should still be listing a candidate's religious affiliation.

We voters want to know how many Jews occupy office, and whether some of those olive-complected ones have been travelling overseas lately. In fact, I think it would be of real interest to voters whether a given candidate has any hispanic ancestry. Sometimes these connections can be significant to a voter.

And I would think that by a standard that seeks to satisfy a voter's curiosity, you should be noting whether a given public figure is homosexual or heterosexual or bisexual. I think voters want to know, don't you?

It's probably time to re-introduce the phrases, "lifelong bachelor," and "perennial spinster" into news reports, if ya know what I mean.

Yes, I'm pleased to see that the News and Observer is getting back on track with what we regular red-blooded Americans really want to key into when we're looking at office-holders or seekers.

I'mm trying to figure out a way to use this blog to wrap fish in. That's the level of this post.

We typically inform our readers of the marital status of elected officials and candidates seeking office. It's part of the basic biographical information that many readers want to know about the people representing them or seeking their votes.

Bill Krueger, Capitol Editor

Is there any reason this should be a subject for Dome?

That is, isn't it private?