Here is the video telling the story of the sad life and death of Walter Dean Jennings.

Andy Warhol once predicted everone would have fifteen minutes. Today, thanks to wordmaster Francesa Street, who did a lovely piece on us, Gosia and I finally achieved 15 minutes of fame, right before our 80th and 65th birthdays.  We are deeply humbled and at once appreciative of the craft it took to write this literary article on CNN’s Travel page.

Title:

Come on out and support carvers from Australia, Mongolia (lots of them), Canada, USA and Thailand. Closes March 31, 2026.  A few carvings have broken appendages. However, melting is minimal.  Wear waterproof shoes.  Bring peanuts for the squirrels.

Book Review by Hank Nuwer

First published in different versions in the Cordova Times and Thestatehousefile.com

And So It Goes: Kurt Vonnegut: A Life

By Charles J. Shields

Fifteen years following the release of “And So It Goes: Kurt Vonnegut: A Life,” I decided to review the biography by Charles J. Shields.

I was surprised to see how many errors jumped off the page. One wonders how the biography’s embarrassing mistakes slipped past former Henry Holt and Co., editor Helen Atsma and Folio Literary Management agent Jeff Kleinman.

I think it is important to note that important changes were made when a St. Martin’s Griffin paperback edition of the biography followed on the heels of the Henry Holt hardback. For one thing, Shields dedicated the hardcover copy to Vonnegut’s longtime friend and magazine editor Knox Breckinridge Burger. Vonnegut had first agreed to leave his longtime agent and join Burger’s fledgling agency, then ran back his promise. Stunned and financially hurt, Burger never quite forgave Vonnegut and turned over more than 100 letters to Shields that contributed to the damning portrait of the author in “So It Goes.” Shields playfully dedicated the hardcover “To Knox Burger: Hang a Gold Medal on him.” Perhaps realizing that dedicating a book to a source looked suspect, Shields removed the dedication from his paperback and dedicated the new edition to his wife Guadelupe.

Also missing from the paperback was a five-page introduction in which Shields revealed that after Vonnegut’s death, Mark Vonnegut refused to grant him permission to quote from hundreds of letters that Shields had picked up privately and from visits to the Vonnegut Collection at Indiana University’s Lilly Library.

In an online blog that Shields shut down without notice one day, Shields openly acknowledged that to obtain his subject’s permission to become the authorized biographer, he promised Vonnegut that he would share any negative references from his interviews with dozens of sources.

That concession, and Shields’ previous largely complimentary biography of Harper Lee, helped convince Vonnegut to name him his authorized biographer despite some initial misgivings by son Mark Vonnegut and wife Jill Krementz. Moreover, while Shields was visiting Vonnegut at his New York townhouse, wife Jill Krementz revealed to the biographer that she was a great fan of Harper Lee’s novels. The latter information is contained in transcripts of interviews with Vonnegut and his wife now found in the Charles J. Shields collection of papers he donated to the Indiana Historical Society.

Shields and Vonnegut chatted several times by phone even as the biographer crisscrossed the country to acquire documents and speak to more sources.

On at least one occasion, Vonnegut hung up on Shields, according to Shields’ notes. On March 13 and March 14, 2007, Vonnegut sat down with Shields for what likely were the most sad and self-pitying interviews he ever gave. In particular, the author surprised and pleased Shields with his explosive criticisms of his late brother Bernard, a well-known scientist. Shields now had ammunition to spare as he gunned down Vonnegut. 

Vonnegut, of course, fell in front of his townhouse after what turned out to be the final interview on March 14. Shields hurried back to the house to locate some documents that Jill Krementz needed for insurance purposes.

The fall proved fatal. Not only did Shields lose a source clearly warming up to him, but Mark Vonnegut denied Shields the right to quote verbatim from the author’s hoard of letters. At that point, Shields told audiences during a post-publication speaking tour, “all bets were off” so far as sharing any negative source feedback with Jill or other family members.

The biography gained a certain notoriety when it was released Nov. 8, 2011. Biographer Charles J. Shields portrayed the celebrated author in an overall unflattering portrait that Shields vigorously touted “as a definitive biography of an extraordinary man.”

To be sure, some reviewers back in 2011 like Janet Maslin of the New York Times gave Shields a free pass, blind to all the book’s errors. She called the biography “an incisive, gossipy page-turner.” Others, like Los Angeles Times book critic David L. Ulin, judged it “a problematic portrait, sketchy and pedantic by turns.”

Biographers Blake Bailey (John Cheever) and Carol Sklenicka (Raymond Carver) gave “So It Goes” juicy blurbs.

I wonder how closely they read the book.

In fact, the best review of “So It Goes,” in my opinion, was by William Rodney Allen.https://www.vonnegutlibrary.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/Rodney-Allen-ARticle.pdf

Let me count the ways the book falls short of what I hoped to read from Shields, the co-founder of Biographers International Organization.

         To begin, Shields misidentified Baby Vonnegut’s birthplace address. The birth certificate listed a rental property at 955 North Pennsylvania Street as the home of parents Edith and Kurt Vonnegut. The rental served the parents, older son Bernard, and daughter Alice as temporary living quarters while workmen completed construction of the parental house in 1923, several months after Kurt’s birth on November 11, 1922. That rental property near downtown Indianapolis long ago was torn down. A smoke shop sits there now, appropriate since Vonnegut smoked Pall Malls right down to his last breath before his fatal fall in 2007

Vonnegut’s boyhood home wasn’t completed until 1923. Vonnegut was born Nov. 11, 1922.

Also, Shields lists the Vonnegut home as 4401 N. Illinois St. The correct address of the boyhood house is 4365 N. Illinois St. The address number didn’t change to “4401” until around 1940, many years after cash-strapped architect Kurt Vonnegut Sr. traded his dream house for another home he and his wife could afford..

Shields said the architect who designed the N. Illinois home was William Osler. Nope, he is the “Father of Internal Medicine.” Shields meant Willard Osler. Besides, Shields might have simply glanced at Wikipedia to see that Sir William Osler died three years before Baby Vonnegut’s birth. The team of Lee Burns and Osler, on the other hand, designed many grand Indianapolis homes in the 1920s, including the residence of Kay’s future best man Benjamin Hitz, Jr.

Vonnegut household servant Carrie B. Hatterbaugh is misspelled “Cannie Hatterbaugh,” Charles McKinley Nice and his wife Clare should have been spelled Charles McKinney Nice and Sadie Claire Mapes Nice (Bingham). Vonnegut’s lawyer Donald C. Farber is called a former sergeant. His military records and wedding announcement have him a PFC.

In Chapter One, Shields writes about young Kurt’s relationship with African-American cook Ida Young.

Shields portrayed Ida Young as a “widow” when she worked for Edith and Kurt Vonnegut. Ida Young didn’t become a widow until Owen, 57, died on February 3, 1935, long after she left the Vonnegut family.

Shields writes that Vonnegut enlisted in the U.S. Army in March of 1943. Vonnegut’s service record notes his enlistment as April 6, 1943.

Then, Shields wrote that Kurt married first wife Jane Cox on Sept. 14, 1945. Uhuh. Due to a change in plans, the wedding took place Sept. 1, 1945.

Shields claimed Vonnegut’s parents attended the wedding of Irma Vonnegut (sister of Kurt Sr.) in Germany in 1924, leaving young Kurt with relatives.

Nope. Irma Vonnegut married Kurt Lindener on August 18, 1922.

His pregnant mother and father didn’t attend the wedding. Kurt wasn’t born until Nov. 11, 1922, and so he sure wasn’t left with anyone.

The Vonnegut parents did sail to Europe in 1924 to visit the Lindeners and their son Arthur.

Also, Lindener’s wealth at the time came from vast Guatemala coffee and sugar plantations. Shields placed the plantations in Honduras, ignoring travel documents, news clippings, and government documents.

Then there’s a “grave error” by Shields of enormous significance. In the climax of Vonnegut’s classic “Slaughterhouse-Five,” an older American foot soldier is put on trial and shot by a German firing squad for swiping a teapot from a ruined building in bombed-out Dresden.

Vonnegut took creative license here.

“Poor old Edgar Derby,” as Vonnegut described him, was a composite character mainly drawn from an actual POW named Michael Palaia who swiped a jar of string-beans or other food. Taking plunder meant death upon conviction.

Shields writes that Palaia “was one of the older prisoners and unable to withstand the deprivations as well as the younger men.”

PFC Michael D. Palaia was a sturdy, strapping 6’2 youth of 19.

Shields fails to factcheck the date Palaia died. Vonnegut and a few other POWS with him in Dresden wrongly claimed the execution occurred on Palm Sunday, 1945.

Shields writes that a firing squad executed Palaia and a Polish soldier April 1, 1945, Palm Sunday.

An online calendar lists April 1 as Easter Sunday. Palm Sunday was March 25, 1945.

German records note the actual execution as Saturday, March 31, 1945. 

Here’s the grave error, far more consequential. Shields writes that Vonnegut was one of four men in the vicinity of the execution who were made to dig a grave and bury Palaia.

No, Vonnegut was not near the execution and learned of it secondhand. Nor did he wield a pick and shovel.

The actual grave diggers were Harry E. J. Kingston, Henry Edward Hall, Joseph Topicz and Floyd T. McLea. The truth was scattered in interviews and commentary by Dresden POWs in the 2008 book “Shadows of Slaughterhouse Five” by Ervin E Szpek, Jr. and Frank J. Idzikowski.

Shields names this book in his list of works cited.

In “Shadows of Slaughterhouse Five,” we learn the real names of the grave diggers from the post-war interviews of military war crime investigators. CIC special agent Joseph Carpenter interviewed Topicz. Special agent William Busch, Army Counter Intelligence Corps, Second Army for the War Crimes office, grilled Kingston. Special agent Joseph S. Smith interviewed former private McLea.

The interviewers also learned that the second prisoner was a Russian, not a Pole as Shields writes.

To be sure, Ginger Strand’s biography “The Brothers Vonnegut” also names Vonnegut as one of the Palaia grave diggers. Less notably, she errs by listing the MIT fraternity of Kurt Sr. as Kappa Sigma. Kurt’s dad actually pledged Delta Upsilon. Why is that important? Because that’s why Kurt became a legacy DU at Cornell University.

It is likely Shields regrets not pressing Vonnegut about the Palaia matter during two interviews at Vonnegut’s New York home. Vonnegut upon his arrival home in Indiana from captivity told his Uncle Alex Vonnegut about Palaia’s demise. It is possible that Kurt claimed to be a grave digger, but it’s also possible notoriously ditzy Uncle Alex wrongly assumed his nephew was present for the execution.

Next up, Shields quotes Vonnegut’s wartime pal Bernard O’Hare describing their capture during the Battle of the Bulge and crying “Don’t s_ _  _” instead of “Don’t shoot!”

However, Vonnegut assured O’Hare’s widow the story was untrue nonsense.

Some other errors by Shields can be traced back to errors by Kurt Vonnegut in his autobiographical writings, including excerpts in “Palm Sunday” taken from an opinionated family “history” by “Uncle” John Rauch, a Vonnegut relative by marriage.

Shields repeats a misspelling by Vonnegut and Rauch of the last name of Charles Volmer, an Indianapolis merchant who persuaded boyhood friend Clemens Vonnegut Sr., Kurt’s great grandfather, to settle in Indianapolis and open a shop with him. Vonnegut, Rauch and Shields write “Volmer” as “Vollmer,” ignoring several city directories of the period.

Moreover, after the financially strapped Volmer and Clemens ended their partnership, the ex-partner did not immediately head for the California gold fields as Shields, Rauch and Kurt presumed. Even a cursory look at readily available city directories list Volmer as the owner of another Indianapolis business in 1861.

Shields, Rauch and Vonnegut all got a single important fact wrong about Kurt’s maternal grandmother, Alice Barus Lieber, who died of illness at 30 on Dec. 10, 1897.

Rauch and Vonnegut wrote she died during childbirth with Vonnegut uncle Rudolph Vonnegut. Wrong, Uncle Rudy was born Jan. 5, 1896.

Shields writes incorrectly that Rudy was 5 when Alice died.

Kurt Vonnegut Sr. died Sept. 30, 1956, of lung cancer after a lifetime of smoking. Shields claims ”no one came to check on him regularly” except a nurse. But sister Irma Lindener flew from Germany to Indianapolis in late July of ’56 to attend to his needs.

We find several errors by Shields in Chapter Six, “The Dead Engineer.” Kurt’s sister Alice lay dying of cancer in a hospital, her husband James Adams dies when his commuter train sailed through an open bridge into Newark Bay.

Unfortunately, the biography’s footnotes reveal that Shields relies too much on an early newspaper account of the tragedy. Later articles contain information based upon investigations by authorities. Those accounts contradict some assertions by Shields.

Most prominently, Shields writes that the train engineer died of a heart attack while the fireman alongside him wasn’t able to halt the train.

No, in fact a pathologist ruled out a heart attack, and experts could not say with certainty if the engineer was incapacitated at the fatal final moments.

Moreover, the inquiry found the fireman had left his post, leaving the engineer alone. Finally, Shields has a car staying on the tracks in safety. Newsreel footage shows two cars spared.

The worst is yet to come.

Here it comes.

After the deaths of Vonnegut’s sister and brother-in-law, Kurt and wife Jane took in their sons James Jr., Steven and Kurt. Shields introduces an older sister of the late James Adams. Shields writes this woman was well off financially and helped with bills incurred by the boys.

What Shields does next is mystifying. The aunt of the boys is Louise Adams Donner, also known as Mrs. Carl Donner. She is an important source for Shields in that she was critical of Kurt and Jane.

For no reason I can see, Shields changes the name Louise Adams Donner to the pseudonymous “Donna Lewis.” Shields refers to Carl Herman Donner as “Carl Lewis.”

Two footnotes cite an interview with “Donna Lewis” on July 27, 2008. Neither footnote explains why the biographer obscures her identity.

I consulted the Charles J. Shields papers at the Indianapolis Historical Society to examine his interview with Louise Adams Donner, aka “Donna Lewis.” 

Shields discloses that his phone interview with her went awry. He neglected to tape her side of the interview. Instead of conducting a second interview, Shields (in his papers) reveals that he relied on his recollection for what the aunt said.

Another big surprise at the Indiana Historical Society was a letter from Shields after Vonnegut’s death to author John Updike. The biographer wrote that he was having trouble getting a handle on how best to tell his subject’s story.

Moreover, confessed Shields, he was no fan of Kurt Vonnegut’s books. He said he wanted to throw two of his subject’s novels across the room when he read them.

Also, Shields confides he told Kurt Vonnegut he would share negative information that came out in interviews with various sources.

To me, that’s hagiography or ersatz biography, not a biography of a well-known novelist.

But when Vonnegut died, Shields declared that promise no longer held.

“I don’t mean to sound ghoulish, but isn’t that the ideal situation for a biographer, to have your subject cooperate happily with you, and then die, leaving you a free hand,” Shields told an interviewer.

Shields’ blistering biography certainly changed the world’s impression of Kurt Vonnegut, as well as my own impression of Vonnegut formed during a long interview, luncheon, and also an evening together at a bar.

“So It Goes” portrays Vonnegut as a skirt-chasing, grouchy, adulterous wreck of a man and something less than a genius as an author.

Here’s Shields describing “Slapstick”: “As the novel doggedly continues, one gets the feeling that he is writing to cheer himself up with wild scenarios but then he returns to castigating the selfishness and behavior of people who should know better. The result is a relentless list of woes. When the last sentence arrives, `And so on,’ the reader is tempted to agree, `Whatever.’”

But therein lies another big fault in the biography. Shields never should have padded the biography with paragraph after paragraph of what amounts to literary criticism. Shields, who self-describes himself as a “literary biographer,” lacks the true critic’s vocabulary, as well as the sensibility, to do justice to criticism. Vonnegut scholars Peter Reed, Jerome Klinkowitz and Robert Merrill do a far better job interpreting the author’s prose.

Shields writes of the death of Kurt’s mother Edith and accepts Kurt’s word that she died a suicide.  The biographer’s interviews with Kurt’s children were skeptical that she intentionally killed herself.

Indeed, Shields had venom to spare after skewering Vonnegut in the hardcover’s intro and in the text of both bios. He refers to Kurt’s patient, elderly agents as “gasbags,” although they protected Vonnegut when short stories came back with rejection slips.

Shields then appears to be a spokesman for Burger. When Vonnegut first agrees and then reneges on a promise to Burger to dump his old agents and sign with Burger, that preachy side of Shields comes out as he paints Vonnegut as a false friend.

Isn’t it possible Vonnegut backed out because Burger was a good editor but never shy about giving his brusque two cents after reading Vonnegut’s manuscripts?

Vonnegut as a struggling newcomer was in no position to do much more than grouse before making all the changes Burger demanded. Perhaps Vonnegut’s pride wouldn’t let him sweat under Burger’s thumb again, which was a mistake on Vonnegut’s part. Burger would have helped the author clean up weaker novels like “Hocus Pocus” and “Slapstick” before they went to press.

Shields was so enamored of Burger, later an editor at pulpy Gold Medal publishing house, that he unwisely dedicated the hardcover to his deceased benefactor, along with a corny pun, “Hang a Gold Medal on him.”

Shields deleted the obsequious dedication in the paperback. He replaced it with a dedication to his wife, Guadalupe.

Shields uses that venom on wife Jill Krementz, an accomplished photographer, who the biographer savages as bitchy, neurotic and unlikable. And who refused to speak to Shields on the record, although she conversed with him off the record during two visits to the New York townhouse she shared with Kurt.

It was instructive for me to read numerous transcripts of the biographer’s interviews with sources like Vonnegut’s daughter Nanny and see how he steered the conversation when bringing up Krementz.

Again and again, he approached the topic by allowing how he was trying to be fair with Jill but try as he might he found very few people who liked her.

A judge would have tossed him out of a courtroom for leading the witnesses, but it worked the way Shields intended. Inevitably, each source babbled some new harsh tidbit about the photographer that allowed Shields to cast her as a harpy from hell.

When Jill declined to go on the record, Shields wrote her a letter, to me rude and unseemly, where he advised her to talk with him because so many of his sources framed her in negative terms.

In an interview with one of Vonnegut’s daughters, Shields complained that he had a phone conversation with Krementz that annoyed him because she said she was speaking from the comfort of her bed and referred to him as dear.

Yet, Krementz told New York magazine that she always likes to talk on the phone in bed, while she browses through magazines. And women of 86-year-old Jill’s age routinely call men “dear” or “honey.”

Moreover, that prissy, prudish, intolerant side of Charles J. Shields jumps off the page now and then in “So It Goes.”

“Still on the prowl, a few weeks later Vonnegut found another woman to bed, a former student at Iowa,” wrote Shields, naming her.

And when Kurt and Jill attend a huge feast at a party for Craig Claiborne attended by 36 chefs and a boatload of celebrities, Shields knocks himself out with irate indignation: “a good example of the disconnect between the values (Vonnegut) espoused and the life he was living.”

The hardcover edition of the biography contained a self-indulgent introduction that raised the eyebrows of reviewers such as David L. Ulin.

Shields said that he tried convincing Kurt to let him be his authorized biographer by praising Kurt’s books as “part of the literature that guides and inspired the next forward-looking age.”

In another letter, Shields told the author, “And I’m a damn good researcher and writer.”

Vonnegut wrote back “OK” on a postcard and had himself a biographer.

Shields removed the introduction from his paperback but neglected to delete references in that intro in his less than all-inclusive index. So, for example, a reference to John Updike on page 5 takes you instead to a blank page.

The bulk of Vonnegut’s quotations and paraphrased words given to Shields came the last two days of Kurt’s life. Jill Krementz even snapped a photo of Shields and Vonnegut seated cheek to cheek.

Shields describes the author as unhealthy appearing, and indeed, Vonnegut’s last utterances sound morose and whiny. Shields puts himself in the book’s final chapter and coyly refers to himself as “a visitor.” We learn that Kurt curtly hung up on a caller, but we only learn the caller was Shields in a talk the biographer gave.

Shields left the brownstone after the session on March 14, 2007, and that evening learned that Vonnegut had fallen while outside and was unconscious. Shields put that in his notes.

Later, in his biography, Shields dresses up the story by saying Vonnegut tripped over his white dog Flour’s leash.

That may be a shaggy dog story. The good citizen who saw Vonnegut on the pavement gave neither his name or too much detail in a 911 call. A footnote lists the biographer’s source for the leash story as a “summary of interviews with Lily Vonnegut, Edie Vonnegut, and Knox Burger.

None of the three saw Vonnegut fall.

The biography ends with the celebrated author’s death April 11, 2007. Somehow, the biography’s mistakes slipped past former Henry Holt and Company editor Helen Atsma and agent Jeff Kleinman.

In closing I should say that Shields was an indefatigable researcher. His biography does have value. And his interviews with dozens of sources stored at the Indianapolis Historical Society will spawn dozens of scholarly articles and books, including my own scholarship on Vonnegut.

I sent an email to Charles J. Shields to ask him for an interview. He sent an email back to decline discussing the Vonnegut bio.

I wanted to ask the biographer about Mark Vonnegut’s charge that “So It Goes” was “a book whose existence is completely and utterly dependent on a picture that Shields would have made up out of whole cloth if he had to.” (Disclosure: I interviewed Dr. Vonnegut before the Shields bio came out).

Perhaps “So It Goes” could be worse, could contain more factual errors and self-righteous pronouncements. But, for the life of me, I don’t see how.

Hank Nuwer is an adjunct professor at the University of Alaska, Fairbanks, a member of Biographers International Organization, and a professor emeritus with Franklin College’s Pulliam School of Journalism. This review first appeared in The Cordova Times.

PS.

I am now reading some reviews of other books by Mr. Shields on Good Reads and find it surprising how Charles J. Shields bites the writing hand of his readers who criticize his biography of Lorraine Hansberry. –Hank Nuwer

I much prefer the Charles J. Shields who writes so eloquently about his father and how his father was an excellent editor and scolded young “Chip” Shields for his composition errors.

This excellent article appeared in Brevity magazine.

I also liked the biographer we see in the following post by author Maud Newton.

 

Web Journalists and Their Sites Are Put to the Test on Ethics

By 

David Sweet

The Wall Street Journal Interactive Edition

Sept. 22, 1999 11:59 pm ET

Hank Nuwer has crafted articles about playing first base for the old Denver Bears. He’s penned a biography of Jesse Owens. But in nearly 20 years as a sportswriter, he’s never been handed an assignment like the one suggested by an incipient sports site.

Wishing to hire Mr. Nuwer as a free-lancer, Sportcut.com discussed money and expectations. But then came a surprising twist: to boost his income, Mr. Nuwer could try to procure signed jerseys from athletes such as Ken Griffey Jr. while interviewing them. If the site were able to sell the merchandise, the free-lancer would nab a 50% cut.

“I said it was unethical, and I got an e-mail back [from a Sportcut.com producer] saying, ‘Some think it is, some think it isn’t,’ ” says Mr. Nuwer, who declined Sportcut.com’s offer. “I’ll put myself in the group of ‘Some think it is.’ ”

(Several attempts to reach the site producer Mr. Nuwer dealt with were unsuccessful.)

Because of the Internet’s explosion, sports sites have been saddled with ethical quandaries (though none as gruesome as whether kidneys should be auctioned online, a decision

Inc. faced recently). The new technology has given birth to issues — should one be able to click to buy Joe DiMaggio memorabilia within an article about his death, for instance. Others are simply old matters wrapped in new packaging: Can a site cover a league or a player fairly when it has inked a side deal with them?

“These issues of ethics weren’t invented with the Web, but they’ve become that much stickier,” says Jerry Lanson, chairman of the department of journalism at Emerson College in Boston. “It’s so easy to put up a Web site. You’re almost returning to the press at the beginning of American history, where almost anyone could start a newspaper. But with that you get falsehoods.”

Aside from producing ESPN.com,

Co.’s ESPN Internet Ventures runs the National Football League and National Basketball Association sites. SportsLine USA Inc., who is owned in part by CBS, operates Major League Baseball’s venue and has signed “superstar” athletes, from golfer Tiger Woods to basketball giant Shaquille O’Neal, to exclusive contracts.

“I think it’s a big problem,” says Emerson’s Mr. Lanson. “Are you not going to hype the NBA? Are you not going to give them prominent play? It’s a real conflict, that’s not appearance of conflict.”

Mark Mariani, president of marketing and sales for SportsLine USA, says SportsLine hasn’t treated its superstar athletes with kid gloves.

“We were the first site to report John Daly lost his contract with Callaway,” says Mr. Mariani, referring to the troubled golfer. “We have on numerous occasions run articles that were not popular with the business side.”

Even sites which haven’t arranged special deals are beholden to developments which took place before their birth. CNN/SI Interactive, for instance, is owned by Time Warner Inc., which runs the Atlanta Braves, Atlanta Hawks and the new National Hockey League expansion team, the Atlanta Thrashers.

Steve Robinson, managing editor of CNN/SI and its namesake network, says the family ties have never affected the site’s coverage.

“We’re two brand names. If we don’t maintain our integrity, then we’re kind of out of business,” he says.

The Catfish Case

When Jim “Catfish” Hunter died of Lou Gehrig’s disease recently, most big venues quickly dedicated their top news hole to numerous stories of the Hall of Famer. (Even The Wall Street Journal’s front page noted the death.) But two sites, ESPN.com and SportsLine, stuck with NFL previews.

Considering their television partners paid billions of dollars for NFL broadcast rights — and considering these sites are promoted handsomely during league telecasts — could this have influenced their story selection? SportsLine’s Mr. Mariani answers an emphatic no.

“That newsroom has 100% editorial control,” Mr. Mariani says. “Catfish Hunter is a sad story, but it’s pretty hard to upset what 80-90% of this country eats, sleeps and drinks, which is NFL football.” (Attempts to set up an interview with an ESPN.com representative were unsuccessful.)

Some baseball team sites benefit from partnerships with local newspapers, who also cover the squad they’re working with. The Los Angeles Times helped the hometown Dodgers create a 40th-anniversary section on their site. Aside from helping to produce the Royals venue, the Kansas City Star also sends beat writers to report on the team.

Chad Rader, the Internet/publications coordinator for the Royals, says the pact is essentially an advertising trade — kcroyals.com is promoted in the Star every Monday, while the newspaper obtains signage at the ballpark. Although he admits the Star’s coverage of the bumbling team has been “nice all year,” he doesn’t believe the alliance affects their reporting.

“Not at all,” he says. “The Kansas City Star’s Internet department operates separately from their news side.”

Unlike their print counterparts, sports sites can sell merchandise instantaneously from within articles. Mark Newman, who has toiled in both the new and old media, sees it as an additional revenue source.

“When John Elway retires, I think it’s justifiable to say, ‘Here’s where you go to get memorabilia,’ ” says Mr. Newman, former general manager of the Sporting News Online. “In this case more than print, the consumer drives the decision-making. If the user wants that capability, you say, ‘Why not?’ You’ve got to make revenue some way.”

CNN/SI’s Mr. Robinson, whose site has not embraced e-commerce with the fervor of others, is not as gung-ho.

“That’s a direction a lot of us are going to go in. But we have to be very careful about it,” he says.

With the Internet’s speed, issues of accuracy come into play — as well as matters of confessing to mistakes. Mr. Newman remembers debating whether the Sporting News Online should create a corrections page, especially considering the magazine itself printed retractions.

Advertisement

“Sites are not being accountable for mistakes; they’re reposting stories,” says Mr. Newman (the Sporting News Online, along with other major sites, do not post corrections).

Further, none of the major sports sites have formulated a code of ethics.

“We’ve been in journalism a long time, and we know what’s wrong and right,” says Mr. Robinson.

Mr. Lanson, who has taught journalism ethics courses at Syracuse University, New York University and San Francisco State University, thinks young journalists need guidance in this area.

“The last time I taught ethics, to my surprise I had a number of students who had no problem taking freebies, making money on the side,” he says. “A lot of reporters who go into an online newsroom need some foundation in why journalists need to be squeaky clean.”

Mr. Nuwer — who has donated letters received from athletes to Buffalo State College — believes he has been cleaner than clean. When it comes to asking for an autograph on the job, he’d rather face sportswriter-loathing Bobby Knight in a dark alley.

“To the best of my knowledge, as a sportswriter, I’ve never asked a player for an autograph,” he notes. “And you know, not one of ’em has asked me for one, either.”

New Sports Site Rescinds Policy After Questions Arise Over Ethics

By 

David Sweet

The Wall Street Journal Interactive Edition

Sept. 24, 1999 11:55 am ET

 

Faced with a policy that was considered by some in journalism to be ethically questionable, Sportcut.com announced Thursday it had rescinded the provision roughly a month before the site’s launch.

As reported in The Wall Street Journal Interactive Edition, Sportcut.com allowed writers a chance to earn money by procuring sports memorabilia from players. If a writer obtained a signed jersey from baseball star Ken Griffey Jr., say, during an interview, he could post it for sale on the site and receive a 50% cut of any revenue. Writers could also sell on the venue any memorabilia they had previously acquired.

“It’s a policy that never should have been in the contract,” says Scott Brown, chief operating officer of the Montclair, N.J., operation. “This is a mistake on our part. We are taking full responsibility.”

Mr. Brown, who believes the original policy was requested by one of the writers, says the person who put together the contract was no longer with Sportcut.com. He says all writers who have joined the site have been informed of the policy change.

Everyone from sports site editors to journalism professors blasted the original policy.

“The last thing a good journalist wants to do is ask someone for an autograph,” says Mark Newman, former general manager of the Sporting News Online. “It’s the most disgusting thing one can do as a journalist.”

Mr. Brown says only one writer, Hank Nuwer, complained about the provision. But Mr. Nuwer — who turned down Sportcut.com’s offer to become a free-lancer when he found out about the memorabilia policy — was vociferous in his opposition.

“I thought athletes already have a low opinion of sportswriters, and it would only go lower,” says Mr. Nuwer, a veteran sportswriter.

Sportcut.com, which looks to give users an insider’s perspective into the world of sports, is prepared to launch in October.

 

 

Manslaughter Sought in Florida Hazing Case

By 

Arian Campo-Flores

March 4, 2013 9:59 pm ET

Resize

Gift unlocked article

Florida prosecutors charged 12 former members of the Florida A&M University marching band with manslaughter Monday, in connection with a 2011 hazing death that focused attention on violent rituals on college campuses.

Ten of the defendants had previously been charged with felony hazing, a third-degree felony that carries a maximum sentence of five years, in the death of 26-year-old drum major Robert Champion. Prosecutors charged two additional people with manslaughter, a second-degree felony that carries a maximum sentence of 15 years.

It isn’t clear what prompted Jeffrey Ashton, the state attorney for Orange and Osceola counties, to upgrade the charges. Calls to his office weren’t returned.

Mr. Champion’s family, who complained that felony hazing charges were too lenient, praised the prosecutors’ decision. “We applaud the courage and leadership demonstrated by Mr. Ashton for amending these charges to be commensurate with the crimes committed against Robert Champion,” said Christopher Chestnut, an attorney for the family. “Finally, we are on a path to justice.”

William Hancock, an attorney for defendant Rikki Wills, reacted with frustration. “We were somewhat surprised and disappointed that the state made this decision at this time,” he said. “We had hoped that we could all reach a resolution in this case and were just taken aback by their actions.”

The defendants haven’t entered pleas for the new charges, but the 10 previously charged with hazing had pleaded not guilty.

To prove manslaughter, prosecutors could pursue several paths, said Tamara Lave, a University of Miami law professor and former public defender who said she had no inside knowledge of the case. They could argue the defendants’ acts caused Mr. Champion’s death and were not excused or justified.

Hank Nuwer, a professor at Franklin College in Franklin, Indiana, who has studied hazing for decades, said the stiffer charges could have repercussions nationally. “You would hope that it sends a message to students across the country in any kind of beating situation that there can be consequences,” he said.

Hazing Charges in Drum Major’s Death

By 

Arian Campo-Flores

Updated May 2, 2012 8:45 pm ET

Resize

Gift unlocked article

Florida prosecutors charged 13 people Wednesday in connection with the suspected hazing death of a Florida college-band member, in a case that has heightened scrutiny of violent campus rituals across the U.S.

YOU MAY ALSO LIKE

2:31

Paused

0:03/3:15

TAP FOR SOUND

A Florida state attorney on Wednesday charged 13 individuals in connection with the hazing death of a Florida A&M University drum major in November. Arian Campo-Flores has details on The News Hub. Photo: AP.

The death last November of Florida A&M University drum major Robert Champion was “nothing short of an American tragedy,” Lawson Lamar, the state attorney for Orange County, said at a news conference.

Prosecutor on Charges in Florida A&M Hazing Death

YOU MAY ALSO LIKE

Prosecutor on Charges in Florida A&M Hazing DeathPlay video: Prosecutor on Charges in Florida A&M Hazing Death

Florida State Attorney Lawson Lamar held a press conference to announce that charges have been filed against 13 individuals in the hazing death of Florida A&M student Robert Champion. Watch clips from the press conference. Video: Associated Press.

Mr. Lamar said 11 of the people face felony hazing charges, which carry a maximum sentence of six years in prison. The other two face misdemeanor hazing charges. Mr. Lamar said he wouldn’t release the names of those charged, since most of them hadn’t yet been arrested.

The case has raised pressure on Florida A&M, in Tallahassee, to address its campus hazing culture. Last week, two faculty members accused of being present during a separate hazing incident in 2010 resigned.

Robert Champion died after a suspected hazing incident. ILLUSTRATION: ASSOCIATED PRESS

In recent years, numerous states—including Florida—have passed tougher antihazing laws, said Hank Nuwer, a professor at Franklin College in Franklin, Ind., who has studied hazing for decades. As a result, those who engage in hazing face “the very good possibility of not only an ethical violation, but spending time in jail,” he said.

The scrutiny of Mr. Champion’s death could lead other universities to become more aggressive in addressing violent rites in bands, fraternities and sororities, said Mr. Nuwer.

Pam Champion, mother of Mr. Champion, said she was “totally disappointed” with the charges. “I was hoping for something a little bit stiffer to set an example,” she said. “My husband and I wanted to end this hazing.”

Mr. Champion, 26 years old, collapsed aboard a bus in Orlando after a hazing incident following a football game against rival Bethune-Cookman University, authorities said. The medical examiner’s office in Orlando ruled the death a homicide, caused by internal bleeding resulting from blunt-force trauma.

“We know that Robert Champion died as a result of being beaten” and “his death is not linked to one sole strike but is attributed to multiple blows.” Mr. Lamar said.

Lawson Lamar, state attorney for Orange County, Fla., standing next to Orange County Sheriff Jerry Demings, announced charges Wednesday in connection with Mr. Champion’s death. ILLUSTRATION: ASSOCIATED PRESS

Mr. Champion, who was previously healthy, died within an hour of the alleged hazing incident, according to the medical examiner’s report. An autopsy found “extensive contusions of his chest, arms, shoulder and back,” the report said.

In a statement released after the charges, Solomon Badger, chairman of the Florida A&M board of trustees, and university president James Ammons said, “We are vigorously working to eradicate hazing from FAMU and doing everything within our power to ensure an incident like this never happens again. Our hearts and our prayers are with the Champion family and the extended FAMU family as we all continue to deal with this tragedy.”

Christopher Chestnut, an attorney for Mr. Champion’s family, couldn’t be reached for comment.

The two former faculty members—Diron Holloway, the marching band’s director of saxophones, and Anthony Simons, an assistant professor of music—had received letters from school officials notifying them that the institution intended to dismiss them, said Mutaqee Akbar, an attorney for Mr. Simons who said he was also authorized to speak for Mr. Holloway. He said they denied the allegations against them, but decided to “protect themselves and their careers” and move on.

In their statement, Messrs. Badger and Ammons outlined steps Florida A&M has taken to address hazing on campus. Among the measures: the indefinite suspension of the marching band; the requirement that incidents be reported within 24 hours; and the formation of an independent anti-hazing committee to research ways to prevent the practice.

The hazing committee has encountered difficulties, as several members have quit in protest over a requirement its meetings take place in public.

Advertisement

Write to Arian Campo-Flores at arian.campo-flores@wsj.com

Copyright ©2024 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved. 87990cbe856818d5eddac44c7b1cdeb8

1. S.
2. CRIME

Five Baruch Students Charged With Hazing in Frat Death

Murder charges expected against other students in 2013 death of Chun Hsien ‘Michael’ Deng

By 

Mike Vilensky

Follow

 and 

Zolan Kanno-Youngs

Sept. 15, 2015 8:58 pm ET

Resize

2

Gift unlocked article

Chun Hsien ‘Michael’ Deng died in 2013 during a fraternity hazing ritual. PHOTO: COURTESY OF THE DENG FAMILY

Five Baruch College students on Tuesday were charged in connection with the 2013 death of a freshman participating in a fraternity hazing ritual, reigniting a debate about the place of Greek life at the Manhattan school.

A grand jury has recommended third-degree murder charges against five other fraternity members as well as the fraternity itself, and lesser charges against another 32 members, some of whom were charged Tuesday, police said. They expect to make the arrests in waves.

Chun Hsien “Michael” Deng died in December 2013 during a weekend trip to a Tunkhannock Township, Pa., house rented by Baruch’s Pi Delta Psi fraternity. There, he and other pledges were outfitted with weighted backpacks and beaten by fraternity members during a hazing ritual, according to the Pocono Mountain Regional Police Department.

Mr. Deng lost consciousness at some point, police said, and died after being taken to the hospital.

Pi Delta Psi didn’t respond to requests for comment on Tuesday. An attorney for one of the students charged on Tuesday said the students were charged with hazing and hindering apprehension.

The murder charges against other students are expected in the coming days or weeks. The Pocono police didn’t respond to requests for comment clarifying the timing of the charges.

Jim Swetz, an attorney for one of the students expected to face murder charges, said on Tuesday he would defend his client vigorously.

“What happened is a terrible tragedy,” Mr. Swetz said, “but not every tragedy involves criminal conduct.”

In a statement, an attorney for Mr. Deng’s family said: “Fraternities and their members must be held accountable, and this step by authorities is an important one.”

On Tuesday, news of the charges reverberated around Baruch, part of the City University of New York system with some 17,000 students. “Everybody’s kind of eerie about Greek life now,” said Laetitia Metellus, a 20-year-old senior. “I wouldn’t participate knowing what happened.”

Brad Williams, a recent Baruch graduate who lived in the same dorm as Mr. Deng, said the tragedy has resulted in extra attention paid to all extracurricular groups on campus.

“They’re really, really scrutinized right now,” he said.

Some students said the incident, while tragic, isn’t indicative of the campus culture. But others were pushing for wider changes.

Since Mr. Deng’s death in 2013, Baruch permanently banned Pi Delta Psi. In fall 2014, it suspended all pledging activities.

Greek life remains a small part of its campus life, with fewer than 100 students involved, school officials said.

Baruch, citing federal privacy rules, declined to say whether the fraternity members facing charges are still enrolled, but it said it “brought disciplinary proceedings against all of them, except for those who voluntarily withdrew from Baruch.”

In a statement, its president, Mitchel B. Wallerstein said: “We owe it to Michael and his family to hold accountable those who were responsible for the senseless death of this promising young man.”

Stephen Francoeur, a Baruch librarian, said on Tuesday that the school hasn’t had closure since Mr. Deng’s death and that its Greek culture hasn’t changed enough.

“The world would be a better place if they had a smaller presence on these campuses,” he said.

Critics of hazing practices are closely following the case. Hazing deaths that led to criminal convictions “can be counted on two hands,” said Hank Nuwer, a professor at Franklin College in Indiana and director of HazingPrevention.org. “Typically the charges get dropped or plea-bargained away. These charges are very serious, so it will be interesting to see if they stick.”

Prof. Nuwer said the incident at Baruch shouldn’t be seen as isolated.

Fraternities “see themselves as a culture all to themselves,” he said, “and part of the power and status associated with frats is that you can take a beating, you can drink an extreme amount of alcohol—that you’re part of a privileged group that’s able to do that.”

Mark Koepsell, executive director of the Association of Fraternity/Sorority Advisors, disagreed.

“The death of this young man is a tragedy, and those involved should be held accountable,” he said. “This is an example of a fraternity gone wrong in an individual situation, but certainly not representative of the whole.”

Other area schools have changed their approach to fraternities and sororities in recent years. Connecticut’s Wesleyan University mandated in 2014 that all of its fraternities go coed.

Earlier this year, Rutgers University, in New Jersey, citing “a number of alcohol-related incidents,” suspended fraternity and sorority parties. Alfred University in upstate New York banned fraternities in 2002 after the death of a student during a fraternity-related incident.

Test for Colleges This Fall: Does Criminalizing Hazing Tame Fraternities?

State laws aim to prevent hazing-related accidents and deaths; ‘there is no such thing as good-natured hazing,’ says FSU president

By 

Acacia Coronado

Oct. 12, 2019 5:30 am ET

Resize

119

Gift unlocked article

Florida implemented what is known as Andrew’s Law, after Florida State University student Andrew Coffey, who died after a hazing incident at a Pi Kappa Phi party. PHOTO: JOSEPH REEDY/ASSOCIATED PRESS

Pledging season for college fraternities is in high gear across the U.S., and this year they face stricter safety protocols and more state laws that criminalize hazing.

States including Florida, Louisiana, Texas, Pennsylvania and New York have strengthened laws in an effort to prevent hazing-related accidents and deaths since early 2018.

Cracking down on hazing is different than curtailing underage drinking because hazing involves various forms of harassment, from the forced consumption of alcohol to the physical abuse of college students trying to join a selective organization like a fraternity or sorority.

This month, Florida implemented what is known as Andrew’s Law, which gives legal immunity to anyone who renders aid to someone whose safety is endangered from hazing, even if they too were involved. Before this clause, there was no clear protection for students who called 911. The state also expanded the definition of hazing victims to include members and former members of a fraternity.

The law is named after Andrew Coffey, a student from Florida State University who died of alcohol poisoning after a Pi Kappa Phi party on “Big Brother Night” in 2017. He was found without a pulse the next morning, and fraternity brothers texted one another for 11 minutes before seeking help.

Five students pleaded guilty for misdemeanor hazing in the Coffey case, and a civil lawsuit settled out of court for an undisclosed amount.

The family of Louisiana State University student Maxwell Gruver, who died after a hazing ritual in 2017. PHOTO: MELINDA DESLATTE/ASSOCIATED PRESS

FSU President John Thrasher, a former state legislator, supported the bill. He said the university has no tolerance for hazing and is actively working with students to communicate concerns and ensure university values are reflected in campus activities.

“There is no such thing as good-natured hazing,” Mr. Thrasher said. “When you have a death like you have here, you have to take a step back and reflect on what are the values of this university.”

Victor Tran, assistant executive director of communications for Pi Kappa Phi, said hazing has no place in its organization and the chapter was immediately closed.

“Pi Kappa Phi supports state-based anti-hazing legislation that delivers greater transparency through stronger hazing reporting requirements, strengthens criminal penalties and encourages prosecution, calls for university accountability for bad actors, provides amnesty to encourage people to call for help, and calls for student education,” Mr. Tran said.

Hank Nuwer, a professor of journalism at Franklin College in Indiana, who has compiled data on hazing deaths for more than 30 years, said laws are doing little to curb the problem. Since 1975, he has researched more than 200 hazing and hazing-related deaths and written two books on the subject. He said fraternities have existed for centuries, but today there is cruelty never seen before.

“We are seeing so much more deaths in this alcohol era than ever,” Mr. Nuwer said.

The North American Interfraternity Conference, which represents 66 men’s fraternities, implemented new health and safety guidelines in September. Among the new regulations is a ban on alcohol with a proof of 15% or more at most fraternity events. The guidelines also reiterate federal laws, such as not consuming illegal substances.

But the conference doesn’t enforce policy, leaving that to the individual fraternities, which could mean the guidelines are more suggestions than rules.

In the past two weeks, Ohio University in Athens, Ohio, has suspended 15 Interfraternity Council member chapters, three sororities, a business co-ed fraternity and the marching band over hazing allegations, a university spokeswoman said.

In Louisiana, the state legislature approved a law in 2018 that clearly defines hazing, making it a criminal felony and raising the fine to up to $10,000. This year, legislators added a requirement that schools promptly report incidents to authorities and the public.

“We hope in the long run it will not only change lives but change the culture and make it unacceptable socially…and make hazing a thing of the past,” said Nancy Landry, a Republican and former state representative who sponsored hazing bills.

The law was sparked by the 2017 death of Louisiana State University student Maxwell Gruver, who died with a blood alcohol content six times the legal driving limit after a Phi Delta Theta ritual called “Bible Study.” One former student was convicted of negligent homicide, while two others were sentenced to 30 days in jail for hazing and fined $100. They weren’t tried under the new law.

LSU representatives said they couldn’t comment on pending litigation matters. Sean Wagner, chief operating officer of Phi Delta Theta, said following Mr. Gruver’s death the fraternity reviewed their health and safety policies, implemented new requirements such as bystander education and closed the LSU chapter.

Advertisement