The courting of Cope: Behind the scenes of a $1 million withdrawal
Written by Doug Brown Sunday, 12 February 2012 23:17
Interactive
| Click through each image to see what role they play in the story
How we reported
No university employees associated with the Cope Court donation spoke to the Daily Kent Stater for this article, despite numerous attempts over two weeks. One trustee hung up his phone after one minute and another emailed one sentence saying she agreed with the university statement; the rest never talked at all.Read more...
Hundreds of emails obtained by the Daily Kent Stater under state open records laws document how:
• Athletic Director Joel Nielsen and other university officials accepted a $1 million donation to the athletic department from alumnus Jason M. Cope in March 2011• The Board of Trustees voted its unanimous approval of the donation and the naming of the basketball court in Cope’s honor, without being informed of the SEC violations in his past
• Cope withdrew the donation as the Stater was investigating his past
• University officials worked in the background to present a unified front as the media began to inquire about the donation
Audio transcript: Trustees approve donation
KentWired Video
Cope, who had previously given about $13,000 over a four-year period to the Kent State Athletic Department, now runs two golf courses under the company Copeland Group, LLC, and emails show he is still heavily involved in the stock market.
He pledged to transfer $1 million in stocks to the athletic department on March 17, 2011, according to emails sent to the athletic department. The university didn’t publicly disclose the donation for nine months until the board officially approved it on Dec. 13.
Kent State’s Board of Trustees has given no indication it was aware of Cope’s past SEC violations when it voted unanimously to rename the basketball court “Cope Court” after he and his wife, Stacie, pledged $1 million.
“Yep… I was there for the vote,” Athletic Director Joel Nielsen reported to Matt Geis, associate athletic director and executive director for athletic advancement, and Tom Kleinlein, deputy athletic director, in an email immediately following the board’s approval. “Only question from a BOT member during the meeting was, ‘did we get enough $$ for the naming?’ … I assured them we did.”
Cope withdrew the donation on the evening of Jan. 5 — nine days before Cope Court would have become official in an elaborately planned pregame ceremony and one day after emails show Nielsen warned him about the Stater working on a story about the SEC violations.
Story Background
Stock Transfer
• Cope’s donation was to be split between the men’s basketball and men’s golf teams. Cope was the college roommate of assistant golf coach Rob Wakeling.• The $1 million donation was to be made up of a transfer of stocks over a period of years from Cope to the university, which “may offer better tax benefits than a gift of cash,” according to the university website — a common practice for donors.
• Although Cope committed to the donation last March, the university received the stock information on Jan. 3. He often didn’t respond to emails from Geis and KSU Foundation employees inquiring about sending his stock information. It left athletic department employees wondering for months about when they could start their projects, and where Cope wanted to designate his money be spent.
Spending the money
• The first priority for spending Cope’s donation was to attract basketball recruits through a $50,000 basketball office upgrade, according to a November email from Geis to Cope.• Three months earlier, Nielsen, Geis and Kleinlein began to discuss where the money would go. Kleinlein was an advocate for the basketball office upgrade “to show some emphasis in that area similar to what we have done in football.”
• Nielsen, on the other hand, wasn’t sold on the idea, saying the pressure for the upgrades “is partly a carryover from Geno bitching to the staff about not getting anything,” he wrote about former basketball coach Geno Ford, with whom the university opened a lawsuit after he was hired away by Bradley last March. “Also, the urgency from the basketball coaches is specifically tied to doing the work for football… just wait until other sports start chirping.”
• He suggested Cope’s money go to “paying off some of our accumulated debt,” an idea that Geis said Cope wouldn’t approve.
• “If we continue to have a prolonged recession, which appears to be the case, we’ll have to be cognizant of operating budget money and our ability to cover any funds that might go away in future annual budgets – we are not in control of 80% of our revenue,” Nielsen wrote. “It’s great to build new things, but we still need to pay the bills each June 30.”
• Three months later, Geis asked Cope to consider the office upgrades first.
Publicizing Cope
• The athletic department and division of institutional advancement staff wanted Cope’s donation to receive maximum publicity.• Geis wanted to plan for an “elaborate” ceremony for the Jan. 14 Cope Court revealing before the Bowling Green game. Geis secured 40 tickets to the game for the Copes.
• A Jan. 1 email from Alicia Gaffney, who runs athletic special events for Kent State indicated what was planned: a one minute public address announcement with the “gift introduction;” a one minute “thank you video” from golf coach Herb Page, basketball coach Rob Senderoff, and student athletes; and a one minute “introduction of Cope Family and presentation of framed jersey by Nielsen, Senderoff” and possibly Lefton. “Foam talons” would be given out to the first 500 fans.
• A September email from Valoree Vargo, director of donor services, to Geis revealed that Finn and Sokany wanted there to be an article about Cope for the December issue of Kent State magazine (“When we talked last night he was honored that we asked!!!!” responded Geis).
• The university hired Ron Kirksey, a former executive director of university communications at Kent State, to write the article for the alumni magazine — the Copes were able to review it before it went in. The December issue of Kent State magazine has not yet printed and it’s unknown if the Cope piece will still be published.
• A draft of the piece, obtained in a records request, reports that Cope worked for “financial advising and venture capital firms in Pittsburgh, New York and Beverly Hills.” It doesn’t mention his SEC violations. “We are giving to these programs because we have personal relationship with the basketball and golf coaches,” said Cope in the article.
• While emailing about the alumni magazine piece, Vargo asked Geis if Cope would speak at November’s Founders Gala, which recognizes donors to the university “to talk about his gift and why it was important for them to do this,” wrote Vargo about Cope. “It would be no more than 3-5 minutes.” Cope gave his speech at the Founder’s Gala in November.
University officials contend they were “well aware” of the donor’s SEC violations before Cope agreed to the $1 million donation.
The board approves
President Lester Lefton, Eugene Finn, vice president of institutional advancement, and Nielsen presented the “Cope Court” resolution to the Board of Trustees on Dec. 13.The 11 trustees approved it — with no objections — in exactly two minutes. Board Chair Jacqueline Woods called the resolution “wonderful” and praised Nielsen and Finn for their “hard work on that.”
Nielsen had known about Cope’s SEC violations since at least March. None of the documents prepared for the presentation to the trustees mentioned the violations, nor did the oral presentation given that afternoon. The board has given no indication that it knew of the possibly controversial nature of the donation before voting.
Anne Neal, president of the American Council of Trustees and Alumni, said in a phone interview on Jan. 30 that too often trustees don’t ask questions and aren’t fully informed before making decisions.
“As best as I can tell in this particular case, obviously questions were raised about the donor after the announcement of the gift,” Neal explained. “That should be up to the board to determine whether that was appropriate on behalf of the institution to accept the gift.”
The American Council of Trustees and Alumni is a non-profit organization that evaluates and works with higher education leaders.
A records request for the background information drafted by athletic department and institutional advancement staff and presented to the board shows a document that did not reflect Cope’s entire past.
Under the “Alternatives and Consequences” section, it says, “There are none. The proposal would bring a degree of highly merited recognition to the Cope family for its generosity, and it is consistent with university naming policy.”
The board reacts
Board members were notified of the past of the basketball court’s namesake from the Stater’s Jan. 6 article, which was posted on KentWired.com and later reposted by the Record-Courier, according to emails sent to and by board members. Charlene Reed, secretary to the Board of Trustees and chief of staff to the president, sent all 11 trustees a link to the story the evening it was published.“Whether it’s large gifts, academic quality, or athletic programs, it is essential that boards be informed and engaged and ask questions,” Neal wrote in an email to the Stater following the phone interview. “In too many places, they simply are rubber stamps, or left out in the dark.”
A Jan. 7 email from trustee Patrick Mullin to Reed asked, “What does our current policy require as far as back group checks for major gifts?”
Reed forwarded the email to Finn.
“There is no established ‘policy’ but we do research on all of our high level prospects,” Finn responded about a background check. “Keep in mind that we did know about Cope’s past but felt it was no longer an issue based on the information we had. But obviously we still do not have a clear sense of what might still be out there for the SEC.”
Finn did not respond to interview inquiries from the Stater to explain what information they had about Cope.
In a brief telephone interview with Mullin on Jan. 25, the trustee confirmed he wasn’t informed of the donor’s past before voting to approve the resolution.
“I don’t know anything about it, so I can’t really help you at all, other than what I read in the paper,” Mullin said. “I was not involved with this at all; I don’t know anything about it, and I’m not going to answer any follow-up questions.” Mullin hung up and promptly reported the call to Reed, who sent an email to the 11 board members and Lefton with the subject “URGENT-Heads up.”
In the email, Reed warned the board members about a reporter asking about the board’s knowledge of the donor, and reminded them about “keeping with the Board’s protocol” by directing any communication to Woods, the board chair. On Jan. 31, the Stater emailed Woods and requested an interview. The email detailed the Stater’s examination of the university officials’ email conversations, which indicated the board was unaware of Cope’s past before approving his donation.
A day later, the Stater received a response from Reed with a statement on behalf of Woods: “The submission to the Board of Trustees of the Cope Family naming gift followed all normal university practices and policies regarding donor gifts including the level of detail that was provided to the board.”
“At the end of the day, trustees are legally responsible for the academic and financial health of their organization, and they are ultimately accountable for decisions of the institution,” Neal, of ACTA, said. “If they don’t know what’s going on or haven’t insisted on a full briefing when there are complex matters, they are not doing their job.”
Despite numerous interview requests and emails sent by the Stater, the only direct response from Woods came in a Feb. 4 email: “I am out of town and agree with the statement the University has provided.”
Vincent, who was informed of the specific topics being reported for this article, did not respond to numerous requests for recorded interviews with Lefton, Nielsen, Finn, Geis and all members of the Board of Trustees. Multiple phone and email messages left for those individuals were ignored. Specific questions relevant to this story were never answered.
On Jan. 27, Vincent did offer a collective interview with Reed, Nielsen, Finn, Willis Walker, vice president for human resources and chief university counsel, and Iris Harvey, vice president for university relations and chief officer for marketing, communications and government relations, but specified the interview could not be recorded on video. The Stater declined the group interview on the grounds that it could not be video recorded but later attempted to arrange other interviews through Vincent, specifying the meetings would be taped on a digital audio recorder. Vincent did not reply to the requests for interviews but replied with the university’s statements.
The press asks questions
On Dec. 21, emails showed Tom Nader, Record-Courier sports editor, was the first to ask if the athletic department was aware of Cope’s SEC violations.“He wasn’t really looking to do anything negative with it, just asking more if we were aware of it before moving forward with the court name,” relayed Todd Vatter, interim director of athletic communications, to Nielsen, Tom Kleinlein, deputy director of athletics, and Geis on Dec 22.
Nielsen responded and said, “We were aware of the 2000 SEC case,” and copied into the email Harvey and Tom Neumann, associate vice president of marketing and communications, Finn, Steve Sokany, senior associate vice president of institutional advancement, Lefton, Reed and Walker. “Todd, let’s get with [University Communications & Marketing] to discuss drafting a response to media should this question arise again.”
UCM worked with the athletic department and institutional advancement for the next two weeks on a statement that said they were aware of Cope’s history and still supported the court naming.
Although emails showed the Record-Courier had the information about Cope on Dec. 21, before other media, the paper didn’t publish anything until it reposted the Jan. 6 story by the Stater on its website.
“I told them to go slow on it because I didn’t know the validity of it, and I didn’t want to mess up a relationship between Kent State and a donor,” said David Dix, Record-Courier publisher, in a Jan. 26 telephone interview about why his paper held off. “I just said be very careful because if it’s wrong and if we cause them to lose a million dollars, or whatever they were going to get, they will never forgive us. Whereas a student newspaper, they will just chalk it up to youthful indiscretion.”
Hours before the Stater interviewed Nielsen for its Jan. 6 story, the university had finished drafting the statement and had it approved by Cope.
At 12:25 p.m. on Jan. 4, an email from Vatter to Nielsen, Neumann, Vincent, Iris Harvey and Geis showed what took two weeks to draft.
“The university was well aware of the past litigation involving Jason Cope before beginning the discussions about his recent gift to Kent State,” it read. “Jason is a proud alumnus and has been a loyal supporter of our athletics program for many years. He has an undeniable passion for the academic and athletic pursuits of our student-athletes.”
At 5:10 p.m., Nielsen emailed top university administrators saying he had spoken to a Stater reporter about Cope Court.
“I essentially gave him the language from our statement verbatim,” he wrote. “I’d anticipate he’ll write a story for publication next week. Nothing new came from the conversation. I also spoke directly with Jason [Cope] this afternoon to alert him of this individuals interest in the ‘story.’”
Cope withdrew his $1 million donation in a short email to Nielsen on the evening of Jan. 5.
“Joel,” said Cope, “I am very sorry to inform you that due to an unforeseen change in my personal situation I will need to cancel my gift to the athletic department. I hope that the situation here changes going forward, and I will keep you informed if and when it does. Regretfully, Jason Cope.”
The withdrawal came a day after emails showed Nielsen saying he warned Cope about the Stater writing an article about his past SEC violations and 42 minutes after Vatter forwarded a message to Nielsen and Geis that the Stater had unsuccessfully tried to reach Cope at his home in an attempt to interview him about his past and the donation.
It was also two days after Cope approved the university statement saying it was aware of his violations and was standing behind his donation and three days after Cope sent in the information for transferring the first $60,000 of his donation.
The benefits of giving
Cope and his wife, Stacie, flew with the Kent State football team to its season opening game against Alabama on Sept. 3. In emails to Casey Wolf, assistant athletic director for football operations, Geis asked for their son to be added to the flight at the last minute.“Sorry about the late notice but this is important,” wrote Geis at 3:45 p.m. Sept. 1, two days before the game. After Wolf answered, “I’ll do my best,” Geis reiterated the request’s importance: “Thanks. This is the guy who recently gave us $1M.” A couple of weeks earlier, Cope indicated in an email that Geis bought his wife jewelry.
“Again, THANK YOU for the ring and necklace for Stacie,” wrote Cope. “We both love them! She is wearing hers today. I look forward to hanging with you soon.”
Cope also asked Geis for free tickets to multiple Kent State basketball games, including last year’s MAC tournament, where Geis provided four tickets and invited Cope to his suite.
Geis also indicated in an email that he was getting tickets to the NCAA basketball tournament in Houston last year. “Final Four tickets will be sent to me mid week,” wrote Geis to Cope. “Hotel rooms are already booked in downtown Houston at the Omni — walking distance to the arena. I’ll send you all of that information.”
Giving free tickets to games is a common occurrence for large donors, said a former athletic department fundraiser who retired from the athletic advancement staff just over a decade ago.
“They are giving you a ton of money, you give them tickets in return,” he said.
Large donors regularly travel with teams to away games when there is room available.
#KWcope
But he doesn’t recall the advancement staff giving donors some of the other perks indicated in the emails between Geis and Cope.
“I don’t ever remember any gifts of any sort,” he said, referencing the jewelry and Final Four tickets. “I don’t know how that would work exactly.”
Geis never responded to phone calls and emails over a period of two weeks to explain his correspondence with Cope.
Rarely discussed
Despite the university’s statement that they were “well aware” of Cope’s SEC violations, it was never discussed in the hundreds of pages of emails from Kent State officials until they began drafting statements for the press on Dec. 22—nine days after the board of trustees approved the donation.Within the context of the emails, no one expressed any hesitation about accepting Cope’s donation, nor was there any acknowledgment or anticipation that the public might react negatively to naming the basketball court after him.
Instead, Kent State’s communications specialists worked with athletic department and institutional advancement staff to emphasize Cope’s commitment to Kent State sports.
The only mention of the violations from Cope came in a Jan. 3 email to Geis, after he was told the Stater would be interviewing Nielsen about the donation. He attached a New York Times article that told a story about the other main figure in the fraud case, Ira Monas, and how “he acted alone,” according to Cope.
“I think it is bad to get in debate over this, and agree with the strategy to try to make it a non event and move forward,” he wrote to Geis. “As my friends know, this is a very sensitive subject with me because I am not the type of person to act unethically in any way. Thank you for your personal support, loyalty, and friendship.”
The Times article Cope sent in an effort to clear his name was published on Feb. 27, 2001. Five months later, on Aug. 14, 2001, the United States district court issued the $19 million judgment against Cope, Monas and their companies.
Cope was suspended from the National Association of Securities Dealers in 2002 because of the violations, and then officially barred in 2003 “from association with any [NASD] member in any capacity” after not challenging the suspension, according to the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority.
Contact Doug Brown at dbrow127@kent.edu.
Set as favorite
Bookmark
Email this
Hits: 7336
Comments (29)
Subscribe to this comment's feed
written by Karl Idsvoog, February 19, 2012
In places like Egypt, Syria and Iran, there's a good reason to remain anonymous. To post a name can lead to a person being beaten, imprisoned or killed. But this isn't China. This isn't Syria. Here, standard operating procedure for anyone adding comments to a news site should be to include his/her name.
-
- +2
-
-
written by Flash Alum, February 18, 2012
Profesor Idsvoog,
You are well aware that you may accept or disregard my comments. I respect your choice. May I simply point out some selective expectations, as you do not ask others who agree with your view to publish their names.
You are well aware that you may accept or disregard my comments. I respect your choice. May I simply point out some selective expectations, as you do not ask others who agree with your view to publish their names.
-
- -2
-
-
written by Flash Alum, February 18, 2012
Thank you for the thoughtful and insightful response to my concerns. We disagree, but I finally feel that my concerns are understood.
The only two college newspapers I read on a regular basis are The Daily Northwestern and The Daily Kent Stater, as I am a graduate of both fine institutions. Both newspapers covered highly embarrassing events at their institutions in the past year. Let me compare the two student papers to express my disappointment in the quality of the Daily Kent Stater’s coverage.
Northwestern was the cite of a highly embarrassing incident in the 2010-11 academic year. A professor allowed a live demonstration in a Human Sexuality class. Hell broke loose the next day. The professor was removed from teaching responsibilities. The Faculty Senate was up in arms over its perceptions of violations of academic freedom. Students were upset the class was cancelled mid quarter. Parents were upset because, well, you might imagine why. The only common denominator was everyone was upset with the administration.
The Daily Northwestern had full access to cover the story over several weeks. They enjoy such access due to their impeccable reputation for fairness and accuracy.
News is on the news pages; opinions on the opinion pages. Stories represent multiple points of view representing broad constituents. Facts are reported as facts, not interpreted. For this story, coverage included the administration, the professor, the faculty, the students, parents, even the volunteers. While they had volumes of salacious material, it was used with a light touch. I was once interviewed by a DNW reporter for an unrelated story. When I complimented her on the detailed interview and interest that she had it right, she responded: “When you don’t have the story right, you don’t have the story." This type of attitude showed in the trust all constituents placed in the DNW in the wake of a high profile, highly embarrassing incident.
The Daily Kent Stater is covering an important event that it should cover. But consider the differences. By his own disclosure, this reporter has almost no access to the parties involved. Why? I suspect that the reporter andDKS staff would say its due to unreasonableness on the part of the parties involved. I suspect the parties involved might also claim unreasonableness, but on the part of the DKS. Has it examined its reputation with constituents? Do they describe DKS coverage as fair and accurate? If they don’t want DKS coverage, why don’t they want it? Why isn't the DKS the “go to” source for this incident? Finally, my unsolicited two cents is that a finger in your face approach that “you better explain” isn’t going to encourage the type of cooperation that the DKS seeks.
In the most recent Cope coverage of February 12, the writer has text and supporting documentation that do not match. Two examples follow. The text in the story reads that the subject requested free tickets to an athletic event. It links to a supporting email that reads “ I will gladly pay full value for them ( the tickets.)” Then, the writer has text that reads “emails show the subject is still heavily involved in the stock market.” It links to a supporting email that reads “ I have stocks quotes on one screen and golf scores on another.” My interpretation is that this subject is engaging in something I do on a regular basis, following two things at the same time. It does not show that he is heavily involved in anything. There are more examples, but I’ll stop here. Others may see this as petty. I see it as if a reporter can’t get the simple facts right, can he get the big story right? Others he is trying to approach for access may agree. Ask them.
The Innocence Project at Medill encouraged me to speak up when I see unfairness and not expect someone else to do it. I see it in this coverage, which is why I contributed to this discussion. The media is often the subject for unjustified criticism when its simply doing its job. That’s why it’s so important to do the job well, so the story, not the quality of the coverage, becomes the discussion.
At any rate, DKS editor, thank you for your response to my concerns.
The only two college newspapers I read on a regular basis are The Daily Northwestern and The Daily Kent Stater, as I am a graduate of both fine institutions. Both newspapers covered highly embarrassing events at their institutions in the past year. Let me compare the two student papers to express my disappointment in the quality of the Daily Kent Stater’s coverage.
Northwestern was the cite of a highly embarrassing incident in the 2010-11 academic year. A professor allowed a live demonstration in a Human Sexuality class. Hell broke loose the next day. The professor was removed from teaching responsibilities. The Faculty Senate was up in arms over its perceptions of violations of academic freedom. Students were upset the class was cancelled mid quarter. Parents were upset because, well, you might imagine why. The only common denominator was everyone was upset with the administration.
The Daily Northwestern had full access to cover the story over several weeks. They enjoy such access due to their impeccable reputation for fairness and accuracy.
News is on the news pages; opinions on the opinion pages. Stories represent multiple points of view representing broad constituents. Facts are reported as facts, not interpreted. For this story, coverage included the administration, the professor, the faculty, the students, parents, even the volunteers. While they had volumes of salacious material, it was used with a light touch. I was once interviewed by a DNW reporter for an unrelated story. When I complimented her on the detailed interview and interest that she had it right, she responded: “When you don’t have the story right, you don’t have the story." This type of attitude showed in the trust all constituents placed in the DNW in the wake of a high profile, highly embarrassing incident.
The Daily Kent Stater is covering an important event that it should cover. But consider the differences. By his own disclosure, this reporter has almost no access to the parties involved. Why? I suspect that the reporter andDKS staff would say its due to unreasonableness on the part of the parties involved. I suspect the parties involved might also claim unreasonableness, but on the part of the DKS. Has it examined its reputation with constituents? Do they describe DKS coverage as fair and accurate? If they don’t want DKS coverage, why don’t they want it? Why isn't the DKS the “go to” source for this incident? Finally, my unsolicited two cents is that a finger in your face approach that “you better explain” isn’t going to encourage the type of cooperation that the DKS seeks.
In the most recent Cope coverage of February 12, the writer has text and supporting documentation that do not match. Two examples follow. The text in the story reads that the subject requested free tickets to an athletic event. It links to a supporting email that reads “ I will gladly pay full value for them ( the tickets.)” Then, the writer has text that reads “emails show the subject is still heavily involved in the stock market.” It links to a supporting email that reads “ I have stocks quotes on one screen and golf scores on another.” My interpretation is that this subject is engaging in something I do on a regular basis, following two things at the same time. It does not show that he is heavily involved in anything. There are more examples, but I’ll stop here. Others may see this as petty. I see it as if a reporter can’t get the simple facts right, can he get the big story right? Others he is trying to approach for access may agree. Ask them.
The Innocence Project at Medill encouraged me to speak up when I see unfairness and not expect someone else to do it. I see it in this coverage, which is why I contributed to this discussion. The media is often the subject for unjustified criticism when its simply doing its job. That’s why it’s so important to do the job well, so the story, not the quality of the coverage, becomes the discussion.
At any rate, DKS editor, thank you for your response to my concerns.
-
- -1
-
-
written by Karl Idsvoog, February 18, 2012
It's truly amazing when people make critical comments without having the courtesy to put their real names.
Think for just one moment of this country's recent economic history and the impact there has been on Northeastern Ohio.
Can you imagine any professional communications department not recognizing that naming a basketball court arena after someone who has paid millions in fines to the SEC could have serious PR consequences? Actually, such a situation could be turned to your communications advantage if the PR professionals plan for it. You anticipate the reaction. You point out that these are tough economic times, that the university needs the million dollars, that Cope has paid his price, and that you were hoping to get criticism from the press and national attention for Kent because this university doesn't have the dollars for a national marketing campaign, and this was a way to get national attention. You coordinate the communications strategy with the guy donating the money; you help him plan his national mea culpa. Naming the arena after Cope could have been a PR opportunity that could have generated national exposure at a monumentally small cpm.
But based on how Kent State has handled this, it would appear that it didn't even have a strategic communications strategy. If that is true, it's an incredible indictment of the lack of professionalism of this university.
The question remains: why would the President of Kent State withhold information from the Board? Why would the athletic director withhold information from the Board? Why would the Board that is supposed to provide oversight provide none? Why is the local press - Akron Beacon Journal and Record Courier and TV2 - failing to ask and push for answers? And why does the critical Kent State alum not have the common decency to publish his or her name?
Disagreement on any issue is fine, but put your name behind what you say.
Both President Lefton and Director Nielsen need to explain why they withheld information from the Board. Each board member needs to explain why the board is failing to provide oversight and apparently failing to hold Lefton and Nielsen and the top communication executives accountable. And both the Record Courier and the Akron Beacon Journal need to explain to their readers why they are failing to ask a basic question on an important local story. When journalism fails, bad things happen.
Think for just one moment of this country's recent economic history and the impact there has been on Northeastern Ohio.
Can you imagine any professional communications department not recognizing that naming a basketball court arena after someone who has paid millions in fines to the SEC could have serious PR consequences? Actually, such a situation could be turned to your communications advantage if the PR professionals plan for it. You anticipate the reaction. You point out that these are tough economic times, that the university needs the million dollars, that Cope has paid his price, and that you were hoping to get criticism from the press and national attention for Kent because this university doesn't have the dollars for a national marketing campaign, and this was a way to get national attention. You coordinate the communications strategy with the guy donating the money; you help him plan his national mea culpa. Naming the arena after Cope could have been a PR opportunity that could have generated national exposure at a monumentally small cpm.
But based on how Kent State has handled this, it would appear that it didn't even have a strategic communications strategy. If that is true, it's an incredible indictment of the lack of professionalism of this university.
The question remains: why would the President of Kent State withhold information from the Board? Why would the athletic director withhold information from the Board? Why would the Board that is supposed to provide oversight provide none? Why is the local press - Akron Beacon Journal and Record Courier and TV2 - failing to ask and push for answers? And why does the critical Kent State alum not have the common decency to publish his or her name?
Disagreement on any issue is fine, but put your name behind what you say.
Both President Lefton and Director Nielsen need to explain why they withheld information from the Board. Each board member needs to explain why the board is failing to provide oversight and apparently failing to hold Lefton and Nielsen and the top communication executives accountable. And both the Record Courier and the Akron Beacon Journal need to explain to their readers why they are failing to ask a basic question on an important local story. When journalism fails, bad things happen.
-
- +3
-
-
written by Former DKS editor, February 18, 2012
I've wrestled with the decision on whether I should comment on this article ever since I saw the brouhaha it kicked up when it was published. Since reading the most recent comments, I decided to bite the bullet and do it.
Let me begin by saying — as is apparently necessary, given Flash Alum's most recent comment — that I do not know Doug Brown. I am not his "grandparent, dad, mom, brother, uncle, friend or mentor." Our only connection is that we both have reported for the Stater.
I am on here to defend the newspaper and its journalists from some of the attacks fired at them on this forum. The Daily Kent Stater, as some of you are aware, is an award-winning publication that has done some truly outstanding work over the years. The previous story on Cope drew praise from numerous people who follow student journalism work nationwide.
Flash Alum, your biggest question was about the need for a second story on Jason Cope and his donation to the KSU Athletic Department. I'll try to answer that. While the original story had all the facts of the case, it didn't delve much into analysis. This article is a follow-up, and it analyzes the entire situation.
When something like this occurs, common questions are "Why did this happen?" or "How did this happen?". I certainly had those questions after reading the original story. I wondered why the university would put itself so far out on a limb to accept a $1M donation from Cope, when information about his past was bound to come out at some point. More to the point of this story, I wondered whether everyone was aware of Cope's past.
This story attempts to answer those questions and does the best it can, considering it appears Mr. Brown got little help from the university in reporting it. Some may see this article as "beating a dead horse." I disagree. Beating a dead horse means to rehash the same facts over and over again. These are new facts.
For the question about "University oversight of student work in University sponsored media": Understand that the Daily Kent Stater is not "University sponsored media." It is an independent student newspaper; the university and its officials have no say on what is published, nor should they. The university has its own public relations department; the Stater and other student media are not here for that purpose. Occasionally, the Stater, TV2, Black Squirrel Radio or one of the various magazines will publish something the university doesn't want it to publish. That's too bad for the university. The reality is that journalistic entities are here to be the "watchdog" on issues like this.
As for faculty oversight, the DKS has faculty advisers who can help on stories like this. In addition, there are numerous other faculty in the journalism department who can be sought out when a reporter is working on a sensitive story, including several who specialize in media law and/or media ethics. I can almost guarantee, based on my experiences at the Stater, that some of these faculty members were consulted about the story in order to make sure it didn't contain libelous information.
I hope this answers some of your questions. I do think your insinuation that Doug Brown would publish any personal emails you sent to him was an unnecessary cheap shot; however, you are well within your rights to say that. And I do think it's laughable that you interpreted koko's statement that "you might look like a real ass one day" as a threat, considering there's nothing even vaguely threatening about that statement. Regardless, you at least have stayed around to further clarify your position and ask questions. That's commendable, and as you said, the purpose of journalism is to open conversation.
Meanwhile, for "Joyce," who called Doug Brown a coward and then proceeded to vanish into thin air ... well, I can only say that the Internet is great for irony sometimes. And as for the suggestion that the DKS is trying to "wreck" the team's season, I can only say this: Ohio State likely would have been a national championship contender last season were it not for the investigation into the misdeeds there. Should news agencies not have looked into the Buckeyes, then? Should we just look into the dregs of the collegiate world, the teams that have no chance at winning anything important? The mere suggestion is an insult.
Let me begin by saying — as is apparently necessary, given Flash Alum's most recent comment — that I do not know Doug Brown. I am not his "grandparent, dad, mom, brother, uncle, friend or mentor." Our only connection is that we both have reported for the Stater.
I am on here to defend the newspaper and its journalists from some of the attacks fired at them on this forum. The Daily Kent Stater, as some of you are aware, is an award-winning publication that has done some truly outstanding work over the years. The previous story on Cope drew praise from numerous people who follow student journalism work nationwide.
Flash Alum, your biggest question was about the need for a second story on Jason Cope and his donation to the KSU Athletic Department. I'll try to answer that. While the original story had all the facts of the case, it didn't delve much into analysis. This article is a follow-up, and it analyzes the entire situation.
When something like this occurs, common questions are "Why did this happen?" or "How did this happen?". I certainly had those questions after reading the original story. I wondered why the university would put itself so far out on a limb to accept a $1M donation from Cope, when information about his past was bound to come out at some point. More to the point of this story, I wondered whether everyone was aware of Cope's past.
This story attempts to answer those questions and does the best it can, considering it appears Mr. Brown got little help from the university in reporting it. Some may see this article as "beating a dead horse." I disagree. Beating a dead horse means to rehash the same facts over and over again. These are new facts.
For the question about "University oversight of student work in University sponsored media": Understand that the Daily Kent Stater is not "University sponsored media." It is an independent student newspaper; the university and its officials have no say on what is published, nor should they. The university has its own public relations department; the Stater and other student media are not here for that purpose. Occasionally, the Stater, TV2, Black Squirrel Radio or one of the various magazines will publish something the university doesn't want it to publish. That's too bad for the university. The reality is that journalistic entities are here to be the "watchdog" on issues like this.
As for faculty oversight, the DKS has faculty advisers who can help on stories like this. In addition, there are numerous other faculty in the journalism department who can be sought out when a reporter is working on a sensitive story, including several who specialize in media law and/or media ethics. I can almost guarantee, based on my experiences at the Stater, that some of these faculty members were consulted about the story in order to make sure it didn't contain libelous information.
I hope this answers some of your questions. I do think your insinuation that Doug Brown would publish any personal emails you sent to him was an unnecessary cheap shot; however, you are well within your rights to say that. And I do think it's laughable that you interpreted koko's statement that "you might look like a real ass one day" as a threat, considering there's nothing even vaguely threatening about that statement. Regardless, you at least have stayed around to further clarify your position and ask questions. That's commendable, and as you said, the purpose of journalism is to open conversation.
Meanwhile, for "Joyce," who called Doug Brown a coward and then proceeded to vanish into thin air ... well, I can only say that the Internet is great for irony sometimes. And as for the suggestion that the DKS is trying to "wreck" the team's season, I can only say this: Ohio State likely would have been a national championship contender last season were it not for the investigation into the misdeeds there. Should news agencies not have looked into the Buckeyes, then? Should we just look into the dregs of the collegiate world, the teams that have no chance at winning anything important? The mere suggestion is an insult.
-
- +4
-
-
written by Flash Alum, February 17, 2012
I wonder why someone who never attended Kent State, has stated a “zero” vested in interest in what happens at Kent State or it’s organizations yet would
read it’s newspaper? Interesting. Don’t know that I’ve ever heard someone reading a college newspaper of a school they claim to have “zero” vested interest in. Yet, seems so well versed in one particular story...”the finest investigative report read in years”.. special interest in one particular journalist cites him as “refreshingly unique ”...knows about the renown the story has received in the inner circles of media... only journalists, geeks and parents follow College Media Matters or Jim Romenesko...even though the story has not picked up by major media outlets and not garnered much public interest outside of KSU and media circles. Hmmm. Curious.
Not a representative of any kind from KSU...doesn’t have the temperament. Doesn’t address any questions raised about JMC, DKS or procedures at KSU. Wonder if he can, given expressed lack of institutional interest. Only wants to defend Mr. Brown. And, defend he does. With gusto..animosity...vitriol. The kind of attacking defense that would come from, let me guess, a Grandparent? Dad? Mom? Brother? Uncle? Friend,? Mentor?...koko7016 is clearly someone vested in Mr. Brown and nothing else about KSU.
Just a personal hunch and no more. Nothing wrong with the calvary coming in. Besides, who doesn’t go to the mat for someone they love?
Except..this is a forum provided by Kent State University to provide feedback from all constituents regarding student media. As an alumni, I asked two questions yesterday on this forum that still have not been answered. First, could there be a review of the a bigger role in athletics as a brand of the University? If so, what should it be? How should it be funded? This is an investigation, that I believe, gets to the root of the problem. And, I objected to the news coverage of the second story. Not the opinion on the opinion page...the news coverage. My concerns have still not been answered.
So, koko7016, I am not interested in your gripe. I’m certain Mr. Brown makes you proud as a grandson, son, brother, nephew, friend, colleague...whatever he is to you. I hope he has a bright future. But I’ve been interested in the long term success of KSU long before Mr. Brown got there and will be long after he leaves. I’ll no longer engage in your spirited defense of Mr. Brown or engage you in anything else for that matter. Besides, Mr. Brown seems quite capable of standing on his own. But, I would like to return to my questions.
read it’s newspaper? Interesting. Don’t know that I’ve ever heard someone reading a college newspaper of a school they claim to have “zero” vested interest in. Yet, seems so well versed in one particular story...”the finest investigative report read in years”.. special interest in one particular journalist cites him as “refreshingly unique ”...knows about the renown the story has received in the inner circles of media... only journalists, geeks and parents follow College Media Matters or Jim Romenesko...even though the story has not picked up by major media outlets and not garnered much public interest outside of KSU and media circles. Hmmm. Curious.
Not a representative of any kind from KSU...doesn’t have the temperament. Doesn’t address any questions raised about JMC, DKS or procedures at KSU. Wonder if he can, given expressed lack of institutional interest. Only wants to defend Mr. Brown. And, defend he does. With gusto..animosity...vitriol. The kind of attacking defense that would come from, let me guess, a Grandparent? Dad? Mom? Brother? Uncle? Friend,? Mentor?...koko7016 is clearly someone vested in Mr. Brown and nothing else about KSU.
Just a personal hunch and no more. Nothing wrong with the calvary coming in. Besides, who doesn’t go to the mat for someone they love?
Except..this is a forum provided by Kent State University to provide feedback from all constituents regarding student media. As an alumni, I asked two questions yesterday on this forum that still have not been answered. First, could there be a review of the a bigger role in athletics as a brand of the University? If so, what should it be? How should it be funded? This is an investigation, that I believe, gets to the root of the problem. And, I objected to the news coverage of the second story. Not the opinion on the opinion page...the news coverage. My concerns have still not been answered.
So, koko7016, I am not interested in your gripe. I’m certain Mr. Brown makes you proud as a grandson, son, brother, nephew, friend, colleague...whatever he is to you. I hope he has a bright future. But I’ve been interested in the long term success of KSU long before Mr. Brown got there and will be long after he leaves. I’ll no longer engage in your spirited defense of Mr. Brown or engage you in anything else for that matter. Besides, Mr. Brown seems quite capable of standing on his own. But, I would like to return to my questions.
-
- -2
-
-
written by Flash Alum, February 17, 2012
To Poster koko7106
I seek to go on record that I offered to pass on a point by point rebuttal of attacks against me. I have not attacked this poster in the personal, acrimonious manner used against me. I will not resort to ad hominem attacks, but I am entitled to defend myself.
I apologize for the remedial and tedious nature of those readers versed in the law, but apparently it’s necessary in this case. Those of you with better things to do can skip this. The posters points are in italics. My statements are not.
Second, you claim Mr. Brown has committed acts of libel and defamation.
I cannot claim Mr. Brown has committed acts of libel and defamation. Claim is an assertion of right; I have no rights against Mr. Brown and have no standing in rights others may have against him. Torts, first semester law school.
Further, I made no such statements about Mr. Brown’s acts; it is a misrepresentation for your own purposes. An accurate reading of my post was wondering if Mr. Brown was aware of the boundaries of libel and defamation. “One might reasonably expect that part of Mr. Brown’s preparation understands the boundaries of libel and defamation.” I continued that I "wondered if Mr. Brown’s future employers will be as tolerant of his boundaries." And, I still wonder that.
Your coupling of these two concepts (libel and defamation) makes it evident that you do not have a firm grasp on what they truly constitute.
I most certainly do understand the difference. I wonder if you do as you are the person who coupled the terms, not me.
Defamation is the issuance of a false statement about another person, which causes that person to suffer harm. ‘Per se” defamation is when allegations are presumed to cause damage to the plaintiff. Libel is the written form of defamation, in print or published materials. I did not infer that these terms were the same. You did.
Likewise, the fact that Mr. Cope had donated such a large sum of money with the prospect of the arena bearing his name could possibly make him a public figure.
Oh, where does one begin? First, may we establish that Mr. Cope did not donate a large sum of money to Kent State. Further, there is no arena bearing his name. Finally, there is not going to be an arena, floor, or anything else in his name at Kent State. If it ever comes to this, go ahead and try to establish Mr. Cope as a public figure based upon these facts to discourage his claim based on limited public figure status. Let me know the date and place of the hearing. It would be entertaining.
Your false allegations could actually allow Mr. Brown to claim that you, yourself, had made libelous publications if it effected his reputation.
Please do not throw around terms you do not understand. I made no such allegations against Mr. Brown. I have no standing to take action against him, because I am not a party to what he has published. Then, a disinterested third party decides what’s true of false; neither you nor I. Please don’t do their job.
I asked if Mr. Brown understood the boundaries of libel and defamation. He has assured me that he has. The decision to take action is not up to me, because I am not a party to this whole mess. And, I too, have the truth as a defense. One benefit is that my defense has been published on February 12, 2012. If necessary, I also have the fair comment on a matter of public interest defense for defamation. It won’t come to that, but I have it. There are other possibilities, but defer to tedium at this point.
But, in fact, your note of the renown Mr. Brown has received as a result of his reporting on this matter, and in fact your own citation of how my comments elevate his stature are quite helpful in against far fetched claim that his reputation has been harmed by this discussion. Thank you.
I won’t review the published personal threat you made against me in an attempt to chill my questions and express malicious intent. It’s been covered. But, rest assured, I have it in context.
Finally, to all readers, please accept my apologies for the turn that this discussion has taken. At its fundamental core, I have significant questions about the reporting intent of the Cope Court coverage. I have expressed my concerns on the only forum made available to me. I will not attack, and if I have, I apologize. To the poster koko 7106, I have defended myself. I will launch no attacks on you, but I will not stand by and allow you to misrepresent me.
In closing, I will not be bullied, I will not be shouted down, I will certainly not be threatened. This is my fourth post and I still have no response to may basic questions. The Daily Kent Stater staff used to appreciate solitary stands like mine. Do you still? If so, I am open for dialogue.
I seek to go on record that I offered to pass on a point by point rebuttal of attacks against me. I have not attacked this poster in the personal, acrimonious manner used against me. I will not resort to ad hominem attacks, but I am entitled to defend myself.
I apologize for the remedial and tedious nature of those readers versed in the law, but apparently it’s necessary in this case. Those of you with better things to do can skip this. The posters points are in italics. My statements are not.
Second, you claim Mr. Brown has committed acts of libel and defamation.
I cannot claim Mr. Brown has committed acts of libel and defamation. Claim is an assertion of right; I have no rights against Mr. Brown and have no standing in rights others may have against him. Torts, first semester law school.
Further, I made no such statements about Mr. Brown’s acts; it is a misrepresentation for your own purposes. An accurate reading of my post was wondering if Mr. Brown was aware of the boundaries of libel and defamation. “One might reasonably expect that part of Mr. Brown’s preparation understands the boundaries of libel and defamation.” I continued that I "wondered if Mr. Brown’s future employers will be as tolerant of his boundaries." And, I still wonder that.
Your coupling of these two concepts (libel and defamation) makes it evident that you do not have a firm grasp on what they truly constitute.
I most certainly do understand the difference. I wonder if you do as you are the person who coupled the terms, not me.
Defamation is the issuance of a false statement about another person, which causes that person to suffer harm. ‘Per se” defamation is when allegations are presumed to cause damage to the plaintiff. Libel is the written form of defamation, in print or published materials. I did not infer that these terms were the same. You did.
Likewise, the fact that Mr. Cope had donated such a large sum of money with the prospect of the arena bearing his name could possibly make him a public figure.
Oh, where does one begin? First, may we establish that Mr. Cope did not donate a large sum of money to Kent State. Further, there is no arena bearing his name. Finally, there is not going to be an arena, floor, or anything else in his name at Kent State. If it ever comes to this, go ahead and try to establish Mr. Cope as a public figure based upon these facts to discourage his claim based on limited public figure status. Let me know the date and place of the hearing. It would be entertaining.
Your false allegations could actually allow Mr. Brown to claim that you, yourself, had made libelous publications if it effected his reputation.
Please do not throw around terms you do not understand. I made no such allegations against Mr. Brown. I have no standing to take action against him, because I am not a party to what he has published. Then, a disinterested third party decides what’s true of false; neither you nor I. Please don’t do their job.
I asked if Mr. Brown understood the boundaries of libel and defamation. He has assured me that he has. The decision to take action is not up to me, because I am not a party to this whole mess. And, I too, have the truth as a defense. One benefit is that my defense has been published on February 12, 2012. If necessary, I also have the fair comment on a matter of public interest defense for defamation. It won’t come to that, but I have it. There are other possibilities, but defer to tedium at this point.
But, in fact, your note of the renown Mr. Brown has received as a result of his reporting on this matter, and in fact your own citation of how my comments elevate his stature are quite helpful in against far fetched claim that his reputation has been harmed by this discussion. Thank you.
I won’t review the published personal threat you made against me in an attempt to chill my questions and express malicious intent. It’s been covered. But, rest assured, I have it in context.
Finally, to all readers, please accept my apologies for the turn that this discussion has taken. At its fundamental core, I have significant questions about the reporting intent of the Cope Court coverage. I have expressed my concerns on the only forum made available to me. I will not attack, and if I have, I apologize. To the poster koko 7106, I have defended myself. I will launch no attacks on you, but I will not stand by and allow you to misrepresent me.
In closing, I will not be bullied, I will not be shouted down, I will certainly not be threatened. This is my fourth post and I still have no response to may basic questions. The Daily Kent Stater staff used to appreciate solitary stands like mine. Do you still? If so, I am open for dialogue.
-
- -2
-
-
written by koko7106, February 17, 2012
Im sure everyone around you thinks you're very smart. Its hard to grasp the concepts produced from the mind from a graduate of such a prestigious university.
You need to get over it...the same thing you're accusing me of is what you're doing. Maybe...just maybe...not everyone is out to get you...
My gripe is your contradictions that are still riddled throughout your argument...I don't nor have I ever attended kent state so I have zero vested interest in what happens there or with its school organizations. The problem came when you decide to throw around the weight of the law which you don't understand beyond that of a lay persons understanding. You claim to have a day job but seem to hang on the next jab I throw your way...go back to work...impress your friends there...you've proven three times now that you don't understand my point. Go use the six latin words you know at your remedial job. I have nothing more to say to you until you address my issues.
You need to get over it...the same thing you're accusing me of is what you're doing. Maybe...just maybe...not everyone is out to get you...
My gripe is your contradictions that are still riddled throughout your argument...I don't nor have I ever attended kent state so I have zero vested interest in what happens there or with its school organizations. The problem came when you decide to throw around the weight of the law which you don't understand beyond that of a lay persons understanding. You claim to have a day job but seem to hang on the next jab I throw your way...go back to work...impress your friends there...you've proven three times now that you don't understand my point. Go use the six latin words you know at your remedial job. I have nothing more to say to you until you address my issues.
-
- +4
-
-
written by Flash Alum, February 17, 2012
I’m sorry, what was I challenged about? I overlooked a sloppily crafted, irrational rant followed by a threat as evidence of someone a) having a bad day or b) a little too sensitive for some unknown reason. I never interpreted it as a serious question but as an ad hominem attack. A different reading might be that you would be grateful that I don’t follow up point by point on your selective interpretation. But, these issues are decided by disinterested third parties, not by posters on a message board. And, I, too, have a day job so will pass.
This is a question to the staff of the Daily Kent Stater. How is one to express disagreement about the coverage of a story? The Daily Kent Stater provides a service of this forum. Is it intended only for those who voice agreement? If so, it might be stated with greater clarity. I’m told that I could send a private message to Mr. Brown. But, as he claims all emails to state employees are open to publication, and he is paid by a state supported instiution, I’m not confident that my private message would not be manipulated for a different purpose. Seriously, how does one disagree with coverage by the Daily Kent Stater? I don’t need to send a private message to express my concern. This is my concern. Would someone respond?
Finally, I found the enclosed article from the Knight media services, Why Can’t Journalists Handle Public Criticism? to be of interest. It observes that journalists, while free to use their platform to criticize others, get bent out of shape when they themselves are criticized. It may be instructive reading.
http://www.pbs.org/idealab/2010/06/why-cant-journalists-handle-public-criticism167.html
This is a question to the staff of the Daily Kent Stater. How is one to express disagreement about the coverage of a story? The Daily Kent Stater provides a service of this forum. Is it intended only for those who voice agreement? If so, it might be stated with greater clarity. I’m told that I could send a private message to Mr. Brown. But, as he claims all emails to state employees are open to publication, and he is paid by a state supported instiution, I’m not confident that my private message would not be manipulated for a different purpose. Seriously, how does one disagree with coverage by the Daily Kent Stater? I don’t need to send a private message to express my concern. This is my concern. Would someone respond?
Finally, I found the enclosed article from the Knight media services, Why Can’t Journalists Handle Public Criticism? to be of interest. It observes that journalists, while free to use their platform to criticize others, get bent out of shape when they themselves are criticized. It may be instructive reading.
http://www.pbs.org/idealab/2010/06/why-cant-journalists-handle-public-criticism167.html
-
- -2
-
-
written by koko7106, February 17, 2012
Its amusing how quickly you backtrack when challenged.
I simply have better things to do then waste my time arguing with a grown man praising the objectivity of his extremely subjective reviews of an article.
However:
Please...stop trying to interpret the law. If someone showed me the quote you have pulled and stated they wished to file a claim I would show them the door. What exactly are you even implying the threat may be? What actual harm or apprehensions of harm do you have? What damages would you sustain? Clearly sir, a man with a college degree from the fine institution of Kent State University should be able to recognize the dangers involved with alleging libel of a journalist in the infancy of his career.Simply put, the statement when read contextually was a nicer way of stating that you need to find better things to do than try to throw around heavy words you do not understand.
Lastly, the free exchange of thoughts and ideas coupled with your view of how it was published is inherently contradictory. You first advocate that Mr. Brown has every right to publish this public information and his thoughts free of restriction, then you follow up by reintroducing your subjective views of the article where you claimed Mr. Brown was using superfluous information and innuendos to build his articles with which you disagreed. So which is it, can he publish his work in any form he chooses or is he barred from expressing his thoughts and ideas on public information because you disagree with him stylistically and morally?
Just to end the discussion, have you ever thought to yourself while reading this, the Plain Dealer, or even watching the nightly news...perhaps this information has been presented to me in a manner that is focused on garnering an emotional response? If you haven't please do...afterwards, I suggest you tip your hat to Mr. Brown. Regardless of your objections to his article you still found yourself emotional attached and providing free publicity attracting others to his work.
Kudos Mr. Brown...there's a sucker born every minute
I simply have better things to do then waste my time arguing with a grown man praising the objectivity of his extremely subjective reviews of an article.
However:
Please...stop trying to interpret the law. If someone showed me the quote you have pulled and stated they wished to file a claim I would show them the door. What exactly are you even implying the threat may be? What actual harm or apprehensions of harm do you have? What damages would you sustain? Clearly sir, a man with a college degree from the fine institution of Kent State University should be able to recognize the dangers involved with alleging libel of a journalist in the infancy of his career.Simply put, the statement when read contextually was a nicer way of stating that you need to find better things to do than try to throw around heavy words you do not understand.
Lastly, the free exchange of thoughts and ideas coupled with your view of how it was published is inherently contradictory. You first advocate that Mr. Brown has every right to publish this public information and his thoughts free of restriction, then you follow up by reintroducing your subjective views of the article where you claimed Mr. Brown was using superfluous information and innuendos to build his articles with which you disagreed. So which is it, can he publish his work in any form he chooses or is he barred from expressing his thoughts and ideas on public information because you disagree with him stylistically and morally?
Just to end the discussion, have you ever thought to yourself while reading this, the Plain Dealer, or even watching the nightly news...perhaps this information has been presented to me in a manner that is focused on garnering an emotional response? If you haven't please do...afterwards, I suggest you tip your hat to Mr. Brown. Regardless of your objections to his article you still found yourself emotional attached and providing free publicity attracting others to his work.
Kudos Mr. Brown...there's a sucker born every minute
-
- +3
-
-
written by Flash Alum, February 17, 2012
Well, it seems ironic to me that some seekers of truth are sensitive to questions.
Aside from that, what’s false about about my post? Was Mr. Brown’s second article, published on Feb. 12, unilateral? An unbiased third party might think so, as it goes to great lengths to share that no one would talk to him. Did Mr. Brown selectively post redacted emails? As these are posted on the website of the Daily Kent Stater, the answer is yes. What is the reason he wants us to care that Mr. Cope was following golf scores and stock prices? What’s THAT supposed to mean? Why does he publish the report of a gift to Mrs. Cope? If not to imply wrong doing, for what other reason are they posted? Did he intend to embarrass? In my opinion, he includes what appears to be superfluous information highlighted in a side bar, unless I’m missing something and Geno Ford’s bitching is somehow relevant. Mr. Brown repeatedly states that people won’t talk to him and ignore his requests. Does he know why they won’t they talk to him? If NO ONE would talk to me, I’d want to wonder why. What oversight does he received from the faculty as he is a student writing in a University supported paper? I thought questions were fair game...it’s interesting that only MY questions are inappropriate.
Finally, I find it interesting that after a lecture on the dangers of libel and defamation, I’m publicly warned "Be careful whom you point your finger at if you do not fully understand why you're doing it...you might look like a real ass one day.” Should I interpret this as a threat? What else is it? I wonder if there is malicious intent behind this statement.
In the selective reading of my post, you missed the fact that the first article appeared to me to be newsworthy. If it helped the University to avoid an embarrassment, that’s a good thing. I did not register a single complaint about the first article, at the time or now. It’s the second article that seems like a fanciful chase after a conspiracy theory to me. What’s the story about the donation that didn’t happen?
Presumably, JMC raises funds. Does it court donors? Does it invite them to special events? Does it exchange emails with them? Has it ever provided them with a token gift? ( In full disclosure, I happen to know the answer to the later question.) What if, some day, it’s pointed out to you that a donor you courted has done something that would embarrass the University, or not live up to the high journalistic standards of JMC ? As a HYPOTHETICAL EXAMPLE, what if you found out that Rupert Murdoch, or his organization, intends to donate money after JMC has courted him. What should we presume? Should we presume it was a mistake? That's what I would presume, because in my experience, people at Kent State do their best to act with integrity. Or, should we presume nefarious intent? If you find out now that JMC has accepted donations associated with someone like Mr. Murdoch or any of his organizations in the past, will you reveal them? After all, that whole hacking business was a bit slimy, don’t you agree? Wouldn’t think we'd want any of his money tainting JMC. ( As an aside, have you reviewed your donor list or donor development practices? I’m simply curious.)
I have read the Daily Kent Stater for dozens of years. It’s been a source of pride for me, as a KSU alumni, for its development of journalists who serve an important and vital role in the world. I do not object to the fact that the Daily Kent Stater conducts investigative journalism. It’s what they are supposed to do. In the past, I’ve experienced world class reporting from the Daily Kent Stater that did not go in with what appears to me to be a preconceived point of view implying wrong doing. It then attempts to support it with spun together innuendo. And the latter, in my opinion, is the situation in this case. I expect the Daily Kent Stater to report on a higher standard. You’re better than this.
Finally, Mr. Brown’s work has been “heralded.” If that’s what matters, why all the sensitivity to a different view ? Isn’t the point of a free and open press to inform and encourage the free exchange of ideas? Why the threat to a single reader because they object to the way something was published?
Finally, Mr. Brown, no, I will NOT send you a private email. I’ve seen what you do with them.
-
- -1
-
-
written by koko7106, February 17, 2012
Flashalum,
There are a few things that deeply trouble me about your comment.
First, you seem to be deeply troubled by a young man asking questions. You begin to question his motives, ethics, and his credibility without any prior knowledge of who he is. After reading this article along with all other relevant materials, it is beyond me why you would stifle the first true investigative report I have seen in years.
Second, you claim that Mr. Brown has committed acts of libel and defamation. Your coupling of these two concepts makes it evident that you do not have a firm grasp of what they truly constitute. Furthermore, an absolute defense to both of your allegations, which is actually just one, is the truth. If what Mr. Brown is claiming is true then on what grounds would there be a substantial case for libel? Likewise, the fact that Mr. Cope had donated such a large sum of money with the prospect of the arena bearing his name could possibly make him a public figure. Therefore, there is an even narrower category of activity that would constitute a libelous publication. Ironically, you false allegations of libel and defamation could actually allow Mr. Brown to claim that you yourself had made libelous publications if it effected his reputation. However, it is highly doubtful that anyone will take your warnings to have any credibility so no worries.
Lastly, simply throwing around concepts and phrases you believe you understand is a dangerous practice. Although it is certainly common practice in this class of forum you should take into account all material factors before you make such false and brash statements about a refreshingly unique journalist. Others in his field, outside of the Kent community, have heralded his work on this particular subject. Simply because you are an alum does not give you carte blanche. Be careful whom you point your finger at if you do not fully understand why you're doing it...you might look like a real ass one day
There are a few things that deeply trouble me about your comment.
First, you seem to be deeply troubled by a young man asking questions. You begin to question his motives, ethics, and his credibility without any prior knowledge of who he is. After reading this article along with all other relevant materials, it is beyond me why you would stifle the first true investigative report I have seen in years.
Second, you claim that Mr. Brown has committed acts of libel and defamation. Your coupling of these two concepts makes it evident that you do not have a firm grasp of what they truly constitute. Furthermore, an absolute defense to both of your allegations, which is actually just one, is the truth. If what Mr. Brown is claiming is true then on what grounds would there be a substantial case for libel? Likewise, the fact that Mr. Cope had donated such a large sum of money with the prospect of the arena bearing his name could possibly make him a public figure. Therefore, there is an even narrower category of activity that would constitute a libelous publication. Ironically, you false allegations of libel and defamation could actually allow Mr. Brown to claim that you yourself had made libelous publications if it effected his reputation. However, it is highly doubtful that anyone will take your warnings to have any credibility so no worries.
Lastly, simply throwing around concepts and phrases you believe you understand is a dangerous practice. Although it is certainly common practice in this class of forum you should take into account all material factors before you make such false and brash statements about a refreshingly unique journalist. Others in his field, outside of the Kent community, have heralded his work on this particular subject. Simply because you are an alum does not give you carte blanche. Be careful whom you point your finger at if you do not fully understand why you're doing it...you might look like a real ass one day
-
- +6
-
-
written by Doug Brown (the DKS reporter), February 16, 2012
KSU alumni,
Thank you for sharing your concerns. Just to clarify, emails from (and sent to) state employees are public record, and certainly not considered "private" by the law. All of the "innuendo" in this article came from what university officials wrote themselves, and those emails were cited and made available to for anybody to read and make up their own mind. I made the people included in this article aware of what would be published, and they all chose to ignore opportunities to respond over a period of two week.
Regarding your premise about "university oversight of of student work in university sponsored media," I can assure you that I am paying MUCH more to the university than I am getting paid by the Stater (seriously, a lot more...). And thankfully for the First Amendment, I don't need "permission" from the university before anything perceived as critical to the university is published.
In regards to your last paragraph, I am a few credits away from my master's degree in journalism and under no circumstance view this article as a "mistake of youth" (I'm 23 years old). Thanks to graduate courses in our journalism program, I am well versed in media law and the repercussions of publishing libelous and defamatory content, and I can assure you that this is neither libelous nor defamatory. If you feel that this article unfairly "embarrasses" the "individuals in the KSU athletic department and administration" please remember that everything published about them is what they wrote in their own words, those emails are included, they all refused to provide additional context even after being informed of what would be published, and they are all in administrative positions paid for by tax dollars and student tuition. I did not seek to "embarrass one of my own," I merely sought to report the truth of an important topic using public records.
If you would like to discuss this further, I will respond to any questions or concerns you have. Email me at dbrow127@kent.edu or dougbrown8@gmail.com.
Thanks,
Doug Brown
DKS Enterprise Reporter
Thank you for sharing your concerns. Just to clarify, emails from (and sent to) state employees are public record, and certainly not considered "private" by the law. All of the "innuendo" in this article came from what university officials wrote themselves, and those emails were cited and made available to for anybody to read and make up their own mind. I made the people included in this article aware of what would be published, and they all chose to ignore opportunities to respond over a period of two week.
Regarding your premise about "university oversight of of student work in university sponsored media," I can assure you that I am paying MUCH more to the university than I am getting paid by the Stater (seriously, a lot more...). And thankfully for the First Amendment, I don't need "permission" from the university before anything perceived as critical to the university is published.
In regards to your last paragraph, I am a few credits away from my master's degree in journalism and under no circumstance view this article as a "mistake of youth" (I'm 23 years old). Thanks to graduate courses in our journalism program, I am well versed in media law and the repercussions of publishing libelous and defamatory content, and I can assure you that this is neither libelous nor defamatory. If you feel that this article unfairly "embarrasses" the "individuals in the KSU athletic department and administration" please remember that everything published about them is what they wrote in their own words, those emails are included, they all refused to provide additional context even after being informed of what would be published, and they are all in administrative positions paid for by tax dollars and student tuition. I did not seek to "embarrass one of my own," I merely sought to report the truth of an important topic using public records.
If you would like to discuss this further, I will respond to any questions or concerns you have. Email me at dbrow127@kent.edu or dougbrown8@gmail.com.
Thanks,
Doug Brown
DKS Enterprise Reporter
-
- +7
-
-
written by Flash Alum, February 16, 2012
As a KSU alumni, this story is troubling on several levels.
First, I am troubled that the Athletic Department had to take the level of risk involved to develop a donation by Jason Cope. The bigger question is Do they have the funds needed to provide a quality athletic program at the MAC level? If the answer is yes, then the development of this donation is about greed. But if the answer is No, which I suspect that it is, perhaps a good use of Kent State FUNDED investigative reporting is What IS the role of athletics in developing and maintaining a University’s brand? Does It matter? if it does, how should it be funded? What’s the appropriate level?
My second concern regards University oversight of student work in University sponsored media. An initial investigative report may have been appropriate. It served it’s purpose, I suppose, and a problem was averted. At any rate, the only news was in the initial report. I have significant questions about the journalistic value of the second report, published this past Monday. First, Mr. Brown published a unilateral report, full of innuendo, with inferences to facts that cannot be supported. Why can’t they be supported? Because no one will talk to him. Why will no one talk to him? Well, one might suspect because Mr. Brown’s body of work speaks for itself. So, he is apparently permitted to publish private e mails ripe with innuendo ( Oh, he looks at STOCK PRICES! He gave her JEWELRY!) to make a case he cannot because he lacks facts. Perhaps the criticism of those who will not cooperate with Mr. Brown could be balanced with reflection about WHY they will not cooperate with him.
I understand that Mr. Brown is a student. He’s permitted the grace of age appropriate naivety and to have his head turned by notoriety as he builds his own brand. He is certainly milking this for all it’s worth. We all make the mistakes of youth. My bigger question is the seeming lack of faculty oversight of Mr. Brown’s work. One might reasonably expect that part of his preparation as a journalist is understanding the boundaries of libel and defamation. He currently enjoys the grace of the individuals in the KSU Athletic Department and Administration, who presumable would not take such action as not to embarrass one of their own- a lesson Mr. Brown could be encouraged to appreciate. I doubt, however, that his post graduate employers will not be so tolerant. Enjoy it now, Mr. Brown, attacks by innuendo and speculation end with your last column at the Daily Kent Stater.
First, I am troubled that the Athletic Department had to take the level of risk involved to develop a donation by Jason Cope. The bigger question is Do they have the funds needed to provide a quality athletic program at the MAC level? If the answer is yes, then the development of this donation is about greed. But if the answer is No, which I suspect that it is, perhaps a good use of Kent State FUNDED investigative reporting is What IS the role of athletics in developing and maintaining a University’s brand? Does It matter? if it does, how should it be funded? What’s the appropriate level?
My second concern regards University oversight of student work in University sponsored media. An initial investigative report may have been appropriate. It served it’s purpose, I suppose, and a problem was averted. At any rate, the only news was in the initial report. I have significant questions about the journalistic value of the second report, published this past Monday. First, Mr. Brown published a unilateral report, full of innuendo, with inferences to facts that cannot be supported. Why can’t they be supported? Because no one will talk to him. Why will no one talk to him? Well, one might suspect because Mr. Brown’s body of work speaks for itself. So, he is apparently permitted to publish private e mails ripe with innuendo ( Oh, he looks at STOCK PRICES! He gave her JEWELRY!) to make a case he cannot because he lacks facts. Perhaps the criticism of those who will not cooperate with Mr. Brown could be balanced with reflection about WHY they will not cooperate with him.
I understand that Mr. Brown is a student. He’s permitted the grace of age appropriate naivety and to have his head turned by notoriety as he builds his own brand. He is certainly milking this for all it’s worth. We all make the mistakes of youth. My bigger question is the seeming lack of faculty oversight of Mr. Brown’s work. One might reasonably expect that part of his preparation as a journalist is understanding the boundaries of libel and defamation. He currently enjoys the grace of the individuals in the KSU Athletic Department and Administration, who presumable would not take such action as not to embarrass one of their own- a lesson Mr. Brown could be encouraged to appreciate. I doubt, however, that his post graduate employers will not be so tolerant. Enjoy it now, Mr. Brown, attacks by innuendo and speculation end with your last column at the Daily Kent Stater.
-
- -1
-
-
written by ....., February 15, 2012
dirty money? have any of you ever made a mistake? obviously not the way you're all talking. This man made a mistake. Yes he hurt some people. But he accepted his punishment and paid back what he took. He tried to start over again, and obviously did pretty well, if he wants to donate a sum of money this large. It's no wonder no one wants to donate large amounts of money to this university, because they know it will be scrutinized by people like you.
-
- -1
-
-
written by Doug Brown (the DKS reporter), February 15, 2012
Feel free to email me (dbrow127@kent.edu or dougbrown8@gmail.com) if you would like to discuss anything related to my work. I'll answer any questions and listen to any complaints you have.
Have a good day.
Have a good day.
-
- +5
-
-
written by Joyce, February 14, 2012
Hey Dougie, in case you haven't noticed - and since you are too much of a coward to show your face at the games anyway, I'm sure you haven't - the Flashes won AGAIN tonight. So you and your cronies can go back to the drawing board and try and find another way to wreck this great season.
-
- -4
-
-
written by Gene Ford, February 14, 2012
Great reporting DKS, and for anybody to say that this is a non story is completly out of their minds. You've got the second biggest univeristy in Ohio accepting dirty money. As an alum its makes me furios to think that with all the tradition of the M.A.C Center, you'd name the court after an individual who the administration openly knew was practicing unethical behavior of the highest degree. Kent State is officially for sale to the highest bidder no matter who they are. How Nielson and Lefton have jobs after this whole mess is really beyond me.
-
- +5
-
-
written by JJ, February 14, 2012
Karl there is no discussion because IT'S NOT AN F-ING STORY. It's the same bland, by-the-book vanilla BS he tried cramming down our throats the first time. Get real.
-
- -7
-
-
written by Conrad Ott, February 14, 2012
I fail to see the wrong doing here. "Corrupt administrators?" What personal gain did any of the above mentioned make at the expense of the University, students, etc.? No story here. Move on DKS.
-
- -6
-
-
written by Karl Idsvoog, February 14, 2012
We have a president and an athletic director who apparently withheld crucial information from the Board before it approves a plan to name the basketball arena after a guy who paid millions in fines to the SEC and there are hardly any comments? In light of our current economic history, why did both President Lefton and Nielsen think it was a good idea to name the arena after a guy who had paid millions in fines to the SEC? Why did they intentionally withhold the information about Cope's past with the SEC from the Board? Put the name "Jason M. Cope" in Google and hit the button and on the first page is a litigation release for Cope by the SEC. A Board is supposed to provide oversight. How does this Board apparently provide none? Board members won't talk? Lefton won't talk?
What's the Governor think of that?
Where's the Akron Beacon Journal? Where's the Record Courier? Dix's quote is nonsensical. What publisher staring at a great story says "go slow?" To verify the key fact that the Jason M Cope donating the money is the same Jason M Cope paying the fines to the SEC is easy. So why, when the Record Courier had this story weeks before a student reporter wasn't it in print? Why did Dix apparently spike the story?
Where's the Plain Dealer? Where's TV2 pressing board members and Lefton for on-camera interviews? Where's the follow up with the Governor? There's some great work here by Doug, and there's lots more reporting to go.
But why, given the facts is there so little discussion, so little concern? Is withholding crucial information from the Board by the President of a university just hunky dory with everyone?
What's the Governor think of that?
Where's the Akron Beacon Journal? Where's the Record Courier? Dix's quote is nonsensical. What publisher staring at a great story says "go slow?" To verify the key fact that the Jason M Cope donating the money is the same Jason M Cope paying the fines to the SEC is easy. So why, when the Record Courier had this story weeks before a student reporter wasn't it in print? Why did Dix apparently spike the story?
Where's the Plain Dealer? Where's TV2 pressing board members and Lefton for on-camera interviews? Where's the follow up with the Governor? There's some great work here by Doug, and there's lots more reporting to go.
But why, given the facts is there so little discussion, so little concern? Is withholding crucial information from the Board by the President of a university just hunky dory with everyone?
-
- +8
-
-
written by ..., February 14, 2012
How much did Cope Specifically have to pay out the four defendants? Is there a link to the judgement of the SEC in here?
...and you misspelled Nielsen in the third sentence of "the board approves."
...and you misspelled Nielsen in the third sentence of "the board approves."
-
- -1
-
-
written by ..., February 14, 2012
Could we maybe link to the article in the New York Times that maybe possibly could actually give some insight to the full nature of the allegations and the ruling? Or would that throw a big wrench in your witch hunt (which might be true, but without full transparency like the aforementioned NYT article, it looks a little Salem-ish)
-
- -7
-
-
written by ..., February 13, 2012
To the first comment...
and articles like this are reasons our J school ranks above or at level with OSU, OU and Cinci.
Facts are truth.
and articles like this are reasons our J school ranks above or at level with OSU, OU and Cinci.
Facts are truth.
-
- +8
-
-
written by Third comment, February 13, 2012
Best part of this story? A guy by the last of Yonkoff helped write it. #KentReadKentWriteKentYonkoff
-
- -2
-
-
Write comment
