« 'Welcome to Welfare Wabasha' | Main | This one ought to draw a crow-d »

01 December 2011


Old Farmer

ElGuapo I wonder how you would some of the principals at Lyle but not know Jim Dusso since he is also the only principal in Lyle.
Also have you wondered why this man is so angry.


The late great Paul Harvey keeps coming to mind with "The Rest of the Story...."


Is it because the news media is now part of the story that this is getting any air?

Mr. Dusso (who I have met, but don't know. I do some business in Lyle and know some of the principles) is trying to provide a minimal amount of control in recently contentious meetings that have been usurped by loudmouth activists with an axe to grind. The very reason these zealots are misbehaving (like Occupiers) in these meetings is because the media is there to report said misbehavior.

He has been threatened with physical harm in front of numerous witnesses (off camera as well as on) by a locally well known hot-head who has been known to CARRY A GUN, and Dusso has been reportedly been threatened more discreetly by others. I think your readers want to know if this angry, retired deputy still carries his sidearm with him? And if so, why has the local sheriff not revoked his license to not only carry, but to possess? This angry guy (seen on camera as angry and threatening) has a restraining order on him issued by a local judge. To me, THAT is a news story. Perhaps you might call him up on his personal cell phone and ask for a response?

The local news media needs to report the news, not be the news.

Jay Furst

Well, Ray, I think I acknowledged that the camera crews need to be as discreet and unobtrusive as possible, but we're not CNN or C-SPAN with a lot of cameras committed to gavel-to-gavel coverage. We need to be able to move around and eventually leave, if we have deadlines (such as TV preparing for 10 p.m. newscasts)...I never hear from county boards, school officials, etc., about concerns regarding reporters and photographers causing issues -- I don't think ever in my 16 years here -- nor am I aware of a policy like this with any other board in our area.


There needs to be acknowledgment that there is another side to the discussion. All of us have been to meetings where video camera persons have been disruptive. Taking a stance in front of the audience preventing many from seeing, moving during answers preventing others hearing, folding up the tripod etc, etc,. Another good example are congressional hearings where the well in front of the witness is full of still and video photographers so the witness has to talk across them to the congressmen, and while digital cameras have solved this issue , noisy motor drives were a major distraction.
The court systems in most states require a stationary camera position, with lens choices making the view appropriate. Some also require remote camera operation to minimize distractions. WE would not put up with audience members wondering around talking or waving during a meeting but the press feels it has a license to do so.

The comments to this entry are closed.