At 02:37 PM 10/22/2009, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Steven Krivit wrote:
With all due respects, you do not seem to understand the fact that,
as a journalist, I posted my writing publicly and openly and that,
as I journalist - serving the broader public - I expect to keep
things public and open.
Krivit's report is made-up nonsense plus some personal details that
are not anyone's business. A journalist is not supposed to publish
every weird notion that crosses his mind without confirmation. This
is not journalism; it is a stream of consciousness blog.
Rothwell is accurate, unfortunately. Something has gone very, very
wrong at New Energy Times. Krivit is, I assume, accurately reporting
what he recalls of what he's seen, but also what he has said and
thought, he's becoming the topic of his own writing, and it is
becoming more and more unbalanced in that way. He's lost journalistic
objectivity, and that's very damaging.
I'd stopped responding publicly about his behavior, and wrote
privately to him; he'd pointed to a document on journalistic ethics,
claiming that this was his guide, and I'm sure it is, regarding some
of his practices, such as refusing to accept a retainer from
Energetics Technologies, and I assume, fully, that those events
happened. Krivit, however, with regard to criticism of his reporting
on Fleischmann, and his drawing of drastic conclusions from what
appears to be a few days of indisposition or illness, has become
increasingly hostile and unresponsive.
I pointed out to him aspects of the journalistic ethics guide that
he'd mentioned that he was not fulfilling well. He did not respond to
that. But today, I asked him if he had any CR-39 left over from the
Galileo Project, because he'd bought quite a bit, and it's
expensive.... his response:
with friends like you, who needs enemies?
take a hike
The criticism I had previously offered was sincere and intended to
help him avoid what could be a disaster for New Energy Times if he
continues on his course; and if he was satisfied that my objections
were invalid, he's the one responsible for his actions, not me, and I
consider it my duty to my friends to warn them when I see them sawing
off the tree limb they are sitting on.
This isn't about defending Dardik or McKubre or the other figures.
It's not about trying to stop any investigation of what may indeed
involve some questionable activities or conflicts of interest, and
it's not about Krivit reporting relevant facts. I've thought, maybe
this is just his blog, he can express his opinions, right? Well, the
blog is part of the NET web site. It colors NET, and the web site is
the publication.
Krivit was turned away in England, and he's striking back, I'm
afraid, he is going to get even. It's conduct unbecoming a
professional; I thought the field was benefitting from the work of a
professional journalist; but I'm afraid it's being lost. Perhaps
Krivit has some friends who are close enough to him and whom he
trusts sufficiently that they can explain to him what he's doing. If
not, I don't see much hope.
I have known some real journalists in my time, including
distinguished people in the mass media, and anti-establishment
people similar to I. F. Stone. (I did not know him, but I knew his
friends and enemies.) These people do not operate by Krivit's rules.
They do not publish half-baked fluff. A responsible journalist
sometimes publishes, and sometimes refrains from publishing.
Publishing everything you hear without distinction or careful
consideration makes you an Internet server, not a journalist. Even
when you know something to be a fact, it may be personal, or
irrelevant, or unimportant, or likely to be misunderstood out of
context, so it should be keep confidential.
There is plenty of room for disagreement about the exact boundaries
with regard to what Krivit has reported. Rothwell knows Fleischmann
and the family situation, probably better than Krivit. My concern,
though, is the political fallout of Krivit's apparent feud, and it's
a feud, all right, this is not merely investigative reporting. It's
polemic, and blatantly so. He's gone over the edge.
Those who support his work should pay close attention, if he can't be
guided through this, it's going down the tubes. The tide is turning,
CF is becoming respectable, and nothing is likely to stop that, but
some organizations will survive and some not.
