Jump to content
JLK

WashingtonPost.com City Guide

Recommended Posts

Click-click for a sample review.

I know change is hard, but I feel like every time they mess with the layout, I like it even less. :lol:

What's up with all of the empty space? I know, for advertising at some point in the future. And in Tom's recent chat, someone asked about why official sites for restaurants aren't included. It's a good question. I understand some of the practical reasons for not doing it, but as a site user, I wish they'd move in that direction.

I find the new font hard on the eyes. The header is dull. On the bright side, I like the addition of a little mapquest snippet showing the place in question's location.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Click-click for a sample review.

I know change is hard, but I feel like every time they mess with the layout, I like it even less.  :P

What's up with all of the empty space?  I know, for advertising at some point in the future.  And in Tom's recent chat, someone asked about why official sites for restaurants aren't included.  It's a good question.  I understand some of the practical reasons for not doing it, but as a site user, I wish they'd move in that direction.

I find the new font hard on the eyes.  The header is dull.  On the bright side, I like the addition of a little mapquest snippet showing the place in question's location.

I'd still like to know why they won't put in web links to the official restaurant/bar sites. It's not like the business is going to constantly be changing its URL. If the link is out of date, chances are the restaurant is closed and the whole listing is dated. :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'd still like to know why they won't put in web links to the official restaurant/bar sites.  It's not like the business is going to constantly be changing its URL.  If the link is out of date, chances are the restaurant is closed and the whole listing is dated.  :lol:

Speaking of which, I could use a volunteer to help me with this. It's a lot of grunt work, so think twice before contacting me. :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Washingtonpost.com does include urls to restaurants (check this out: http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?n...earchLocation=), but a database of 1700 restaurants makes it difficult to keep up with every restaurant's site.

Interesting. I plugged in Firefly, Jaleo and Kotobuki as samplers to see and none of them had a website. I hadn't seen one there ever before. Maybe they're making the effort.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

New low in journalism? The new direction? Or is this just the new standard?

Just what is the point to these open-ended, base insinuations given the total lack of anything new to say?

Why exactly is it necessary to prey on one family's pain for profit and even worse purposely and purposefully cause that poor man a whole new round of pain and obviously-felt shame just to be able to report on it?

Whoever doesn't take the next round of buy-outs should really check his moral compass.

Let's all show some support by making our next night out be at Coppi's. Maybe an "On a Whim"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

New low in journalism? The new direction? Or is this just the new standard?

Just what is the point to these open-ended, base insinuations given the total lack of anything new to say?

Why exactly is it necessary to prey on one family's pain for profit and even worse purposely and purposefully cause that poor man a whole new round of pain and obviously-felt shame just to be able to report on it?

Whoever doesn't take the next round of buy-outs should really check his moral compass.

Let's all show some support by making our next night out be at Coppi's. Maybe an "On a Whim"?

OK, then. I'll step up to the plate for this one. Michael, I love you to death; but, I truly don't understand your complaint. I read this article in the WaPo this morning, and then came here and re-read the thing looking for what I had (obviously) missed.

1) This is now a "cold" case. And, it comes on the heels of Chief Lanier assigning detectives to look at the Chandra Levy case and they came up with the goods (as did the WaPo).

2) How can you possibly imagine that the victim's brother would be upset by the renewed interest in this case? Particularly, if said interest results in an arrest? Do you think he doesn't want his sister's murder solved?

3) The real "victim" of unfair publicity seems to be the Rumba Cafe, not Coppi's. I was surprised that you didn't think that this place was worth of some DR.com love.

Please help me out here: what have I missed?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salacious, gruesome, provocative, prejudicial, leering details? Check.

Santeria? Check.

Aging single woman whose desperate search for love and unconventional lifestyle somehow invited her own murder? Check.

Sensational "Halloween Murder" (WTF?) headline? Check.

The obvious anguished breakdown and wish to be left alone by the brother at the end of the story? Check.

The complete disregard for his implied plea for privacy? Check.

Complete absence of investigative progress or any other plausible pretext at newsworthiness to justify exposing and re-exposing the family's obvious pain? Check.

Is there something I missed?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salacious, gruesome, provocative, prejudicial, leering details? Check.

Santeria? Check.

Aging single woman whose desperate search for love and unconventional lifestyle somehow invited her own murder? Check.

Sensational "Halloween Murder" (WTF?) headline? Check.

The obvious anguished breakdown and wish to be left alone by the brother at the end of the story? Check.

The complete disregard for his implied plea for privacy? Check.

Complete absence of investigative progress or any other plausible pretext at newsworthiness to justify exposing and re-exposing the family's obvious pain? Check.

Is there something I missed?

Amazing/inspiring/puzzling how such diverse interpretations emerge from the same text. When I read the article yesterday, none of those same ideas resulted.

Instead, I felt saddened by the brutal and universal nature of passion-spawned violence. And a faint glimmer of hope that an article like this might dust off the investigative reports and shake out some new leads.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3) The real "victim" of unfair publicity...

It is not about publicity. It is about simple, human dignity in death versus preying upon and exploiting private pain for profit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is not about publicity. It is about simple, human dignity in death versus preying upon and exploiting private pain for profit.

We can't all sell steaks for a living. Some of us have to defend criminals or exploit the pain/fear of others so our families can eat [at Ray's].

I certainly don't read the story the way you do. I think it's touching, highlights her personality and emphasizes the suffering of people who loved her (and how they're at odds with one another).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right. Religious beliefs and naked, mutilated bodies are so germane to compassionate, sensitive, high-minded, purposeful journalism. And "Halloween Murder Mystery" headlines in May aren't designed to sell newspapers, but rather to signify respect for those who have passed.

Wait until they write about you, or better yet, better hope that they never do.

Sorry but you are way out of line here. I know this whole circle of people and believe me, everyone would like the tragic murder of this wonderful person to be solved. That is the point of this article, which, in your knee-jerk haste to condemn the press, you have totally missed. And your posts here are disgusting and way more salacious and cynical than the article. I'm not sure what your motives are, and I don't care; but by the same token, you certainly don't have the power to discern the author's motives either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is there something I missed?

Yes. In cold cases, teh press reviews like this one and the ones in the David Wone case are one way, in our info over-ladened society, to keep the cases alive and to try and drum up information that may go to unlocking the mystery.

If there are factual errors in the piece, then by all means point them out. But if the facts are correct and the folk quoted were actually interviewed and quoted correctly, then it is a human interest story that I felt heartfelt and a call to action to get folk who might know something to say something.

But it seems like your upset is a continuation of your issues with the Post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the early morning hours of August 1st, 1997, a line cook who worked for me, Michael Cole, was beaten to death with a baseball bat. I found out that morning upon my arrival to work, when an ICU nurse from Johns Hopkins called the restaurant I managed to let us know that he was in a coma and unlikely to make it; could we contact the next of kin? In a horrible twist of fate, Michaels parents were already on their way from Tennessee to pick him up for a family vacation. Instead, they took him home.

You would think that a young man brutally beaten to death would make the papers, or the news. But it did not. However, about a week and a half after he passed, reporters started showing up at the restaurant. The "story" had become edgy, because it involved an employee of an "exclusive" restaurant and a late night trip to a strip club that ended tragically.

I, and the owners of the restaurant, certainly did not want the publicity. If he hadn't worked for us, the story probably would have continued to go unnoticed by the general populace. But low and behold, the moment that the story aired, tips came in to the police. And two days later, three people were arrested and charged with the crime.

Maybe the same can happen for Ms. Amaya.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i noticed the headline and read the lede but would have skipped this story if i hadn't noticed the controversy here. maybe it will arouse new interest in a cold case, but it is rather lurid and casts a cloud of suspicion over just about everyone who appears in it. this is almost something you might expect to see in the police gazette, if there ever was or still is such a thing. there is some provocative interviewing going on and unsettling or suggestive findings from the journalistic detective work, but not enough hard facts in between, so naturally the imagination will wander. i would say it's made for television, a promising outline for a medium where the writers and producers would have a freer hand in filling in the blanks. it's far too late to take a stand against sensationalizing the news, but i can see how it would bother anyone actually acquainted with the people getting this treatment and seeing a reporter push them almost into a fictional realm.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anybody who reads crime novels and police procedurals knows that when you are murdered, you lose any "right to privacy." If you are a murdered woman, nine times out of ten your killer is your boyfriend, ex-boyfriend, wannabe-boyfriend, husband, or ex-husband. It's that one-out-of-ten that proves to be so difficult for everybody involved, even tangentially. Remember how everybody's attention was focused on Gary Condit in the Chandra Levy case? Sure, the creep was voted out of office by his constituents; but, the distraction kept the police from connecting the dots with the Grandique guy who had been attacking women in Rock Creek Park. Once you are murdered, and no obvious suspect comes to the fore, your whole life becomes open for inspection. That's just how it is.

Remember the Starbucks murders on Wisconsin Avenue? There was no obvious killer, so the Police started looking into the lives of the victims. The night manager was a woman who happened to be a lesbian. Did that play any role in her murder? Who knew? But the publicity about that drove George Pelecanos to write another DC crime novel with the background of the victims are the main story. It turned out to be a random robbery that ended in the murder of the eyewitnesses, but nobody knew that at the time the bodies were discovered. I actually served on a Grand Jury in DC which heard the initial testimony in the Colonel Brook's Tavern murders. We later learned, along with everybody in DC, that the murders were done by the usual doofuses who couldn't keep their mouths shut. Most murders here are like that--stupid people doing stupid things. I once heard a cop say that he had never arrested a perp who had a Mensa membership card in his wallet.

The answer is not to be murdered and make sure nobody you know is ever murdered. Then, you can maintain your privacy to the extent that you wish. Otherwise . . .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is not about publicity. It is about simple, human dignity in death versus preying upon and exploiting private pain for profit.

Michael, I entirely agree with your view of this piece of "journalism", but rest assured that the Washington Post is not making a profit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...