Sunday, February 15, 2015

The FrankenMatzner Monster

More credible than Caren Matzner's "The bounds of free speech"

GA applauds this comment by 'Anonymoud'  posted below The FrankenMatzner monster:

Anonymoud


2 Hours Ago

It's interesting how easy it is to tell what portions of this article were written by Carlo and what portions were written by Caren.

Caren - civil cases do not have victims and perps. They have plaintiffs and defendants. And Mr. Bajardi was not deemed a public figure because he was a simple "activist." Of course the scope and nature of Bajardi's public activities. as well as his behind the scenes role has always been well known to you so your mis characterization both of the Bajardi's role and the nature of the Court's ruling is pretty clearly not just an innocent mistake.

Why does your coverage consistently and intentionally fail to accurately portray mr. Bajardi's role in hoboken's political and Internet scene despite your awareness of the facts?

This litigation was not some groundbreaking first amendment case about how much nastiness directed toward a poor innocent Hoboken couple" by evil bloggers is "too much." It was about a local political operative with a history of using the Internet as a political weapon misusing the courts by filing a frivolous defamation suit that was thrown out in mid trial because of the complete lack of evidence.
 

Not only did the plaintiff fail to adduce any evidence of damages or malice, he couldn't even show the comments he sued over weren't true perhaps because in large part they in fact were true. He was very much an important senior member of Mrs. mason's political team carrying out political operations on her behalf and his possession of apparently stolen e-mails makes it clear to me that if he wasn't interviewed by the FBI in the e-mail theft investigation he certainly should have been.

I've heard that the e-mails obtained in discovery cast a great deal of light on Mr. Bajardi's involvement with the media including not just Hoboken411 but with Hoboken Patch and the Hoboken Reporter as well.

Perhaps if those e-mails are made public your misleading editorial choices will be easier to understand. I for one am anxiously awaiting their publication.
 

13 comments:

  1. I SO hope Anonymoud submits that comment to the HR as a letter to the editor. Heck, I'd be willing to do it for him/her! Slam, hits the nail firmly on so many heads. A shame these people get away with calling themselves journalists, I always laugh so hard each year when they publish a story about all the local "excellence in journalism" awards they win, what a (sad) joke.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I know from past experience, that they will not post anonymous letters to the editor unless you work for the city or the person you are speaking about.

    I tried to submit something about my personal observations of the Russo's anonymously, they would not do it. Given some of the stories about Michael Russo's brothers, I didn't want to post it with my name.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I have seen anonymous letters in the Hoboken Reporter many times

      Delete
    2. That might be, but they would not post mine anonymously unless I was someone that might lose my job for city job for speaking against Russo.

      But we know about the Hudson Reporters journalist ethics.

      Delete
    3. ETHICS ?
      No one in their right mind would accused the Hoboken Reporter of having ethics.

      I wouldn't worry too much what is printed in the Hoboken Reporter they are a throwaway and if you walk around Hoboken you can see most people do just that without ever opening it when they find it on their door step.





      Delete
  3. You'd do well to think of the Hoboken Reporter as the new Hoboken 411.

    Are they are completely driven by a political agenda? Check.

    Is Beth the beneficiary of the agenda? Check.

    Will they put your posts in moderation if they trigger a political switch? Check.

    Should you consider your logon information unsafe and prone to being shared with others for political reasons? Check.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I thought Politicker did a much better job at covering the story.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Bajardi posted some inflammatory stuff on the nj.com Hoboken forum about Stan Grossbard's diamond business under the screen names Wakeup07030 and MarkLower.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Oh no, that's not possible. He said he's Jewish. We all know he wouldn't lie... well about everything? Well, he may be small but he is one BIG liar!

      Delete
  6. Hoboken Reporter writes articles that Advertisers control. a page 3 story on some window treatment hack and on page 5 a big ad from the same guy.
    If he gets a story for that ad imagine Beth has bought years of lies, watered down stories and Finboy ghost written tripe

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. While I agree with the sentiment about the Hoboken Reporter, but a business lasting sixteen years in Hoboken is certainly not a hack.

      Delete
    2. HR is not a hack publication. But it has some ethical issues

      Delete
  7. Oh please. The HR is a TOTAL hack publication, little more than a real estate newsletter. It has lasted 16 years because it's got no competition n town and the owners don't care if it loses money. Get real.

    ReplyDelete