Update On Park Cities News' Report On SPCT & Merritt Patterson

Assisted Reproduction

Update On Park Cities News’ Report On SPCT & Merritt Patterson

By Andrew Vorzimer ⋅ February 25, 2011 ⋅

Filed Under circulation area, edition, information, investigative piece, moment, Park, park cities, print journalism, SPCT, update

Unfortunately, I have little additional information to add at the moment as, curiously, Park Cities News elected not to post their report (or any portion of it) online. While I realize that Park Cities News is a print newspaper, they do have an online presence. In fact, they announced online their intent to publish their own report in response to the Channel 8 investigative piece on SPCT and Patterson. When the article came out in print yesterday, they again promoted the story online. Yet they chose to not make the article available online or a summary of their findings. Moreover, they shut down the comment thread in which some of the victims of SPCT and Patterson were airing their legitimate complaints.

Obviously Park Cities News is entitled to limit its content to the print edition. While that type of business model has largely led to the end of print journalism as we knew it, it is their prerogative. However, it certainly is inconsistent with their prior online reporting of this scandal. Moreover, most of the victims of Patterson and SPCT’s business practices live outside the Park Cities News’ circulation area, thus leaving them in the dark as to the findings of the report.

If anyone has a copy of the print edition, kindly send it my way and I can post the key portions of the article as well as sharing my thoughts on whether the reporting is consistent with what we already know.

Discussion

14 comments for “Update On Park Cities News’ Report On SPCT & Merritt Patterson”

CampbellsChickenNoodle

They haven’t offered full stories on their website for several years now. It wasn’t a decision based on this article. It’s a bit disingenuous to make it sound as if they purposely withheld just this story.

And given all your railing about whether they were disingenuous in their coverage, you’d think you’d want to be, at the very least, more cognizant of that.

You know, a simple e-mail to the editor of that particular publication would’ve told you that, too.

You can also always buy a paper, even if you’re not in Dallas. Just takes a phone call to the office, I hear.
- Andrew Vorzimer
  
  Thanks for coming back to visit Ms. Chickennoodle. After reading your comment, I guess the word of the day in the Park Cities News is “disingenuous”.
  
  Perhaps you did not read the blog entry because I made it abundantly clear that Park Cities News is a print publication and it is well within their rights not to publish the story online. However, it is surprising that none of Mr. Pearson’s reporting was posted in the online blog section given that they have already run two separate pieces about this story already.
  
  So perhaps you didn’t mean to use the word “disingenuous” since I was very public in acknowledging their archaic business model of not having all their content available online. Moreover, I have not made any comment about the quality of their “coverage” as, like many others, I am unable to read it.
  
  As I stated, I simply find it odd that they selectively provide some information online and withhold other reporting. You can draw your own conclusions as to this practice.
  
  I hope you come back tomorrow when the word of the day will be “specious”.
CampbellsChickenNoodle

It’s hardly an archaic business model. A lot of publications don’t give away their product – including the Dallas Morning News, and several others. They’re behind a paywall, or they don’t offer their print things online.
Are you a regular visitor to the blog? If so, you’d know they don’t really make a habit of putting entire stories on their posts. Again, that’s what the paper is for.
I don’t work for Park Cities People, btw. I just know a lot about the newspaper business, and how it works.
- Andrew Vorzimer
  
  We disagree. Print media circulation numbers have been declining at a pace of approximately 9% per year. Between online news outlets and social media, more people today turn to the internet to get current news. These numbers are not likely to change as young people are far more inclined to use the internet than buy a newspaper.
  
  It is interesting that you cite to the Dallas Morning News as an example of a newspaper that disproves my point about the print media becoming archaic. I say interesting because the Dallas Morning News has lost more than 40% of their circulation since 2005. Not exactly a growth industry.
- LL
  
  see post below
LL

Though not a “regular” visitor to the blog (thank God, I have a life)-I have seen them link to their stories. Are you that old flight attendant that hangs out w/Merritt? MK?
morningbreeze

I will send you a copy of the article. You will get a kick out of it. This is my interpretation. “oh, I know I have $70,000.00 worth of judgments against me, but it’s not my fault. You know, little vendor disputes and such. I just hate the way courts just hand out judgments so freely. Doesn’t everyone get sued?” “I am totally innocent but I just don’t need to show up in court to defend myself. You know.” It could have been written by Merritt herself.
The small local magazines and newspapers in Dallas go in and out of business.
- LL
  
  Her husband is an attorney-I do not know, but I doubt, that he is a good one. If my husband was an attorney, and I got sued, I think I would show up. With representation.
- Andrew Vorzimer
  
  Thank you!
morningbreeze

I will send you a copy of the article. You will get a kick out of it. They left out many, many facts to make Merritt look good. The woman has NO conscious. It’s kind of scary.
Thank you so much for your posts!!!
Those newspapers go in and out of business!!!
morningbreeze

No, her husband is not an attorney. He is communications director for a big energy company. His job is kind of high profile. He is very involved with the Dallas Press Club. I wonder if he knew about her shady dealings. It is very expensive to live in the Park Cities. ….a lot of “keeping up with the Joneses'”
JustaTexan

Ms. Patterson claims that she will pay everyone back by March 31. If she had properly put the money in escrow, wouldn’t she just have the bank holding the escrow cut a check?
- Andrew Vorzimer
  
  That is the critical issue. There would be some refunds that could be owed that would not originate from an escrow/trust account. As an example, payments made to the Agency for their program fee may not have been deposited into a trust or escrow account. However, payments to surrogates and egg donors should have been placed in a segregated trust or escrow account and those funds should be available for immediate payment. Similarly, balances remaining on account and owed to Intended/Recipient Parents for completed or canceled cycles should also be available without delay. That is why the delayed payments to the surrogates and egg donors are inexcusable.
  
  I will be curious to see if the reporter questioned Ms. Patterson on these very serious allegations for which no adequate justification has been presented.
riri

She is a crook and harasses way too many people about things that she has no business sticking her nose into. Man I bet her husband Michael Patterson is sick of her

Search The Spin Doctor

Assisted Reproduction