• Thank you for letting us know how you felt regarding the article about your son. We do care about our friends and neighbors and recognize this connection is what sets us apart from other media.
    Time and time again, family members in these difficult circumstances tell us they appreciate having the chance to say more about the person who died than just what comes out on a police or fire report. I appreciate your kind words despite the incredible pain you've endured.

    January 9, 2008 at 3:46 p.m.

  • GoliadChica, such a sad story :( Your story just goes to show why there should always be careful consideration in how newspaper material is laid out. Some citizens only care that the most horrendous news should be sensationalized. They think it is their right to know EVERYTHING and it ought to be laid out as so to become immediately apparent.
    Chris I think you guys made the right decision.

    January 9, 2008 at 12:39 p.m.

  • Oh, I understood it at the time (April 2, 2006).  The news was statewide.  I don't think anyone besides y'all even think about the impact on the family because it was THE NEWS.  We might not have even seen the headlines except that we were homeless and living in a hotel, so we had to eat all our meals out in public and, well, you know the rest.
    On the other side of this, your paper did a WONDERFUL story on my son afterwards that was a big comfort to my family.  It helped balance what happened to him with who he really was - and we didn't want the only information about Garret that the public heard to be just how he died.   While the entire episode was (and still is) very very painful, the balanced coverage erased the shock and anger of seeing that terrible headline all day.
    So, a late thank you to all of you for the second article.  I already thanked Jason when I saw him a few weeks ago.

    January 9, 2008 at 11:41 a.m.

  • I am sorry for your loss. I don't the details of the fire, but I do know newspapers routinely report on such deaths. It is difficult to balance the need to report the news and the concerns of an individual family. We try to respectfully contact families in such situations to best understand what's happened.

    January 9, 2008 at 10:37 a.m.

  • I also appreciate your sensitivity, even though I wish it been applied when my son died last year.  I couldn't go anywhere for a few days without the huge headline MAN DIES IN FIRE staring at me from the paper vending machines.  Thank you for sparing the PIgott family the same reminders.

    January 9, 2008 at 9:48 a.m.

  • Chris,
    In an age that victims' emotions and moral rights are routinely trampled by the "paparazzi"; when innocents visited by terrible tragedy are hardly given an opportunity to grieve before some media agent abusing the freedom of the press jams a camera and a microphone in his face, I'm glad the Advocate took this responsible position.
    Sometimes the responsibility to be human and to be humane overrides the need to have an exclusive.
    Thank you.

    January 9, 2008 at 1:21 a.m.