Letters to the editor
Clarification of statements reported
I would like to go on record as saying that I take great exception to having words attributed to me in a newspaper article that were not what was said. One generally believes that the words between quotation marks are literal quotes and one assumes that the balance of the article is accurate. That is not the case with the Nevada Daily Mail's coverage of the school board portion of the Soroptomist/ Chamber of Commerce Candidate Forum in the Tuesday, March 28, 2006 edition of your paper.
In that article, I find little of what I said that was reported correctly. In fact, it was so off base that I requested and received a copy of the video of the forum to review and see if I had actually made some of the stupid comments for which I have been given credit.
Gratefully, I had not. For example the article reads, not in quotes: "Hillier said that she didn't have any particular expertise." The true wording was that I didn't have any expertise in education but I did have 25 years of experience in accounting... skills that I would bring to the Board. I won't bore you with the actual responses that were made to every question, but I assure the community that I am not completely without intelligent thought, even though the newspaper article certainly gave that impression. And while most of the words, in quotes with my name, are not mine, the summaries of what was said are almost worse.
I am very disappointed that this type of "reporting" is what passes as journalism in Nevada. If the newspaper decides an event is news worthy, it should be covered accurately.
-- Norlene Hillier