When Tim Scannell was shot in the Cook County courthouse in Grand Marais a year ago this month, it led to a revelation, as reported by MPR's Dan Kraker: In Grand Marais, there's an odd pattern in the town of older men pursuing high school-aged girls. Or being pursued by high-school aged girls.
"We started hearing about these 20-, 25-, 30-year-old men who were constantly at football games, around the teenage girls, and who somehow believed that it was a great thing to be sleeping with virgins," one mother said. "And I was aghast."
The man who shot Scannell, Daniel Schlienz, 42, had just been found guilty of having sex with a 15-year-old girl several years earlier, when he was in his mid-30s. Scannell was the prosecutor.
Now, Scannell is embroiled in a controversy surrounding a young girl. The parents of a 17-year-old have obtained a restraining order against him, according to the Associated Press.
The girl's parents say Scannell was a longtime family friend who told them this summer that he had fallen in love with the teen.
Their petition accuses him of continuing to contact the girl after promising not to.
The AP says Mr. Scannell, 46, did not return a phone call for comment.
If true, this is so far beyond creepy.
"IF" it's true? Oh, it's true. Grand Marais. Look up the news. This Scannell was the same one quoted as saying he really couldn't do anything about the underage sex/ pedophilia that was ongoing continuously throughout "his watch" because it was word against word. Everybody knew the gravel pit where the cars all parked and the underage girls gave it up to adult males. A phalanx of county squad cars that encircled and blocked the exit to the gravel pit would have solved everything. But that would have been too messy for the town.
So here's the county prosecutor (!) diddling a girl who is now 17. When did he "fall in love" as he admits? He's a slime and he's a county prosecutor. What's wrong with that picture?
That story by Kraker looks prescient now. Scannell atty just issued statement saying he'll stay in job.
I live in Grand Marais, and am in high school as well. Things like this can happen anywhere, really. Up here, there's not a whole lot to do. I don't know, it just seems like people make it look worse than it really is. Just a perspective. I've seen my peers date older guys, but I've also seen the same thing happen elsewhere as well. It's just that people are recognizing that this happens now, instead of turning a blind eye.
It's sad to see a public figure that is supposed to abide by the law and enforce the laws do something like this!! It shows that the criminal justice system is biased to themselves and that is the worst thing about this whole system of cops, DA's, and Judges. They all think and act like they are above the laws they are supposed to be enforcing. If that was my daughter, I would be asking for his resignation!!
Is there something about MPR?
Using a rhetorical sentance as headline is the classic telltale sign that the following journalism is substandard. It's of the quality you would see in Fox News or the Enquirer. It's titilation. What would make MPR drop it's journalistic integrity so completely?
What good people up here are worried about is an overzealous blanket judgement of this amazing town and region (and all small towns in general) by outsider urbanites. As a former city drone I stared at the walls of my cubical and up at the small patch of sky and often felt I was on the wrong path. I dreamt of a more self directed and examined life in a more beautiful place with less people and great art and culture. I resisted the temptation to deamonize small towns like this as a way of making myself feel better about my current circumstances. MPR wants to find a Twin Peaks episode or a Cohen Brothers film in this story to provide fodder to disafected urbanites looking for comfort in their life choices. Stick to the facts NPR, and the people involved, but don't try to tar the entire region and all it's diverse population.
This is an incredibly diverse area, ethnically and culturally. There is no one "Grand Marais" that can be labeled "this" or "that". There are old communities, families, Ojibwe, recent transplants, artists, musicians, craftspeople, young, old, red, blue, on grid off grid...MPR reporters have sought out subjects to interview that confirm their desire to portray a narrow slice of the community as representative of the broad community. It is sensationalism for it's own sake with little concern for the casualties outside of those actually involved.
Unfortunately, as this drama plays out the tragedy is taking on Shakespearian proportions- making it easier for MPR to put the pieces in place for their stylish drama. HIstory will judge many in this drama harshly, including MPR.
MPR is doing it's listeners and this region a profound injustice. Is there something wrong with MPR?
So you're saying there isn't an unusual problem of older men and young girls in the town?
Betteridge's law of headlines
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Betteridge's law of headlines is an adage that states, "Any headline which ends in a question mark can be answered by the word no". The name refers to Ian Betteridge, a British technology journalist who primarily covers topics relating to Apple, although the general concept is much older. The observation has also been called "Davis' law" or just the "journalistic principle".
Betteridge explained the concept in a February 2009 article, regarding a TechCrunch article with the headline "Did Last.fm Just Hand Over User Listening Data To the RIAA?":
This story is a great demonstration of my maxim that any headline which ends in a question mark can be answered by the word "no". The reason why journalists use that style of headline is that they know the story is probably bollocks, and don’t actually have the sources and facts to back it up, but still want to run it.
Five years before Betteridge's article, a similar observation was made by UK journalist Andrew Marr in his 2004 book My Trade. It was among Marr's suggestions for how a reader should approach a newspaper if they really wish to know what is going on:
If the headline asks a question, try answering 'no'. Is This the True Face of Britain's Young? (Sensible reader: No.) Have We Found the Cure for AIDS? (No; or you wouldn't have put the question mark in.) Does This Map Provide the Key for Peace? (Probably not.) A headline with a question mark at the end means, in the vast majority of cases, that the story is tendentious or over-sold. It is often a scare story, or an attempt to elevate some run-of-the-mill piece of reporting into a national controversy and, preferably, a national panic. To a busy journalist hunting for real information a question mark means 'don't bother reading this bit'.
Betteridge has admitted to breaking his own law, in an article published at his own site.
Thank you for providing that. It's interesting.
But your response didn't answer my question.
In reading Andy's very well-written comment, I do not see any evidence of his stating or even implying that there is or is not a problem in Grand Marais between older men and young girls. My reading of it is that it's unfair to paint an entire region according to its worst (or sleaziest, maybe) citizens.
Bob, I basically agree with Andy Mous. You have (1.) the odd coincidence of a prosecutor being shot by a man he prosecuted for sex with an underaged girl later becoming involved with an underaged girl, and (2) an unnamed local mother talking about unnamed local men apparently bragging about having sex with virgins. And on that you base a scandalous and salacious headline like, "Is there something about Grand Marais?" C'mon, MPR. You're better than that.
Of course not. But i didn't say every old guy in Grand Marais is a creepy old man. I suggested Grand Marais has a problem. But maybe a "Grand Marais has a creepy old man problem" would be more appropriate.
Do you think there's something about Duluth? (w.r.t. racism)
If you ask that question -- or even as a declarative sentence -- are you saying everyone in Duluth is a racist?
Feelings are hurt. I get that.
// an unnamed local mother talking about unnamed local men apparently bragging about having sex with virgins.
I might agree with him, too, if I hadn't bothered to read Kraker's excellent story in which everyone was named and which makes clear that there is a problem in the town, an assertion made by people in the town.
And you didn't bother to read the story, obviously.
You should, and then come back and talk about whether you think Grand Marais has a problem and whether a question mark in a headline is really a bigger deal.
I have read every article, and your contention that they prove anything is false beyond any question. Bob, at first I was going to just cast you off as a substandard journalist who is still surprisingly employed by MPR. But after seeing you repeatedly using questions to insert untennable and hurtful accusations, and now presuming to be the only authority who has read the articles and telling those who haven't that it proves your stance is well... beyond the pale. So I will no longer contend you are a substandard journalist. You are an ass. I will also no longer dignify this thread with contributions.
Andy, you probably know that Dan Kraker's article has been out for 10 months now.
My comment regarding not reading the story was not directed toward you but to Kevin's capsulization which said all "I had" was anonymous parent. That's why I quoted his line at the beginning of my response. His comment revealed that he didn't read Dan's story. I'm suggesting if anyone is going to say what I "have" or "don't have," read the story which is what I "have." That's not unreasonable.
Look, I get it, you're proud of your city. But there are certainly indications your city has a problem and rather than discuss that, you've decided to distract from an assessment of that problem (anywhere from "yes" to "no" would be a start) by attacking me rather than engage in a discussion about whether Grand Marais has a problem and, if so, is it any greater or worse than any other rural city.
If you don't want to discuss it, that's fine But the best way to make a case about what poor journalism MPR may/may not be exhibiting, is to look at the journalism and deal with the facts or assertions that are presented by people in the town.
You claim to have read the article and *my* accusations (if you've read the articles, then you know they're not *my* accusations) but you've done everything but respond to the issue.
To the extent that you've determined that I'm an ass, you may well be right. Lucky guess.
But that doesn't mean Grand Marais doesn't have a problem a lot of people in Grand Marais seem to think it has. Nowhere is it stated or implied that because you live in Grand Marais, you must be dating underage girls. What it says is there are enough people in Grand Marais who are and enough people in positions of responsibility who think it's a problem for Grand Marais. Those people are named in Dan's story.
If you don't want to talk about it, that's your certainly your choice and I respect it.
I'm disappointed that Andy thinks we in the twin cities are disaffected urbanites and cubicle dwelling city drones. Perhaps you thought of yourself that way. I reject your blanket characterizations in your comment rejecting the blanket characterization of Grand Marais. And I love Grand Marais.
Shame on MPR too!!
How about a story about the great community spirit of Grand Maras that supports its youth through Arts, sports, mentoring, reading, church, girl scouts, boy scouts and many other positive avenues! A community that encourages them through school and to excel in whatever path they chose after high school! Come to a football game, school play, band concert! Look in the halls of the schools and see the host of volunteers! What awful writing! Is journalism really dead??? How about integrity in your work?
I grew up in a small town, and all I can say is that this is not just a Grand Marais problem. Yes, there are great outlets for youth but - like every small town - there is a population of men who view the high school as an always replenishing supply of dating material.
Don't confuse a willingness to accept that it's an issue as a lack of civic pride. It's not unique to this community, and I bet anyone from a "smaller" town can relate similar stories.
// Is journalism really dead??? How about integrity in your work?
If your definition of journalism and integrity is look the other way on civic problems in order to assume a role as the public relations arm of a town, I certainly hope so, yes.
I'm a former newspaper reporter, and I have to say I agree that the headline--yes, I know; you didn't necessarily write it-- is completely unsupported by the story. If your story did support it, you wouldn't find yourself going back-and-forth with your readers in the comments section. You come off as really defensive. If your story and headline were both good, you could have just gone with the old stock response: "I stand by my story." It has fewer words, but, to me, at least, it's much more convincing than all this self-justification.
I haven't written any story to "stand behind." I've written a blog post adding the Associated Press story to Dan Kraker's story. Please understand what this. An aggregation of news stories and a discussion space to engage each other on the content and issues therein.
So I haven't justified anything. Instead, I've invited participants to provide less heat and more light on the allegations that originated in Grand Rapids by people from Grand Rapids.
At some point, perhaps some of you will reveal what it is about the two stories that you disagree with factually. That hasn't happened yet so there's really nothing more to say until someone wants to tackle actual facts.
People in Grand Rapids and people in positions of authority have said Grand Rapids has a problem with older men seeking inappropriate relationships with young girls. Do you agree or do you not agree? Do you think it's none of anyone's business? What is the point at which a problem that doesn't personally affect everyone in a town, nonetheless becomes a town's problem?
Sure, we can discuss whether I'm an ass, a bad journalist, defensive or any number of other things, but that doesn't preclude not shying away from the more relevant concern that Dan's and the AP's stories suggest, unless the goal of that discussion is to avoid any consideration of those concerns from your fellow community members?
The assertion that I've somehow said everyone in Grand Rapids has an inappropriate relationship is utter nonsense and seems designed to distract from issues being raised in your town and court action which most certainly lends it credence. Why?
So I hope at some point the invitation will be accepted.
By the way, who were you a reporter for?
^we live in Grand Marais, not Grand Rapids...
Although I'm sure this kind of stuff happens there just as it happens here and in the cities. Perhaps what is so wonderful about Grand MARAIS is that it is such a wonderful town, that people stop and take the time to correct you on how wrong the media such as yourselves are about it. We are a wonderful, tightly knit, creative, diverse and tolerant, breathtaking town. The issues that are arising now are a result of a small town doing something most small towns are unwilling to do; letting them surface. these behaviors are psychological, NOT cultural, and they have been happening behind closed doors for as long as any of us can remember in every community in this country.. Our doors are wide open. The media doesn't want to help solve the problem, they want to strangle our town with a "desperate housewives" plot line of morbid, exagerated proportions.
// The issues that are arising now are a result of a small town doing something most small towns are unwilling to do; letting them surface.
In the previous paragraph you said what makes Grand Marais wonderful -- and I don't question that it is -- is that people take the time to correct us on how wrong the media portrayal is.
In the above paragraph you congratulate your town for being willing to let the issue the media is portraying "surface."
What is the difference as you see it between the issue that the town has allowed to surface and the portrayal of that issue ?
The comments here seem to portray the issue as one of outsiders vs. Grand Marais/Cook County residents. And yet, in Dan's story, everyone quoted is a Grand Marais/Cook County resident. WHAT is it they got wrong? That seems to be the question that I keep asking that doesn't seem to be getting answered among a continuing theme that the city media got it wrong.
Let's break it down in smaller pieces and maybe that will move things along a bit.
Beth Kennedy, who lives in Grand Marais.
"It wasn't that it was acceptable with all of society," she said of the relationships older men had with teenage girls. "It's just that nothing was done about it. People knew about it, and nothing was done."
Steve Borud, your county's probation officer:
"I remember one particular call in the middle of the night where a stepfather was threatening me -- if I didn't find his daughter out there in this sea of wilderness, because she was running with a well-known adult," he said.
Since then, Borud has talked to many women who admitted being involved with older men when they were teenagers, and to parents whose daughters had such relationships. He said peer pressure — a fear of being branded a "squealer" — helped breed a culture of silence that no one would break.
Annie DeBevec, a social worker:
"So it was very difficult," she said. "You can't do anything with rumors. You can't prosecute. You can't take it to the county attorney."
I get the whole "you're not from here so you don't know" theme. But these people in the story you object to DO live there.
So it seems to me that these Grand Marais residents are the one who "allowed" the issue to surface. And they were in the story and that's how it surfaced. So how on one hand can you acknowledge what makes Grand Marais special is that the issue was allowed to surface, and on the other hand criticize that they had a platform to do it?
From what I can tell by the comments, there's little appreciation for the fact the issue surfaced, and a real objection to any discussion of it at all. Talk about something else instead, the comment upstream suggests as a standard of what constitutes good journalism.
The questions I asked in my previous comment remain unanswered. I'm sorry, but they seem pretty basic for any community that applauds itself for allowing the issue to surface.
//The media doesn't want to help solve the problem, they want to strangle our town with a "desperate housewives" plot line of morbid, exagerated proportions.
Your county attorney, one of the people who in February lamented the problem of older men pursuing girls in high school, just had a restraining order slapped against him for pursuing a 17 year old. If that sounds like a weird plotline, I agree. But it was written in Grand Marais.
Have these issues been happening everywhere behind closed doors? I don't know to be specifically true everywhere else, but it's clear it's true in Grand Marais. From what I can tell by the comments -- which, by the way, pretty much mirror the ones after Dan's story originally ran -- behind closed doors is just where some people would rather it remain.
Bob, are comments filetered or censored on this blog? Or not included because of space limitations, or something?
Spam comments and comments that violate the Terms of Service are deleted. This often happens -- in regards to the latter -- with potentially libelous comments, especially when accompanied by phony names or email addresses. Also, completely idiotic comments -- that is to say, "trolling" --are usually deleted because they contribute little to a civil conversation.
Generally, this comes down to two paragraphs in the Terms of Service:
You are responsible for all of your submissions.
You may not post any messages misrepresenting yourself as someone else, or by using a false e-mail address. In MPR and APM forums and content contributions, you must post under your own username, and are responsible for all posts from your account.
Your submissions may not infringe upon others' use and enjoyment of the MPR and APM Web sites.
Do not post any material or links to material that is libelous, defamatory, false, obscene, violent, abusive, threatening, harassing, prejudicial, or is otherwise in violation of the law or MPR's guidelines. (If you see a violation of this policy in an MPR or APM discussion space, please e-mail firstname.lastname@example.org.)
In terms of filtering, the blog system has a very robust filter, which can be adjusted depending on the circumstances. It's very good at picking off spam. Occasionally it will net an innocent comment and hold it for review. On those occasions, the commenter is usually told in a screen after submitting a comment.
Is there something about Grand Marais? Yes, but it doesn't stop there. This is a problem throughout our society. Just look at the movies and TV shows we watch or the magazines we read. Young women are consistently over sexualized. To suggest this is a Grand Marais problem really misses the mark. If MPR really cares about young women and the myriad of inappropriate things they experience and confront in our society, then it should consider taking a hard journalistic look at where this problem comes from. Newsflash: it doesn't stop and start in Grand Marais. I'd like to see some stories and conversations that address the origin of this societal problem instead of a quick news blurb with a headline that points a finger at one small town. I want to be clear, I'm not saying a conversation about sexual violence specific to Grand Marais and the local culture there should not be had, but rather that that discussion include the culture of sexual violence we have throughout our society. Making it a story framed by the question “Is there something about Grand Marais” alone does a disservice to that community, young women, and ultimately our society.
// To suggest this is a Grand Marais problem really misses the mark. If MPR really cares about young women and the myriad of inappropriate things they experience and confront in our society, then it should consider taking a hard journalistic look at where this problem comes from. Newsflash: it doesn't stop and start in Grand Marais.
Nowhere did we say it was limited to Grand Marais. It's just that at the moment, there isn't another county prosecutor in the state that we know of who had a restraining order slapped on him for an inappropriate relationship with a kid, months after getting shot while prosecuting a guy who had an inappropriate relationship with a kid, and speaking out about the problem of older people having inappropriate relationships with kids in the town.
And while I continue to hear "MPR" "MPR" "MPR," it obscures the fact that the original complaints came from people from Grand Marais.
I don't see how raising the issue does a "disservice to our society" that's any more astonishing than the extent to which people are going out of their way to avoid actually looking at their community members' assertions, and the lengths to which they're going to comfort themselves when faced with the facts. The reaction is reminiscent of the whole "Don't Mess With Texas" vibe.
Bob, your continuing justification for your Tabloidesque article and headline is a clear indication that you know you are and were wrong. You guys LOVE to beat up on Grand Marais or use us as you see fit for some strange reason. Grand Marais is one of the healthiest communities in the State of Minnesota dependent mostly on a very well balanced Tourism/rArts/environmental/outdoors economy. We have moved away from a unsustainable economy and are thriving. Perhaps that is why you feel it is necessary to try to drag us down. We are aware of our problems just as every small community is aware of their own but to turn us into a freak show does us no good at all. We do not do well if visitors become afraid to bring their daughters on vacation here. Kinda reminds me of the scare tactics of the US Chamber of commerce trying to frighten people about traveling to Mexico! MPR has lost much credibility with me over the years becoming bought and sold in many ways! How unfortunate.
First off, I would be remised if I did not put my criticism of your/MPR’s story in its proper context. I believe that good journalism has the power and ability to really change society for the better by giving people what they need to be informed—and I’m not alone in that belief—there’s a reason freedom of the press is enshrined in our constitution. Good journalism delves into the story in a way that goes beyond lurid details, gimmicks and sensationalism. Real journalism gives people information that has the power to change how they act as individuals and further to challenge injustice in our world. At MPR you have that opportunity and indeed I hear MPR reporters tout their amazing ability and dedication to that ideal over and over while on-air--particularly during membership drives. So far, with this story, you’ve really missed that mark.
Moving on, it's not just MPRs responsibility to cultivate this discussion, each of us as a part of this society has a responsibility to really look at the issue. One thing that has bothered me about the ongoing coverage of this particular story is that very little attention was paid to it when it was just about Schlienz and the statutory rape of young women in Grand Marais. It wasn't until he was convicted of the crime and pulled a gun and shot up the courthouse that people suddenly started paying attention to the plight of young women in Grand Marais. After that, the media couldn't get there fast enough. While I am personally really glad there's awareness of the problem and discussion about it and that MPR is helping encourage that dialog, it’s sad that it took such an extreme act of violence to get folks to really pay attention to the problem. No one from MPR or any other outside news agency was up in Grand Marais talking about it at length and interviewing people until after that sad and horribly violent event occurred. Which speaks to the larger problem in our culture--general silence, acceptance and tolerance of sexual violence toward young women. When it was just about the young women and the perpetrator the media didn’t seem to care. Fast forward to today when the plot line thickens and the county attorney is now allegedly involved inappropriately with a teenage girl and the same Grand Marais centric framing of the discussion continues. While I realize MPR can't do everything and be everywhere at once, I hope that when the opportunity arises to talk about sexual violence and predation, proper thought and context goes into the discussion. I do not have a problem with you/MPR covering this story at all...but I think you took a wrong turn with the headline "Is there something about Grand Marais?" Yes, that's where these particular incidents occurred and they do need to be talked about; however, sexual violence is endemic in our culture and happens everywhere in this country. Framing the story around Grand Marais being somehow peculiar—which your headline suggests—lets a lot of folks off the hook. It takes very little digging to uncover what a huge problem this is in our society. From the 2010 Center For Disease Control Study: “Nearly 1 in 5 women experience rape in their lifetime while 1 and 71 men are raped in their lifetime.” Of those women, “Approximately 80% of female victims experienced their first rape before the age of 25 and almost half experienced the first rape before age 18 (30% between 11-17 years old and 12% at or before the age of 10).”
//Nowhere did we say it was limited to Grand Marais. It's just that at the moment, there isn't another county prosecutor in the state that we know of who had a restraining order slapped on him for an inappropriate relationship with a kid, months after getting shot while prosecuting a guy who had an inappropriate relationship with a kid, and speaking out about the problem of older people having inappropriate relationships with kids in the town.
Of course there’s not another situation exactly like what’s happening in Grand Marais going on anywhere else—one could hardly make up such an awful and twisted story—but I guarantee you there’s violence and sexual predation happening to young women all across this state and beyond. I’m sure there are even other cases pending in court right now in other counties in Minnesota.
//I don't see how raising the issue does a "disservice to our society" that's any more astonishing than the extent to which people are going out of their way to avoid actually looking at their community members' assertions, and the lengths to which they're going to comfort themselves when faced with the facts. The reaction is reminiscent of the whole "Don't Mess With Texas" vibe.
Again, like I said originally this needs to be talked about, but not just in terms of a Grand Marais thing. No question, the Grand Marais community needs to deal with the issue and having lived there for many years I’m certain there are folks working hard to give it the visibility it deserves—but the conversation needs to also be placed within the larger social reality. As the CDC report states, the majority of violence starts early in life and the study clearly shows how widespread it is in our culture and society as a whole. To not address that when talking about this story, and to further try and isolate it to a single community is where I feel the disservice comes in. I think if you had run your initial story with a less sensational headline you might not be getting quite as much flack. I also feel you could deepen your coverage and the relevance of your work by looking at the problem in proper context. Violence against women in our culture is endemic and clearly lots of people have a hard time admitting that and really looking at it. Isn’t journalism all about shining light in dark corners? What an opportunity to do so with this story—an opportunity you’ve so far missed.
I'm very impressed and swayed by the thoughtfulness of your response.
When you have time, please go to the "search" box above and enter "violence against women."
Bob, if you are so moved then apologize for the headline. You wrote the headline, not Kraker. Apologize.
Thank you, my neighbors in Grand Marais, for all of your thoughtful responses to this cheap report, and holding journalists responsible for sensationalistic and unhelpful "news". Too many people in my town are suffering terribly. This is a unique opportunity to really look carefully and thoughtfully, and a time to shed light. I applaud Barbara, a Grand Marais journalist with integrity and vision, for holding MPR accountable. I hope many more discussions on the subject of violence against persons are pursued, and we all come to understand ourselves better, and begin to heal.
I'm proud that Cook County and Grand Marais have led the state in working on issues surrounding violence toward women and girls - for more than 20 years. Our law enforcement, courts, social services and non-profit community have been way ahead of the curve and deserve credit.
That said, these are difficult, complex problems and can't be solved overnight. By leading, we have left ourselves open to incomplete and insensitive journalism, but that just goes with the territory, I'm afraid. The real story here is that these issues are now out in the open and the culture is changing, slowly but surely.
I agree wholeheartedly with Barbara. The issues at stake here are sexual violence, and, I'd add, pedophilia. They are universal problems that need to be addressed here in Grand Marais, and everywhere. This starts with how we educate boys and girls about their bodies, sexuality, and overt and covert forms of sexual and emotional abuse. It also involves calling out all the forms of sexual violence and sexism we tolerate in our culture, in the media, advertising, and the film and game industries. Naming these things empowers girls and boys, women and men, daughters and sons, mothers and fathers. We all have to work together for change.
While I remain impressed with Grand Marais residents rallying to defend their town, I can't say I'm swayed by the assertion that "it happens everywhere" is a proper reason to ignore the obvious realities that it happens in Grand Marais. It's not either-or.
There have been a plethora of assertions that Grand Marais is no different from any other community in Minnesota, but I'm not sure what data is being used to assert that. In Grand Marais' case, the data may only be anecdotal. Has this been discussed in the community? What data was used?
To say one more time: Many of you are looking to MPR as the boogeyman here, and while I can certainly appreciate the obvious civic price, the original allegations, assessment, and attention arose from Grand Marais officials and residents.
I've asked several times in this space if those are people are wrong. The question has gone unanswered. And it's pretty clear after several weeks there's little interest in answering it.
For the most part, I sense from many comments that there's much more outrage over coverage of, what Kate refers to as sexual violence and pedophilia than sexual violence and pedophilia. I don't see how that's a logical progression of problem-solving. I acknowledge, however, that Grand Marais probably isn't very unique in that reaction.
Thank you for your comments and criticisms.