Denver7’s Zelinger responds to baseless criticism of his work on Keyser forgery story

(Journalist commits journalism, Republicans freak out – Promoted by Colorado Pols)

It’s a basic part of a journalist’s job to respond publicly to questions about their reporting. Yet, many don’t do it.

So, in case you missed it last week, it was good to hear Denver7’s Marshall Zelinger respond to hostile, and baseless, criticism from KNUS 710-AM’s Dan Caplis.

Caplis was upset with Zelinger’s reports on the forged signatures on the ballot-access petitions of Republican U.S. Senate candidate Jon Keyser. Caplis accused Zelinger of doing the work of Democrats generally and pulling a “punk-ass move” by seeking a mid-afternoon interview with Keyser at Keyser’s home, after Keyser and his campaign didn’t respond to numerous requests for interviews. Zelinger responded directly to Caplis’ accusations. Here’s the audio.

13 Community Comments, Facebook Comments

  1. JohnInDenver says:

    If homes should be such inviolate castles, does Caplis object to police picking up arrestees at their homes? How about signature gatherers or politicians going door to door to ask for support? Teenagers asking if they can shovel the walks? Jehovah's Witnesses or Latter Day Saints asking about religion?

  2. Conserv. Head Banger says:

    Caplis is over-rated and over-blown. 

  3. cpolind says:

    Caplis just plain wouldn't acknowledge that Zelinger knocked on Keyser's door only after repeated attempts to contact him, nor would he give Zelinger credit when he gave him specific examples of other times he knocked on doors of both R and D politicians. As a matter of fact, Zelinger tweeted a few times about his frustration with Keyser's lack of any sort of statement to him about the tainted petitions. Everybody can see those tweets, including Dan Caplis, if they want proof that he did indeed try other means of communication. If Caplis wants Hickenlooper so bad, why doesn’t he do his own work and go knock on Hickenlooper’s door instead of trying to push it off on Zelinger?

    Furthermore, when Keyser pulled that two ballot stunt a few years ago, the picture he posted of the ballots had his address on it! So, he must not be all that worried about someone ringing his doorbell if he put his own address right up online for all to see. It’s just one guy making an excuse for lack of accountability and trying to justify that guy hiding from problems. Shouldn't Keyser of all people know how totally harmless ringing a door bell is? Afterall, the yarn he spins is about how he went door to door an ever increasing amount of times in the Middle East as a "door kicker".

     

  4. JeffcoDemoJeffcoDemo says:

    Arguing with Caplis must be like arguing with a brick, no matter how many times you refute his accusations he's just going to keep repeating himself, hey, kinda like Keyser.

    Have you ever knocked on a Dem door, yes.

    Did you knock on Hickenlooper's door, no, he responds.

    You knocked on his door in the middle of day, yes just like a petitioner.

    That's different.  Ok.

    What a waste of airspace…..

  5. DenverMom says:

    Does Caplis object that Woodward and Bernstein did work that Dems should have done as well? 

  6. Treydot says:

    In my opinion….

    Most times, when you listen to Caplis, you will hear a constant blather of disingenuous, often hypocritical logical fallacies used in an attempt discredit anyone with whom he disagrees. Among the fallacies you will hear in the above recording are:

    The Straw Man fallacy committed when a person simply ignores a person's actual position and substitutes a distorted, exaggerated or misrepresented version of that position.

    An Ad Hominem a general category of fallacies in which a claim or argument is rejected on the basis of some irrelevant fact about the author of or the person presenting the claim or argument.

    The Appeal to Ridicule a fallacy in which ridicule or mockery is substituted for evidence in an "argument."

    The False Equivalency  : The fallacy of incorrectly comparing one thing to another in order to draw a false conclusion. – You are only fair if you go to Hinkenlooper house as you have gone Keyser's house.

    I wonder if this just comes naturally to Caplis as substitute for honest debate, or if it is just a well honed rhortical skill he applies out of disrespect for the acumen  of his listeners.

    I forgot to mention he does all of this in the conversational style of Eddie Haskle speaking with mr and Mrs Cleaver.

    • mamajama55mamajama55 says:

      Trey, +10 for listing the most common logical fallacies! I imagine that Mr. Caplis also makes frequent use of

      "Bandwagon" – All the real Americans are ________,

      "No true Scotsman" (no real conservative _____), and

      begging the question (circular reasoning): Keyser is whom Bennet fears. Why does Bennet fear Keyser? Why does Zelinger attack Keyser? Because Bennet fears Keyser. Rinse, repeat.

      • Treydot says:

        I suppose with Caplis, we could create an extensive list of logical fallacies that he spews. The question remains, does he do this with intent (his training is as an attorney), or is this really the level of his intellectual reasoning? A true believer type of thing.

        Oops, I think I just used a Logical Fallacy!

        • mamajama55mamajama55 says:

          It would be a false premise syllogism either way.

          Premise 1. All attorneys use logical fallacies.

          Premise 2. Caplis is an attorney.

          Conclusion: Caplis uses logical fallacies.

          or:

          1.All people who like to manipulate others use logical fallacies in argument.

          2.Caplis likes to manipulate others.

          Conclusion: .Caplis uses logical fallacies in arguments.

          The second syllogism has 2 unprovable, therefore false premises, whereas the first syllogism only has an unprovable premise in 1. It could be "All attorneys are trained to argue with logical fallacies", and then the conclusion would be "Caplis is trained to argue with logical fallacies."

          Sorry…my inner geek likes syllogisms, even though I think I'm not particularly good with them.

        • Diogenesdemar says:

          All those years being forced to listen to Silverman's voice (. . . through headphones, no doubt) would have damaged the faculties of much finer minds . . . 

  7. Republican 36 says:

    Mr. Caplis' astonishment that an investigative reporter would knock on someone's door and proceed to call it a "punk-ass" move is silly. Local television investigative reporters at every TV station in the United States knock on doors where the subject of the investigation lives almost every day of the week for the same reason Mr. Zelinger knocked on Mr. Keyser's door – Keyser's failure to respond. Mr. Caplis attempt to characterize a normal investigative technique as something unusual or immoral made me laugh out loud. Perhaps, the best question Mr. Caplis could ask should be directed at Mr. Keyser – why didn't you or someone from your campaign respond to Mr. Zelinger? He obviously made many attempts to contact Mr. Keyser before knocking on his door.

    • Jorgensen says:

      Zelinger acted professionally. Keyser's fantasy about Zelinger jumping out of bushes is as stupid as the candidate and his campaign staff not answering the phone or email to say, "no comment." The Watergate scandal would never have been exposed without reporters knocking on residential doors. For an attorney who ran for office and lost, and radio show host, Caplis is showing ignorance and he knows it.

Leave a Reply

Comment from your Facebook account


You may comment with your Colorado Pols account above (click here to register), or via Facebook below.