Brian McNeil wrote:
If we can get pro-Scientology people who aren't batshit crazy and refer to us as the "Jimmy Donal Wales Chronicle" then they're welcome to submit questions.
If you are unable to find people who are pro-Scientology to submit questions, then write them yourself! :)
Incidentally Jimmy, the guy who keeps posting crap on your Wikipedia talk page about us and our coverage was the subject of a Wikipedia arbitration case for similar issues. I'd have to excuse myself from sitting on a judgement on him on Wikinews but I have been told were he to be subject to a permaban on Wikinews the en.WP arbcom would review the case with a view to a similar block. He is a single issue person who has contributed nothing to Wikinews and I'd welcome being notified whenever he pesters you about this. I'm happy to bring a case on cross-project disruption and POV warring about this guy.
I understand, any my comments were more philosophical in nature.
My point is that this can be a point of deep personal challenge for a good journalist: to write fairly, to interview fairly, when you have a difficult topic.
In a dispute you can have one side feeding you exactly what you want, i.e. open to interviews, talking about how crazy the other side is, ethwatever. And then the other side, shocked and offended by the whole thing, and refusing to participate, *as is their right*.
A bad journalist will let that set of facts carry the day, and end up letting one side push an agenda.
A good journalist will dig deep and look at all sides critically.
--Jimbo