Sara Ganim's talk at Penn State APSE meeting on April 10, 2012

[francofan]

In viewing the youtube video on Sally Jenkins talk from the APSE regional meeting at Penn State on April 10, 2012, I ran across the following video from Sara Ganim at that same meeting. It is fascinating and I would encourage everyone to have a look. It is 49 minutes long and includes Ganim and her supervisor at Pennlive, Mike Feeley, in telling their story about their perspective on how the whole saga unfolded.

Since this meeting, I of not aware of Ganim giving another in-depth talk where she reflects on the events from 2011-2012. I am also not aware of Ganim writing any articles or a book on her experiences. This seems odd in light of her winning a Pulitzer prize and I am curious why she has been so close lipped. I am speculating that she may not want to take any questions on her sources, particularly those within the OAG.

 

[step.eng69]

In viewing the youtube video on Sally Jenkins talk from the APSE regional meeting at Penn State on April 10, 2012, I ran across the following video from Sara Ganim at that same meeting. It is fascinating and I would encourage everyone to have a look. It is 49 minutes long and includes Ganim and her supervisor at Pennlive, Mike Feeley, in telling their story about their perspective on how the whole saga unfolded.

Since this meeting, I of not aware of Ganim giving another in-depth talk where she reflects on the events from 2011-2012. I am also not aware of Ganim writing any articles or a book on her experiences. This seems odd in light of her winning a Pulitzer prize and I am curious why she has been so close lipped. I am speculating that she may not want to take any questions on her sources, particularly those within the OAG.

View embedded media

Thanks Franco, I'll view when I have time to watch. I'm interested to hear Sara's responses.

 

[TenerHallTerror]

thanks for sharing. what a lying sack of sh*t Ganim is.

in just the first 10 minutes she says . . . they never saw the firing of Joe Paterno coming, and that she will continue to write about other serial pedophiles.

 

[Player2BNamedL8r]

Perhaps she's afraid of her actual ignorance on the topic. She skimmed the surface and walked away with a pullizer and a cushy new job in Atlanta. Imagine if someone asked her a question that required some actual critical thinking. Imagine if it was made crystal clear that she simply cut/pasted the story she was spoon-fed, and that she missed countless opportunities to actually "investigate" her subject. No, she has absolutely nothing to gain from reopening this story, and she knows it.

 

[Zenophile]

in just the first 10 minutes she says . . . that she will continue to write about other serial pedophiles.

Cut her some slack. Maybe pedophiles hide in snow storms.

 

[Player2BNamedL8r]

Cut her some slack. Maybe pedophiles hide in snow storms.

Ha....Literally just spit my beverage!

 

[ChiTownLion]

"I reported it, but I didn't write it -- our lawyers wrote it." - Ganim

 

[Player2BNamedL8r]

"I reported it, but I didn't write it -- our lawyers wrote it." - Ganim

View embedded media

She's so full of shit - the epitome of the millennial DON'T-go-gettem (yet still get rewarded) mantra. If 9 months went by between her reporting and the story "breaking," wouldn't a real pullizer prize winning journalist dig deeper rather than just sit by and let a clerk accidentally post it?

And she still doesn't know what happened - almost all of the boys were abused on Penn State's campus?? Really Sarah? Might want to check your sources on that little nugget.

Finally, she admits that almost all of Jerry's victims were introduced to him via the 2nd Mile, and yet this crack investigative journalist never felt compelled to go dig around over there, did she?

Bottom line, she knows she was given a sweet deal, and I doubt she's really so ignorant that she doesn't understand the concept of such a gift horse. Problem is she IS too ignorant (or arrogant?) to know (or care?) that we all see right through her charade.

 

[pandaczar12]

She's so full of shit - the epitome of the millennial DON'T-go-gettem (yet still get rewarded) mantra. If 9 months went by between her reporting and the story "breaking," wouldn't a real pullizer prize winning journalist dig deeper rather than just sit by and let a clerk accidentally post it?

And she still doesn't know what happened - almost all of the boys were abused on Penn State's campus?? Really Sarah? Might want to check your sources on that little nugget.

Finally, she admits that almost all of Jerry's victims were introduced to him via the 2nd Mile, and yet this crack investigative journalist never felt compelled to go dig around over there, did she?

Bottom line, she knows she was given a sweet deal, and I doubt she's really so ignorant that she doesn't understand the concept of such a gift horse. Problem is she IS too ignorant (or arrogant?) to know (or care?) that we all see right through her charade.

She has to know she was a pawn in this, and was given an award to keep quiet.

 

[jim cummings]

 

[MtNittany]

She has to know she was a pawn in this, and was given an award to keep quiet.

Of course she does. JZ and even RB and others have been in her face about it for years. Hell she intentionally dodged/tricked JZ on a scheduled interview.

 

[Connorpozlee]

I don't get it. I watched it and didn't see her wearing a winter coat and hat or providing any update on the snowfall or anything.

 

[Eurotrash1]

I just don't get the hatred for this girl. She is a Penn State grad. Her story put away a guy who preyed on children. You can disagree with a lot of what went down. I can agree she was naive and used in a lot of ways. However, most young people who are eager to make a name for themselves are used by their employers. They're the people made to do the dirty work. She did what she was asked and got her reward for it.

 

[pandaczar12]

I just don't get the hatred for this girl. She is a Penn State grad. Her story put away a guy who preyed on children. You can disagree with a lot of what went down. I can agree she was naive and used in a lot of ways. However, most young people who are eager to make a name for themselves are used by their employers. They're the people made to do the dirty work. She did what she was asked and got her reward for it.

And that is where she stopped. She could have exposed how she was used, and how those at TSM, DPW, and CYS skated. She could have improved the future for the children of PA. Instead she just slunk away clinging to her award, not giving a damn about anyone but herself.

 

[PSU_l]

And that is where she stopped. She could have exposed how she was used, and how those at TSM, DPW, and CYS skated. She could have improved the future for the children of PA. Instead she just slunk away clinging to her award, not giving a damn about anyone but herself.

No doubt panda, how about not demonstrating all of the massive conflicts that Corbutt had in regards to TSM and his political aspirations? And not just the Chairman of the Board of TSM throwing him fundraiser parties at his own personal residence more than 10 months after AG Corbutt was handed a DPW-Indicated Report of CSA implicating TSM/Sandusky for prosecution (and more than 8 months after AG Corbutt's SWIGJ Application detailing that DPW had implicated TSM and Sandusky), but how about Senator Jake Corman, the "PA Senate Majority Leader" from AG Corbutt's political party (and the same Political Party that Corbutt had made it clear he was running for Governor from) being on the Board of Directors at The Second Mile at the very time DPW was given their CSA Complaint by V1, investigated it and handed over the DPW-Indicated Report of CSA to Corbutt for prosecuation......but miraculously TSM is never investigated and Corman mysteriously cuts his ties with TSM???

 

[PSU_l]

No doubt panda, how about not demonstrating all of the massive conflicts that Corbutt had in regards to TSM and his political aspirations? And not just the Chairman of the Board of TSM throwing him fundraiser parties at his own personal residence more than 10 months after AG Corbutt was handed a DPW-Indicated Report of CSA implicating TSM/Sandusky for prosecution (and more than 8 months after AG Corbutt's SWIGJ Application detailing that DPW had implicated TSM and Sandusky), but how about Senator Jake Corman, the "PA Senate Majority Leader" from AG Corbutt's political party (and the same Political Party that Corbutt had made it clear he was running for Governor from) being on the Board of Directors at The Second Mile at the very time DPW was given their CSA Complaint by V1, investigated it and handed over the DPW-Indicated Report of CSA to Corbutt for prosecuation......but miraculously TSM is never investigated and Corman mysteriously cuts his ties with TSM???

Here is Jake Corman's lame statements regarding TSM and their clear culpability detailed in this Ganim article:

But many wanted to see an independent authority decide if anyone could have seen this coming.

And that's what they thought Lynne Abraham's internal review would accomplish.

State Sen. Jake Corman, who was a visible member of the board, has been quoted many times in the last eight months as saying that he hoped for answers from the internal report.

Last month, he said he must have misunderstood its purpose.

"Maybe that's just my misunderstanding," he said. "Maybe because the organization is clearly not going to continue, maybe that sort of review isn't necessary. I'm not on the board anymore, so I guess I don't have a lot of standing."

"It stinks," Marshall said. "We all thought an investigation was going to take place on who knew what and when."

Since leaving the organization in January, Marshall has been disheartened by a lack of transparency.

One example: She and her husband, who had once donated to the charity, received a letter in the mail seeking permission to transfer the money they donated to The Second Mile over to Arrow Ministries.

There is no place in the letter for people to answer "no," and when she called to ask what would happen if she simply didn't give an answer, she was told her money would be transferred anyway.

"There was no return envelope. No place to say no. How many people just threw that out and don't know this?" she said.

It's a complete joke that TSM - a FRAUDULENT CHARITY where Sandusky was the most-powerful, regulatory-listed "Control Person" at the time according to none other than Corbett's own AG - was never subjected to an investigation by the AG under whose auspice Charities fall. NEVER investigated for criminally providing Sandusky access to children in violation of their own State-Filed and State-Audited Policies and Procedures.....and never prosecuted for FRAUDULENTLY RAISING millions of dollars from 2009 through 2011 using Sandusky as the face of the organization and primary fundraiser and never disclosing the DPW-Initiated 2008 Investigation which turned into an AG SWIGJ in 2009???

 

[JoeDidntKnow]

This biatch makes me ill with her lies and deception

 

[Eurotrash1]

And that is where she stopped. She could have exposed how she was used, and how those at TSM, DPW, and CYS skated. She could have improved the future for the children of PA. Instead she just slunk away clinging to her award, not giving a damn about anyone but herself.

Like many have said, she was fed the story. She was a young girl right out of college. Yes, she received tons of accolades for her reporting. However, the truth is she probably isn't this crack investigative reporter. She benefitted from being used. That doesn't make her a horrible person. It also doesn't make her an ace investigative reporter.

 

[getmyjive11]

Like many have said, she was fed the story. She was a young girl right out of college. Yes, she received tons of accolades for her reporting. However, the truth is she probably isn't this crack investigative reporter. She benefitted from being used. That doesn't make her a horrible person. It also doesn't make her an ace investigative reporter.

The hate for her is pathetic. It's one thing to not respect her work, but to attack her like many do here is just sad. She didn't cause anything that happened to us to happen. And if it wasn't her reporting it, it would have been someone else.

 

[pandaczar12]

Like many have said, she was fed the story. She was a young girl right out of college. Yes, she received tons of accolades for her reporting. However, the truth is she probably isn't this crack investigative reporter. She benefitted from being used. That doesn't make her a horrible person. It also doesn't make her an ace investigative reporter.

At best case she is an idiot, at worst she is complicit. She has the real story at her finger tips, a chance to show off her investigative skills, and she either doesn't realize it, or doesn't want to rock the boat. She benefited from being used, and in the process put PA's children in danger. Her lies caused a lot of our problems. So yeah that does make her a horrible person, and is a reason to dislike her.

The hate for her is pathetic. It's one thing to not respect her work, but to attack her like many do here is just sad. She didn't cause anything that happened to us to happen. And if it wasn't her reporting it, it would have been someone else.

That's like saying you are going to break into and burglarize someone's house, because if you don't do it, someone else will. Maybe if she developed some ethics and refused to be a pawn, so would have the next person. Stop blindly defending her just to be a contrarian. Your act is as tired as hers.

 

[Connorpozlee]

The hate for her is pathetic. It's one thing to not respect her work, but to attack her like many do here is just sad. She didn't cause anything that happened to us to happen. And if it wasn't her reporting it, it would have been someone else.

Speaking personally, I don't have any hate for her. In fact, I love to know how many inches of snow a storm is putting down and what route the plows will take to clear the streets. But if she was really going to cover the Sandusky story in its entirety (in a Pulitzer Prize worthy fashion), she would have gone beyond the basics.

 

[TenerHallTerror]

At best case she is an idiot, at worst she is complicit. She has the real story at her finger tips, a chance to show off her investigative skills, and she either doesn't realize it, or doesn't want to rock the boat. She benefited from being used, and in the process put PA's children in danger. Her lies caused a lot of our problems. So yeah that does make her a horrible person, and is a reason to dislike her.



That's like saying you are going to break into and burglarize someone's house, because if you don't do it, someone else will. Maybe if she developed some ethics and refused to be a pawn, so would have the next person. Stop blindly defending her just to be a contrarian. Your act is as tired as hers.

I think the real issue is how 2 false narratives emerged from her reporting.

one of which was that she was this plucky, determined young reporter who knocked on doors and hustled up courthouse steps to get a story people were trying to hide from her.

IMHO there were 2 critical moments of Sandusky's trial that the media conveniently overlooked. One was when the trial judge had to call out the defense for NOT objecting to McGettin leading McQueary.

the second was how quickly Ganim pissed her pants when she was going to be called to the witness stand and reveal her unethical (and likely illegal) contact with the families of victims

 

[getmyjive11]

Has anything the SG reported proven (and I mean proven, not JZ "proven") to be false?

 

[Connorpozlee]

I don't see people really having such an issue with the factual nature of what she reported. The issue seems to be how she acquired the information and her reluctance to go further with it.

 

[getmyjive11]

I don't see people really having such an issue with the factual nature of what she reported. The issue seems to be how she acquired the information and her reluctance to go further with it.

Is her information is accurate, don't you think the hate (and it truely is hate) is unjustified? Ok, the reporter who just got out of school and was writing several long articles a week on the scandal didn't dig in as much as people here wanted... is that so awful? How many reporters these days would go to those lengths? I think you all are holding her to a ridiculous standard because of what she accurately reported.

 

[TenerHallTerror]

I don't see people really having such an issue with the factual nature of what she reported. The issue seems to be how she acquired the information and her reluctance to go further with it.

I felt Blehar did a good job trashing Sara here:

LINK

there is such a thing as lying by omission, which Ganim did in spades. It isn't that she reported outright falsehoods, it is that she only presented information out of context which promoted a false narrative. And she did sloppy journalism (not corroborating sources, not fact checking elements of stories like the physical layout of the Lasch showers, or how a kid allegedly molested on the east side of campus walked all the way across campus and got a one-on-one meeting with a busy college football coach, or that one of her sources is a drunk who writes vulgar anti-Paterno screeds inside local newspapers)

 

[didier]

"Marce: Why is there so little coverage of the role played by the Second Mile and CYS in this fiasco? Sandusky gained access to kids through these organizations, not Penn State.

Ganim: That's one angle that I am very aware of and continually researching. There are a lot of facets to this story, and I assure you that an in-depth look at The Second Mile is one that we are working on."

- Sara Ganim Q&A May 8, 2012
http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2012/05/pulitizer-winning_reporter_sar.html

 

[didier]

Has anything the SG reported proven (and I mean proven, not JZ "proven") to be false?

Some of her details about 1998 were incorrect. She reported, for instance, that two boys were in the shower with Sandusky at the same time...whereas it was independent incidents each involving one boy.

She also repeatedly mixed up CYS and DPW, which may seem trivial but isn't in the grand scheme of this.

 

[getmyjive11]

Some of her details about 1998 were incorrect. She reported, for instance, that two boys were in the shower with Sandusky at the same time...whereas it was independent incidents each involving one boy.

She also repeatedly mixed up CYS and DPW, which may seem trivial but isn't in the grand scheme of this.

I have not seen that, could you link the story. Everything I have found Ganim references one boy in 1998. And those articles were from right when the scandal broke.

Her original story from March 2011 which was centered around victim 1 but added that Paterno, Schultz and Curley appeared before the GJ.

http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2011/03/jerry_sandusky_former_penn_sta.html

 

[didier]

I have not seen that, could you link the story. Everything I have found Ganim references one boy. And those articles were from right when the scandal broke.

Her original story from March 2011 which was centered around victim 1 but added that Paterno, Schultz and Curley appeared before the GJ.

http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2011/03/jerry_sandusky_former_penn_sta.html

In the above: "Another boy, now an adult in the armed forces, was named as a witness in the 1998 Penn State police report and has been contacted by state police, his wife confirmed."

 

[didier]

I have not seen that, could you link the story. Everything I have found Ganim references one boy in 1998. And those articles were from right when the scandal broke.

Her original story from March 2011 which was centered around victim 1 but added that Paterno, Schultz and Curley appeared before the GJ.

http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2011/03/jerry_sandusky_former_penn_sta.html

http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2011/11/who_knew_what_about_jerry_sand.html

"The boy told police that Sandusky had showered naked with him. A second boy was in the showers at the time, but did not testify before the grand jury."

 

[getmyjive11]

In the above: "Another boy, now an adult in the armed forces, was named as a witness in the 1998 Penn State police report and has been contacted by state police, his wife confirmed."

That doesn't say that the boy was in the shower, only that he was a witness. It may have been a friend. But it was in the police report and the mother confirmed that he talked to PSU police. I think you are confused on this one as it is accurate.

 

[Connorpozlee]

Is her information is accurate, don't you think the hate (and it truely is hate) is unjustified? Ok, the reporter who just got out of school and was writing several long articles a week on the scandal didn't dig in as much as people here wanted... is that so awful? How many reporters these days would go to those lengths? I think you all are holding her to a ridiculous standard because of what she accurately reported.

Hate is a strong word in my world, so I can't define what you insist is hate as such. I have no idea what anonymous message board people are feeling internally.
I do not think the dissatisfaction with her reporting is unjustified though. She reported part of a story. Basically the surface level information that even as you said, would have come out anyway. For this she was rewarded with a prize. The other story was the political connections and Second Mile and she didn't touch that part of the story. And if I have read you properly on this topic, you agree that there is indeed a story there that needs to be reported. To manipulate a half-quote from Joe Paterno, "She should have done more."

 

[pandaczar12]

Has anything the SG reported proven (and I mean proven, not JZ "proven") to be false?

Has anything the SG reported proven (and I mean proven, not PA commonwealth legal system "proven") to be true?

(Note: poor grammar left in for effect)

 

[getmyjive11]

http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2011/11/who_knew_what_about_jerry_sand.html
"The boy told police that Sandusky had showered naked with him. A second boy was in the showers at the time, but did not testify before the grand jury."

Thank you. It appears that was incorrect, but the boy was a witness of some kind.

 

[pandaczar12]

Hate is a strong word in my world, so I can't define what you insist is hate as such. I have no idea what anonymous message board people are feeling internally.
I do not think the dissatisfaction with her reporting is unjustified though. She reported part of a story. Basically the surface level information that even as you said would have come out anyway. For this she was rewarded with a prize. The other story was the political connections and Second Mile and she didn't touch that part of the story. And if I have read you properly on this topic, you agree that there is indeed a story there that need to be reported. To manipulate a half-quote from Joe Paterno, "She should have done more."

Agreed, with the benefit of hindsight, SG should have done more. Instead of helping to make PA a safer place for our children, she has chosen to bury the true story for a worthless award. She put her career before the welfare of children, and I think it's OK to dislike someone for that reason.

 

[getmyjive11]

Hate is a strong word in my world, so I can't define what you insist is hate as such. I have no idea what anonymous message board people are feeling internally.
I do not think the dissatisfaction with her reporting is unjustified though. She reported part of a story. Basically the surface level information that even as you said would have come out anyway. For this she was rewarded with a prize. The other story was the political connections and Second Mile and she didn't touch that part of the story. And if I have read you properly on this topic, you agree that there is indeed a story there that need to be reported. To manipulate a half-quote from Joe Paterno, "She should have done more."

I think then your issue should be with the Pulitzer Prize people, not her. That untold TSM story is available to anyone to report on, not just SG.

 

[didier]

Thank you. It appears that was incorrect, but the boy was a witness of some kind.

Ganim also refers to Lauro as CYS which he was not. Also refers to it as a 6-week police investigation. As far as we know, it was a four week investigation.

 

[ChiTownLion]

The hate for her is pathetic. It's one thing to not respect her work, but to attack her like many do here is just sad. She didn't cause anything that happened to us to happen. And if it wasn't her reporting it, it would have been someone else.

Remember this gem on the day of the big reveal?

Not to mention her CNN report of 1970s allegations which she packed full of horrible quotes about PSU culture. Went way out of her way to smear PSU.

 

[Connorpozlee]

I think then your issue should be with the Pulitzer Prize people, not her. That untold TSM story is available to anyone to report on, not just SG.

I'm not really the one with the problem. I'm pointing out to you why others seem to have such issues with her.