.

Give Credit Where Credit is Due

If you read “Standing Together During Hurricane Irene,” Councilwoman DeRiggi-Whitton unfortunately omitted many individuals who deserved credit.

Many individuals deserved credit for establishing a shelter at the in preparation for Hurricane Irene. If you read “Standing Together During Hurricane Irene,” Councilwoman DeRiggi-Whitton unfortunately omitted many individuals who deserved credit.   

I volunteered at the Locust Valley and Glen Cove shelter sites from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. on Saturday, Aug. 27. Although Councilwoman DeRiggi-Whitton was “especially impressed by Glen Cove City Coucnilman [sic] Tony Jimenez,” these persons should also receive credit for establishing the shelter: 

  • Ricardo Mercado, my colleague in Nassau County, helped me coordinate logistical support for the shelter. He and I were in constant communication with Nassau County Office of Emergency Management.

  • Nassau County Detectives Jose Mercado and Frederick Goldman provided site security from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m.They also helped set up 100 cots in the Glen Cove High School gymnasium.

  • As the rain poured late Saturday morning, Detective Mercado and I joined Glen Cove City School District employees in unloading and transporting miscellaneous equipment from the Red Cross’ emergency container on Old Tappan Road to the school gymnasium. These school employees are John Macchione, Sal Scutifero, Frank Zangari, Sal DiMaggio and Travis Basile. Joe Fiorino, director of facilities for the school district, was especially helpful in obtaining portable generators, fuel, and emergency lighting for the shelter site.

  • Glen Cove High School students Billy Neice, Alex Aguilar, Charlie Gustella, Nicky Rant, Paul Cavese and Josh Martin were essential members of the shelter team.  Each student quickly set up cots in the gymnasium.

  • When I called Mayor Ralph Suozzi late Saturday morning and asked him for volunteers, he sent D.J. Martone (a member of the Glen Cove Volunteer Fire Department) and Jeff Jackson (captain of the fire police). The mayor joined them in setting up cots.

Vince Lombardi said, “Individual commitment to a group effort – that is what makes a team work, a company work, a society work, a civilization work.” I witnessed this on that day.

This post is contributed by a community member. The views expressed in this blog are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Patch Media Corporation. Everyone is welcome to submit a post to Patch. If you'd like to post a blog, go here to get started.

Rob Germino September 01, 2011 at 10:28 PM
Landing School's Head Custodian, John Pacini, should also be recognized for his contributions that day. He left his wife and new born baby home to volunteer at the high school.
Claude September 02, 2011 at 12:18 PM
You know, you could have just thanked them without the political slant.
Steve Withers September 02, 2011 at 12:29 PM
"Political slant?" DeRiggi-Whitton wrote a puff piece about Councilman Jimenez--I mean "Coucnilman Tony Jimenez"--and never mentioned the people above. Stop the whining Claude!
John Jay September 02, 2011 at 12:57 PM
political slant is correct, steve. You misspelled councilman.
Steve Withers September 02, 2011 at 02:23 PM
Yes, John, DeRiggi-Whitton did put a political slant on her puff piece. You missed that part along with her last paragraph that describes the boundaries of her district. She also didn't need to remind the reader that she's running for County Legislature. By the way, DeRiggi-Whitton spelled "councilman" wrong. Look up the definition of "sic."
Mike G. September 02, 2011 at 04:02 PM
Judging by Delia's errors, at least we know she definitely wrote "Standing Together During Hurricane Irene." Good job to all who really helped with the hurricane shelter!
John Jay September 02, 2011 at 04:25 PM
One politcal puff piece following another. Stop whining, Steve!
Jim September 07, 2011 at 05:09 PM
I cant seem to find Delia's article. Was she embarassed that her and Mr Jiminez took credit for what other people did and pulled it.
Leslie September 09, 2011 at 02:28 PM
As of today's date, you can not access Councilwoman's DeRiggi-Whitton's article anywhere on glencovepatch.com or any other links from other newspapersor internet articles that carried it. They all come back the same, page or url you are looking for does not exist. Glen Cove Patch, why is this? This is not good journalism and makes me wonder why a fair and balanced news organization would allow this to happen. It cast a cloud of doubt over your reporting of issues.
Elena DiMarco September 09, 2011 at 02:41 PM
Hi Leslie, I'm Elena, the guest editor for the Glen Cove Patch. I am looking into this, and will make sure her blog post will be put back up if it was taken down accidentally. Thank you!
John September 14, 2011 at 06:24 PM
Still not available
mike September 16, 2011 at 08:49 PM
September 16th and Councilwoman Deriggi-Whitton's article where she takes credit for the work of others is still not back up. This was not an inaccurate article written by someone else making her look bad, this was a self serving political piece written by her. As embarrasing as it may be to the councilwoman it should not have been taken off of your website.
Jason Molinet September 16, 2011 at 09:15 PM
A representative for the Councilwoman asked we take the blog down for her to revise. That was on Sept. 2. We'll repost it once it's ready. Thanks.
Leslie September 19, 2011 at 03:30 PM
I do not think that taking down a post or blog for someone to revise after it has been posted is correct. It should be left as is. This blog is not being revised for a retraction, but because of inaccuricies written by the author who is now going to correct her mistakes. Again this is not good journalism and smacks of favoritism. Is this standard policy for glencovepatch.com. or patch.com? Regardless of how this ends, your intergrity (glencovepatch.com) is what is going to be questioned. Councilwoman Deriggi-Whitton should not be allowed to revise the original blog post, but write a follow up blog post addressing any issues or inaccuricies first reported or written in the original post.
Jason Molinet September 19, 2011 at 03:36 PM
@Leslie: If we see an error or typo in a story, we fix it. If there's new information we try to update it. In this case, we're talking about an independent blogger, not a Patch reporter. They asked to revise their post. We obliged.
Leslie September 19, 2011 at 07:59 PM
@ Jason: Glencovepatch.com is an internet news source, not a personal blogger's page. I understand that Councilwoman Deriggi-Whitton is an independent blogger and not a reporter. This is not about some typos, errors or new information. This is about a post taken down after it was posted, that people had read and commented on it, both positively and negatively. In all fairness, the original post should have been left up and the revised post put right next to it, so that the readers of this internet news source can make their own educated decisions on what was written. The minute glencovepatch.com removed the post for revision they took away that process. What about the people that did not get to read the original post and will now only be able to read the revised post. I understand glencovepatch.com's choice to oblige, I just don't feel it was a fair or good choice. I am curious to hear from any of the other independent bloggers on glencovepatch.com their view on this, removal of a post after it had been read and commented on and to be given a chance to revise the post.
Mike September 22, 2011 at 08:14 PM
Hi Jason If you pulled all of Delia Deriggi-Whitton's blog posts that had errors or typos in them she would have nothing left on your website
Marc Rosen October 03, 2011 at 07:40 PM
As another blogger, I'll answer. If an error is made in a blog post, or if, for any reason, we feel it necessary to make changes to the post, we are obligated to ask Patch staff to take down the post, in order for us to make necessary corrections or even to have it removed from the site if we see fit. Furthermore, Patch.com does NOT own the words we type as bloggers. If we want something taken down, we have the right to request it deleted.
Leslie October 03, 2011 at 08:27 PM
@ Marc, thank you for taking the time to respond. I agree if mistakes are made they need to be corrected. I can understand that if it was your own blog website and you wanted to remove posts or shut it down you can, but you are not blogging on your own personal site, you are blogging on a internet news service, very different animal. This was about an event that had happened, that was written about, that was read by some people as a blog and who commented about the blog, and then was taken down after mistakes were pointed out to the author. Now the original blog is not being allowed to be read by any others and as of today, no corrected blog has been posted. Everyone has the right to blog and state what they want, but remember like the spoken word, once you say it, or in this case blog it on the internet, especially a internet news service, it is no longer private no matter how much you want it to be.
Marc Rosen October 03, 2011 at 10:06 PM
Leslie, as much as you may believe this, Patch's terms of service for bloggers clearly say that we retain full control over our blog posts, subject to approval from staff. If I wanted to pull any or all of my posts, for any or no reason at all, I would have every right to request it, though it may or may not be granted, dependent primarily on the reason the retraction was requested. I would also be under zero obligation to re-post, regardless of my reasons. I choose not to exercise this, not because of some sense of obligation, but because I have no issues with anything I have posted on here, either before or after the fact, and I stand by what I've posted, no matter how offensive it may be to SOME readers. News site or not, we bloggers aren't getting paid, and are NOT representatives of Patch.com. We are NOT obligated to post here, we CHOOSE to do so, often after being invited to do so (in my case, I was invited by the previous Glen Cove editor). I post what I want, when I want, as I want, and so does every other blogger on here. There is nothing that binds me or my words to this site, at all, ever. If I want it gone, and have reason to want it, it will be gone.
Frank DiAnconio October 04, 2011 at 03:21 AM
Rosen, you don't have a "right" to have content taken down, the same way that you don't have a "right" to photos you post on Facebook or some other private sector site. Once you post something on Facebook for example, they can use it however they want, I'm pretty sure, under the law, it'd be the same here.
Marc Rosen October 04, 2011 at 03:23 AM
Did you read the terms of service in full? No? Then you don't know.
Marc Rosen October 04, 2011 at 03:24 AM
Also, you DO have a right to take down any content you post on Facebook. You can delete it at any time, so long as you still have your account up. There's even an automated program called "Internet Suicide Machine" designed specifically to aid users in deleting every shred of content posted to a social networking site.
Marc Rosen October 04, 2011 at 03:27 AM
Here's the exact wording FROM those Terms of Service, to clarify: Patch is built to let you do fun things such as share and upload photos, videos, text, and other information (all of which we call "Content"). When you do this, you own that Content. However (and here comes some legalese), you hereby grant Patch a perpetual license to use, redact, republish, copy, perform and distribute your Content and screen name, including any intellectual property contained therein, in any medium now known or hereinafter developed without payment or compensation to you and without seeking any further approval from you. We may further use your name, likeness, publicly accessible biographical data and any other information in connection with such use of the Content. You acknowledge that our use of your Content may include licensing such Content to third parties and/or using such Content for advertising purposes. In no event shall we be required to seek your approval or provide you with any compensation in connection with such uses. You acknowledge that nothing contained within your Content would require us to seek permission of a third party in order to use the Content as described in these Terms of Use. All that may sound like a lot, but these rights are primarily designed to give us legal protection—we're not looking to go into the “you business” (as they say in Hollywood). Basically, the content lasts for as long as you let it last, because you own it. That means you can remove it.
Marc Rosen October 04, 2011 at 05:01 AM
Frank, based on the terms of service on Patch, which I did just provide, yes, I DO have a right to take content down, because I OWN THAT CONTENT! It is my property, not Patch's, and I can do with my property as I see fit, even if it is posted in a public setting. That means, should I wish it, I am free to have any and every blog post I've ever made taken down, and unless there is a legally valid reason in their terms of service for why I forfeit that right to my property (including the right to destroy it), which is not clearly labeled at all, then yes, it will be taken down, no matter who complains.

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »