Sonoran Alliance obviously generated a lot of buzz over the photo that went public yesterday in which an anonymous photographer claims Colleen Mathis and her husband were visiting with the office of Congressman Raul Grijalva in mid-July of this year.
The post and photo has been placed back in pending “private” mode as we double-back once again with the photographer to verify the identities. Because this has generated much wailing and gnashing of teeth among Arizona’s left and provoked the possibility of legal action, we believe it is certainly worth yet another verification with the photographer in order to ensure they are willing to stand by the photo or even go public.
Update: November 21, 2011 @ 20:30 – Sonoran Alliance has decided to retract the photo and issue a retraction. Although the photographer asserts that the two individuals in the photo are Chris and Colleen Mathis, there is not enough information available to double verify the photo. We have made a decision to pull the photo and issue a retraction unless new evidence is provided.
Gnashing of teeth is a rather hyperbolic response. The photo showed my nephew and office mate who both work at the building. You should be more careful about your sources and intentions.
Thought it was a stretch to identify two people when there are 200,000 pairs of people who would look JUST like that from the back and from that distance. Can’t even see their faces.
And if your source lied to you, you should burn the source publicly.
“Double back once again” suggests that you actually vetted the photo in the first place.
As always, pretty funny.
Shane- you mean you didn’t run the pic through “Butt Recognition” software!
Amateurish journalism. And I am a staunch conservative.
That’s cute that you think this site has any intentions of practicing journalism.
Wouldn’t this be easy to find out via Grijalva’s records? He’s a public official with a taxpayer funded office and visitor logs? He has to keep a record of meetings and visits precisely for this reason, accountability to the public. It would be interesting if there was a record or if there isn’t but the photog who took the pic in a public place, is willing to go public. There shouln’t be any problem with accountability and honesty from any politician of any political persuasion unluss there is something to hide?
Remember this next time you all bleat about the mainstream media getting it wrong. What a joke…really? Was it that necessary to post an unsourced and unvalidated picture because you were all butthurt about the AZSC smacking down the Gov?
Yellow journalism? (it would have to actually rise to a level of something resembling journalism here)
Well if people were willing to PAY for access to blogs, maybe blogs could afford bigger staffs.
So, its our fault that Shane has no journalistic standards or ethics, and if we all just dig a little deeper, he can hire a smart person?
LOL
Yeah, like that would work.
Sonoran Alliance holds up quite well compared to the blogs you usually hang out out. You’re here shut down oppositing viewpoints. Too insecure.
Project much?
Don’t assume where I hang out on the internet. You know what happens when you assume, don’t you?
This has absolutely nothing to do with staffing, Wanumba.
I am quite aware of that. I am also aware of the hypocritical sense of entitlements of posters who show up and say anything, lie and spin and then demand perfection of everyone that they themselves cannot meet.
“I am quite aware of that.”
No, I don’t think you are.
Otherwise, why would you have posted “Well if people were willing to PAY for access to blogs, maybe blogs could afford bigger staffs.”
So, are you aware of it, but not aware of it to not post “Well if people were willing to PAY for access to blogs, maybe blogs could afford bigger staffs.”
I am confused. If we pay Shane, and he doesn’t have to hire anyone, somehow, magically, he won’t make stupid, non journalistic choices in the future? Its a lack of judgment on the part of Shane, you can charge the 12 people who post here, but will that make Shane smarter?
I doubt it.
“Butthurt”? Ha. Know who you are on twitter trollazona. Very appropriate twiiter name and posting name. If I remember the photo correctly the female did not have a bad rear end. Nothing on the backside to be embarrased about. The face might be embarrassing though if it does happen to be the “Indepent” chair of a redistricting panel visiting a sitting congressman who happens to be a Dem or Rep who would benefit from a redistrecting map and this visit is neither reported, not in open meeting nor visits to all congress critters in az. These people are given a lot of power and they need to do this: openly, fairly, and according to the Az Constitution. Why woild anyone have a problem with open? I too think that a complete consensus from the Entire Panel of 5 would yield a better result.
I don’t have a Twitter account, but the word “butthurt” has been on the interwebs for many years, sorry you are not hip to that.
Why does everyone here have to assume that if someone doesn’t toe their conservative line 100%, they must be (fill in the blank).
Paranoia
Lampy, you are miles away from the Conservative Line.
I vote mostly Republican actually, but I don’t vote for people like Pearce. Guess I’m not part of the ever smaller tent that the party is creating. Its OK, being independent is a great feeling.
“Its OK, being independent is a great feeling.”
Amen to that.
I have to one finger type this on a small keypad. Before the grammar police try to hit me on that instead of the content of my post, I’m taking ownership of my poor typing.
Posters on both sides here are good about not going there with typos.
Happens to everyone chick….don’t sweat it.
There’s more important things to deal with.
It’s an IBB that doesn’t support editing. The best writers in the world have editors to fix their typos and other errors.
Only a twit complains about such in the post of another. (and yes, we all sometimes act like twits …)
It doesn’t matter if the photo is of Mathis. It simply doesn’t constitute a smoking gun.
Ding, Ding. We have a winner.
Like I said, whomever the chick is, she has nothing to be embarrassed about the backside.
have you ever seen someone in public, recognized them,. and by the time the camera was turned on they had already walked by you….
AHA!
So Mathis and hubby ARE there….they just happened to enter the lobby and the doors closed behind them before the photog could get the snap.
And these two people just happened to walk in front and ended up being described as them.
Yeah….that’s the ticket….
I gotta call shenanigans on that. Unless they were working with an old Kodak manually advancing camera using 126 film, I doubt that they couldn’t get the camera working that fast. Tell you what, next time they can borrow my DSLR, it shoots several shots per second, or you can just shoot HD video. Its almost 2012, cameras are pretty fast, even the crappy ones.
Was thinking the same thing too.
EXIF shows it was a Nikon D3100 with the 18-55 kit lens, so it’s at the low end of Nikon’s consumer bodies, but still a capable consumer DSLR.
Even at that, power on to first shot for the D3100 is listed at .04 second…considering it was in Auto exposure mode… by the time it was turned on, acquired focus and file written to card…maybe 2 seconds?
Since no one can prove who is in the picture, and Shane won’t take responsibility for being wrong, could we at least stop referring to it as the “Mathis Photo?”