Update on Malcolm Gladwell's book "Talking to Strangers"

[francofan]

Malcolm Gladwell’s new book “Talking to Strangers” comes out next week (Sept. 10) and there is a chapter devoted to the Penn State scandal in the book. John Ziegler talked about it in his podcast yesterday, starting around the 25 minute mark.

Ziegler has recently received a copy of the book and states that the book completely exonerates Tim Curley, Gary Schultz, and Graham Spanier and by extension Joe Paterno. He said that it doesn’t go as far as he would have liked about Jerry Sandusky’s innocence, but it does raise serious questions about the case against Sandusky.

The key finding that Gladwell establishes is that the day of the v2/McQueary incident was Dec. 29, 2000 and that Mike waited until Feb. 10, 2001 before he discussed the incident with Joe Paterno implying that it was not an urgent report of child sexual assault.

Ziegler said that Gladwell was slated to be a guest on his podcast next week.

 

[Harrisburg Dave]

Malcolm Gladwell’s new book “Talking to Strangers” comes out next week (Sept. 10) and there is a chapter devoted to the Penn State scandal in the book. John Ziegler talked about it in his podcast yesterday, starting around the 25 minute mark.

Ziegler has recently received a copy of the book and states that the book completely exonerates Tim Curley, Gary Schultz, and Graham Spanier and by extension Joe Paterno. He said that it doesn’t go as far as he would have liked about Jerry Sandusky’s innocence, but it does raise serious questions about the case against Sandusky.

The key finding that Gladwell establishes is that the day of the v2/McQueary incident was Dec. 29, 2000 and that Mike waited until Feb. 10, 2001 before he discussed the incident with Joe Paterno implying that it was not an urgent report of child sexual assault.

Ziegler said that Gladwell was slated to be a guest on his podcast next week.

View embedded media

Thank you for the link.

I may not know enough to buy the entire line about Jerry being innocent, but I have never bought the McQueary story. Now that there are legitimate questions about his story timeline I have even more reason to question his motives.

Where is McQueary on all this? Can anyone point to interviews where he has answered detailed questions?

If he lied we have yet another troubling item to add to his history. Gambling, the accusations made by his wife, and now this?

If McQueary has lied, and his lies led to the personal destruction of good people, he should come clean before he burns.

 

[francofan]

Thank you for the link.

I may not know enough to buy the entire line about Jerry being innocent, but I have never bought the McQueary story. Now that there are legitimate questions about his story timeline I have even more reason to question his motives.

Where is McQueary on all this? Can anyone point to interviews where he has answered detailed questions?

If he lied we have yet another troubling item to add to his history. Gambling, the accusations made by his wife, and now this?

If McQueary has lied, and his lies led to the personal destruction of good people, he should come clean before he burns.

I don't know if McQueary has knowingly lied, but I agree with John Snedden that he has not been a credible witness. Snedden explains why he doesn't find McQueary credible as related to Ralph Cipriano in his bigtrial blog.

http://www.bigtrial.net/2017/04/federal-agent-no-sex-scandal-at-penn.html

I don't believe that McQueary told any of the 5 people he told of the incident in 2000/2001 (hid Dad, Dr. Dranov, Curley, Schultz, Paterno) that he witnessed a sexual assault.

Fast forward 10 years later and with accusations of CSA against Sandusky, McQueary starts to think there may have been more to the Lasch building incident that innocent horse play and is probably not sure what exactly happened. With the OAG possibly having leverage on McQueary regarding gambling on college football and intimate cell phone photos of his anatomy, it may have helped his memory. To his credit, he called Jonelle Eshbach out in an email for twisting his words in the grand jury presentment that he witnessed an anal rape. To his detriment, he never went public with exactly what he saw and what he didn't see and his shaky testimony helped to convict Sandusky, Curley, Schultz, Spanier as well as to severly damage the legacy of Joe Paterno and the reputation of Penn State.

http://www.bigtrial.net/2017/10/penn-state-confidential-prosecutor-told.html

 

[PSURoar]

The McQueary story has always been bothersome:
- why were police not called
- why did Dranov and Dad not call police
- why did McQueary not correct the presentment of "anal rape" publicly (he did by email/text)-this one bothers me the most
- why did dates change
- how could you feel so confident of what you saw over your shoulder looking into a mirror- seems like a rape couldn't occur in an upright position with an adult and child
- is it true that McQueary was sending naked pictures via his phone and could the same person be credible or was that an incentive to cooperate - did this pattern continue
- is it more logical that this was about a job - huge coincidence if the day after this occurs a job comes available especially since police were not called the night of the incidents
- Rudy - really, he can't remember the year but can remember Rudy and new sneakers

Probably just scratching the surface but just seems like the details don't make sense.

 

[PrtLng Lion]

I had no idea that Gladwell was addressing this in his new book. Loved his others (Blink, Outliers, and Tipping Point) so I'll get the new one too.

if its true that Gladwell exonerates TC, GS, and GS, will he be accused of being a conspiracy theorist by those in the media who previously held him in such high regard? Very interesting situation...

 

[francofan]

I had no idea that Gladwell was addressing this in his new book. Loved his others (Blink, Outliers, and Tipping Point) so I'll get the new one too.

if its true that Gladwell exonerates TC, GS, and GS, will he be accused of being a conspiracy theorist by those in the media who previously held him in such high regard? Very interesting situation...

Of course Gladwell will get attacked for questioning the existing narrative of what exactly happened. That is a given. At the same time you will now have a much larger audience of people who will now be willing to question the conventional wisdom. When they do, they will find a cache of information that suggests things may not be exactly as described in the scenario that the OAG sold the public at the outset in the first place.

Once people believe a story, it is very difficult in the future to get them to change their view of what happened. At the present time, the public by in large still believes the story that the OAG told in Nov. 2011. It is likely that Gladwell's book will cause some people to now question the existing narrative that underlies the Penn State/Sandusky scandal, but it probably will only make a small dent in the overall public opinion of the story. Every little bit helps and there will likely be continuing developments that will further dent public opinion. One day, it will be evident just how wrong the story that the OAG has sold was. I hope that day will be sooner rather than later.

 

[NittPicker]

With the OAG possibly having leverage on McQueary regarding gambling on college football and intimate cell phone photos of his anatomy, it may have helped his memory.

I'd be shocked, SHOCKED, if the OAG used leverage over McQueary to gain anything other than the truth.

OK, I wasn't able to type that with a straight face. Given what we know about the personal ethics of the porndogs, I wouldn't put anything past them. To them it's not about getting the truth. It's really about scoring PR points and winning at all costs. If innocent lives are ruined along the way, so be it.

 

[gslachta]

I'd be shocked, SHOCKED, if the OAG used leverage over McQueary to gain anything other than the truth.

OK, I wasn't able to type that with a straight face. Given what we know about the personal ethics of the porndogs, I wouldn't put anything past them. To them it's not about getting the truth. It's really about scoring PR points and winning at all costs. If innocent loves are ruined along the way, so be it.

If I told this Board once I told this Board a dozen times our BOT needs to resign and rectify the situation. Gladwell isn’t the only outside source that has debunked the accepted story line and my guess he won’t be the last. Also take the gd name off the Erickson Bldg. It is a constant reminder of incompetence at PSU.

 

[RussianEagle]

Thank you for the link.

I may not know enough to buy the entire line about Jerry being innocent, but I have never bought the McQueary story. Now that there are legitimate questions about his story timeline I have even more reason to question his motives.

Where is McQueary on all this? Can anyone point to interviews where he has answered detailed questions?

If he lied we have yet another troubling item to add to his history. Gambling, the accusations made by his wife, and now this?

If McQueary has lied, and his lies led to the personal destruction of good people, he should come clean before he burns.

I keep posing these four questions to anyone who thinks McQueary has any credibility as a witness. No one ever answers.

1. The night before McQueary met with Joe Paterno, February 9, 2001, was a typical Friday Night during the school year at PSU. In addition to the hoards of drunk college students walking around everywhere, there was a Barenaked Ladies concert at the BJC and a home club hockey game starting at a building attached to Lasch. Why then, did McQueary originally believe the incident happened the Friday before Spring Break, a time when campus would be practically empty?

2. Mike McQueary admitted he only got two or three 1-2 second glances at the shower, through a mirror that likely was fogged up. Also, from the angle he was at, he would not have been able to see the boy if his “hands were against the wall”, as he stated in the most damning version (of several) of his testimony. Why then is McQueary so sure what he saw was a sexual act?

3. Mike McQueary continued to support Jerry Sandusky’s charity by playing in its golf tournaments for years AFTER the alleged shower incident. He also admitted under oath he did not voice any objection to Sandusky still being around the program until AFTER speaking with the OAG in late 2010 or early 2011. Would you acknowledge McQueary was provided information by the OAG that caused him to drastically reinterpret what he witnessed ten years earlier?

4. It has been documented that Mike McQueary wrote an email to OAG prosecutor Jonelle Eshbach just after he was outed as the witness in the grand jury report. McQueary complained that he was misrepresented and that he was not certain he witnessed sodomy. Eshbach basically acknowledged he was correct but informed him keep quiet. Why did Mike McQueary listen to the OAG and not speak up, despite the fact that it would have certainly helped his public image at a time when he was being accused of cowardly walking away from child rape?

 

[KC-KS-Lion]

The McQueary story has always been bothersome:
- why were police not called
- why did Dranov and Dad not call police
- why did McQueary not correct the presentment of "anal rape" publicly (he did by email/text)-this one bothers me the most
- why did dates change
- how could you feel so confident of what you saw over your shoulder looking into a mirror- seems like a rape couldn't occur in an upright position with an adult and child
- is it true that McQueary was sending naked pictures via his phone and could the same person be credible or was that an incentive to cooperate - did this pattern continue
- is it more logical that this was about a job - huge coincidence if the day after this occurs a job comes available especially since police were not called the night of the incidents
- Rudy - really, he can't remember the year but can remember Rudy and new sneakers

Probably just scratching the surface but just seems like the details don't make sense.

It may take someone like Gladwell who has a wide audience who appreciates his unique insight to turn the popular narrative around. I would believe even the most popular ESPN talking heads would consciously avoid disagreeing with him.

 

[nits74]

It may take someone like Gladwell who has a wide audience who appreciates his unique insight to turn the popular narrative around. I would believe even the most popular ESPN talking heads would consciously avoid disagreeing with him.

The MSM will handle this by not even acknowledging this book. Remember, as wide an audience that Gladwell may have, it is all relative. It won't even scratch the surface with the largely stupid and uneducated American public.

 

[RussianEagle]

The MSM will handle this by not even acknowledging this book. Remember, as wide an audience that Gladwell may have, it is all relative. It won't even scratch the surface with the largely stupid and uneducated American public.

One thing I will acknowledge is that talking to actual human beings, most fans of other teams are very willing to listen and the overwhelming majority will admit Joe Paterno got screwed. The real world is not the internet. Likewise, the sports media needs to realize most people are not Twitter trolls and be willing to look at this issue again and acknowledge they got it wrong.

 

[francofan]

Ziegler interviewed Malcolm Gladwell today and it will be out in the next couple of days. In the interview, Gladwell blows apart the media BS narrative on Penn State by citing Ziegler's extensive research.

 

[LionDeNittany]

I had no idea that Gladwell was addressing this in his new book. Loved his others (Blink, Outliers, and Tipping Point) so I'll get the new one too.

if its true that Gladwell exonerates TC, GS, and GS, will he be accused of being a conspiracy theorist by those in the media who previously held him in such high regard? Very interesting situation...

This was discussed in another thread by a frequent poster who works for the publisher.

He didn't go into this detail, but it was implied it was good.

LDN

 

[LionDeNittany]

Likewise, the sports media needs to realize most people are not Twitter trolls and be willing to look at this issue again and acknowledge they got it wrong.

It is not just the sports media who believes twitter trolls. Look at Tennessee.

There is way wayyyy too much value placed on services like twitter and facebook for their view of where people stand on issues.

It is why the media gets it so wrong so often these days.

LdN

 

[john4psu]

 

[nits74]

One thing I will acknowledge is that talking to actual human beings, most fans of other teams are very willing to listen and the overwhelming majority will admit Joe Paterno got screwed. The real world is not the internet. Likewise, the sports media needs to realize most people are not Twitter trolls and be willing to look at this issue again and acknowledge they got it wrong.

Unfortunately, this will never happen. And it's not just the sports media. It is the entire MSM.

 

[BBrown]

Ziegler interviewed Malcolm Gladwell today and it will be out in the next couple of days. In the interview, Gladwell blows apart the media BS narrative on Penn State by citing Ziegler's extensive research.

View embedded media

Whatever happened to the one media guy that was always questioning the media? I think his name was Kevin?
He was one of the few people that would not roll over.

 

[RussianEagle]

Whatever happened to the one media guy that was always questioning the media? I think his name was Kevin?
He was one of the few people that would not roll over.

I think you are referring to Kevin Slaten. He’s been very quiet ever since he ended up feuding with Ziegler over an issue completely unrelated to PSU.

A trend, unfortunately.

 

[francofan]

I believe that Ziegler will post a link to the video on Sunday. I can hardly wait to listen to the podcast. My copy of "Talking to Strangers" is scheduled to arrive at my house on Tuesday September 10. I can hardly wait to read it. I don't expect that this development will turn around public opinion in this case, but I do expect that it will make a dent.

 

[LundyPSU]

I am interested in what Gladwell has to say. But, sounds like just a repeat of Ziegler which is old news.

 

[Chris92]

I believe that Ziegler will post a link to the video on Sunday. I can hardly wait to listen to the podcast. My copy of "Talking to Strangers" is scheduled to arrive at my house on Tuesday September 10. I can hardly wait to read it. I don't expect that this development will turn around public opinion in this case, but I do expect that it will make a dent.

Are you expecting any of the content of Schultz's interview with JZ to be in the book?

 

[francofan]

Are you expecting any of the content of Schultz's interview with JZ to be in the book?

Probably not. I don't believe that Gary wants his interview out before he is no longer on probation which will be another year or two. However, I think Gladwell will explain why he believes the v2 incident happened on Dec. 30, 2000 which I expect to be compelling.

 

[wbcincy]

I am interested in what Gladwell has to say. But, sounds like just a repeat of Ziegler which is old news.

Old news, but finally reaching a much, much larger group. Ziegler has been heard mostly by Penn State folks alone. People around the world will read what Gladwell writes.

One thing that would be very helpful: Gladwell typically goes on Bill Simmons' podcast when he has something to promote. He and Gladwell are friends. So I imagine he will be on Bill's podcast soon, which is listened to by millions. It will make sense that a significant focus of their conversation would be on the sports story in the book. If Gladwell can make a compelling argument on that pod, and get any kind of concession from Bill, it will be another important step in shifting this narrative, because that will be the largest group yet to hear that the narrative may have been false.

 

[francofan]

I am interested in what Gladwell has to say. But, sounds like just a repeat of Ziegler which is old news.

Having someone with the credibility of Malcolm Gladwell say that he is totally convinced that Graham Spanier. Tim Curley, and Gary Schultz are completely innocent and that the reputation of Joe Paterno's legacy has been unfairly maligned would not be old news.

 

[francofan]

I ran across this interesting Krishnan Guru-Murthy podcast where Gladwell talks about his new book. Gladwell does not talk specifically about the Penn State chapter. I found that Gladwell has a lot of very interesting insights and opinions.

 

[didier]

I'm curious how much the book will deviate from what Gladwell wrote about the subject 7 years ago:

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2012/09/24/in-plain-view

 

[didier]

Probably not. I don't believe that Gary wants his interview out before he is no longer on probation which will be another year or two. However, I think Gladwell will explain why he believes the v2 incident happened on Dec. 30, 2000 which I expect to be compelling.

I thought Ziegler said he didn't think Gladwell was including the date change in his book.

 

[francofan]

I'm curious how much the book will deviate from what Gladwell wrote about the subject 7 years ago:

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2012/09/24/in-plain-view

I suspect a lot.

 

[francofan]

I thought Ziegler said he didn't think Gladwell wasincluding the date change in his book.

I believe he is. I believe Ziegler said that Gladwell did not include that Kenny Jackson resigned his position at wide receivers coach on Feb. 8, 2001. Mike McQueary was supposedly seeking the wide receivers coaching position when he went to see Joe Paterno on Feb. 10 and used the Lasch building shower incident as an excuse to get face time with Joe.

 

[Pinkhippo PeanutButter]

I believe he is. I believe has said that Gladwell did not include that Kenny Jackson resigned his position at wide receivers coach on Feb. 8, 2001. Mike McQueary was supposedly seeking the wide receivers coaching position when he went to see Joe Paterno on Feb. 10 and used the Lasch building shower incident as an excuse to get face time with Joe.

The date change makes no practical difference.

- For Sandusky, he was already deemed not guilty on the main V2 charges
- For Paterno, he reported/referred to his superiors ASAP
- For C/S/S, it makes no difference whether anything happened or on what date, they would have had the same responsibilities. Outcome: 2 pleaded to a misdemeanor, one is appealing.

Focusing on the date change is minutia. It does shed light (a little) on MMQ, but his testimony has held (so far) in I think 4 court cases against (generally) fairly good lawyers. I just don't see the date of the V2 incident as being substantial.

 

[BBrown]

The date change makes no practical difference.

- For Sandusky, he was already deemed not guilty on the main V2 charges
- For Paterno, he reported/referred to his superiors ASAP
- For C/S/S, it makes no difference whether anything happened or on what date, they would have had the same responsibilities. Outcome: 2 pleaded to a misdemeanor, one is appealing.

Focusing on the date change is minutia. It does shed light (a little) on MMQ, but his testimony has held (so far) in I think 4 court cases against (generally) fairly good lawyers. I just don't see the date of the V2 incident as being substantial.

JMO but it seriously undermines their credibility.

 

[Pinkhippo PeanutButter]

JMO but it seriously undermines their credibility.

"Their" as in who?

 

[francofan]

I thought Cur/Sch were given a max sentence of 23 months - which I would think should cover any "probation" time.... back in June or July of 2017.

Now, I am not sure when that clock would start running (or for sure if the "time" was 23 months)…… but I think the time might be up (or damn near it).

Gary told me he will be on a 2 year probation until July 2021, but judge indicated he would entertain a request to reduce probation to 1 year, and if he approves, to end July 2020.

 

[The Song Remains the Same]

I thought Cur/Sch were given a max sentence of 23 months - which I would think should cover any "probation" time.... back in June or July of 2017.

Now, I am not sure when that clock would start running (or for sure if the "time" was 23 months)…… but I think the time might be up (or damn near it).

Silly you, it's the Pennsylvania justice system, where dates/times mean nothing...

 

[The Song Remains the Same]

Weird.
I have to assume they know when their own probation terms run

But I know they were both released from Prison two years ago.

Like I said...

 

[pandaczar12]

The date change makes no practical difference.

- For Sandusky, he was already deemed not guilty on the main V2 charges
- For Paterno, he reported/referred to his superiors ASAP
- For C/S/S, it makes no difference whether anything happened or on what date, they would have had the same responsibilities. Outcome: 2 pleaded to a misdemeanor, one is appealing.

Focusing on the date change is minutia. It does shed light (a little) on MMQ, but his testimony has held (so far) in I think 4 court cases against (generally) fairly good lawyers. I just don't see the date of the V2 incident as being substantial.

Spanier is not appealing, he has successfully appealed.

 

[fizzyskittles]

It may take someone like Gladwell who has a wide audience who appreciates his unique insight to turn the popular narrative around. I would believe even the most popular ESPN talking heads would consciously avoid disagreeing with him.

The narrative has been laser etched in titanium . There’s nothing changing it . Ever.

 

[nits74]

"Their" as in who?

Mike and the OAG, that's who.

 

[NittPicker]

Spanier is not appealing, he has successfully appealed.

Indeed, it's the OAG who is appealing. I don't think Shapiro can honestly say an appeal is worth pursuing but he has the 2022 gubernatorial election to worry about. He's acting in his own self interest and wants to portray himself as a champion of the people. To that end, he'll spend the peoples' money to make himself look like a tough guy.