OK, so the Dan Pinch story dominated our work last week and it turned out pretty well–except for one major issue: We had no input from Pinch himself. Our story was based on statements from the Senate report and Emerson officials, in short, the “accusers.” Our story did say in the end that we tried, unsuccessfully, to reach him, but in all fairness, this may not be enough.
Our reporters who talked to members of the Emerson community, for example, found out that some people felt that being on these lender advisory boards might have been seen as an “honor” for the College or an “advantage” for Emerson students, etc. Others wondered if college officials knew about Pinch’s association with the lenders and allowed him to be in them because they (the officials) might have thought the relationship was good for the College. We were unable to confirm any of that because, as we said in our stories, Emerson officials did not want to talk with any specificity about the substance of the accusations against Pinch.
Clearly, Pinch remains the only one who can answer some of these questions.
We have let it be known that we are eager to hear from him.
We’ll continue to stay on top of the story….
mp


