Hello, my name is Charlie Smith. I read through the article on the speech given last week by Reginald Jones and was astonished to find a number of factual errors. These were not small misprints, but conceptual flaws that paint Reginald Jones’s ideas in entirely the wrong light. I not only attended the event, but had dinner with Reginald beforehand and had a great opportunity to talk with him about his speech afterwards as well. I believe he would be outraged by the article written and will be calling him shortly to notify him of its printing. To begin, the quotes from Mr. Jones addressing “racism” were taken entirely out of context. He never once asserted that Black Americans were being made to “feel second-rate” as is stated in the article. Also, he was contending that inventors such as Elijah McCoy were not celebrated not because they were black but because they were successful. The entire message of his speech was that rich people never received recognition for their work improving society, not about racism. Indeed, Mr. Jones stands firmly against racism as an excuse for not being successful. In talks before the speech, he conveyed that he thought it was tragic that rich people were being vilified because it gives the poor (largely minorities) a bad image of success. Never once did he say that he felt white people were holding black people back. Second, to say that Reginald “ended his speech by talking about success” makes me question whether the author even attended the speech. His WHOLE speech was about success and why it should no longer be looked upon as a bad thing! Lastly, and most astonishing to me, was this: “He thinks success is ‘life’s lottery.'” I had to read it twice. If there is any one thing that Reginald Jones was attempting to stress in his entire speech it was that success was not about luck, but instead about hard work and the reaping of those rewards. When he mentioned success being “life’s lottery” he was quoting Dick Gephardt and it was in severe criticism. Reginald Jones’s message is in complete contradiction to what Gephardt said. Again, I am alarmed by the utter incompetence of the writer in capturing Reginald Jones’s message. I will be contacting him to let him know about it in case he wishes to set right the wrongs done here. I also demand and apology from The Clarion stating that they were sorry they misrepresented his statements. This level of journalism can not be tolerated. People who read this article that were not able to attend the speech now have a tainted image of Reginald Jones and his message.