On July 15, 2025, the Marietta Daily Journal (MDJ) published an article quoting Cobb County School Board member Leroy “Tre” Hutchins as saying that Superintendent Chris Ragsdale’s attempt to change the district’s public comment policy was “on-brand” for him.
The article also quoted Hutchins as saying:
“It’s challenging for some people to hear dissenting rhetoric,” he said. “For me, I will vote accordingly to ensure we have all access for communication.”
Mr. Hutchins even linked to the MDJ article from his official Facebook page, an article that still includes his words in quotation marks.
Yet speaking later from the district office on Glover Street, Hutchins flatly denied saying those things. He claimed the MDJ had “misquoted” him and accused the reporter of inserting language he never used.
What the MDJ Reported, and What Hutchins Now Denies
The MDJ directly quoted Hutchins twice, including the now-controversial “on-brand” phrase and the remark about “dissenting rhetoric.” Hutchins insists he never said either and implied the journalist got it wrong.
Has the MDJ Defended Its Reporter?
To date, the MDJ has not issued a public statement defending its reporter or directly responding to Hutchins’ denial. However, that silence should not be confused with guilt. Reputable newsrooms often review accusations like these internally and only issue corrections if a genuine error is confirmed.
Why Fabrication Accusations Matter, and Why the MDJ Deserves the Benefit of the Doubt
Falsifying or altering quotes is one of the most serious violations of journalistic ethics. The Society of Professional Journalists Code of Ethics strictly prohibits such behavior. The MDJ, founded in 1864, has a long-standing reputation for honest reporting and has no known history of fabricating quotes.
Credible newspapers like the MDJ follow rigorous standards for sourcing, including audio recordings and meticulous note-taking. If Hutchins truly was misquoted, the MDJ has mechanisms for correcting the record. But unless and until such a correction appears, the public should trust that the quotes were reported accurately.
Hutchins’ Track Record: A Pattern Emerges
This isn’t the first time Hutchins has made serious claims that were later questioned. In March 2024, he accused the board of “racist intent” for removing the word equitable from fiscal policy language. That accusation was later refuted by district attorneys and several lawmakers, who said the move was aimed at clarifying policy language, not targeting any group.
Now, in this latest instance, we see a troubling pattern: Mr. Hutchins making strong public claims without presenting solid evidence.
What’s Missing, and What Hutchins Should Provide
If Hutchins genuinely believes he was misquoted, he should produce evidence, such as a recording, transcript, or eyewitness testimony. Until then, his claim remains unverified.
Meanwhile, there’s no reason to believe the MDJ failed in its duties. Their article quoted Hutchins in good faith, and unless proven otherwise, their reporting stands on solid ground.
Verdict: The MDJ Holds the Advantage
- Publication date and quote: July 15, 2025, Hutchins reportedly said the policy shift was “on-brand” for Ragsdale.
- MDJ response: No public statement defending the reporter, yet no retraction or correction either.
- Ethical track record: The MDJ has no reputation for fabricating content and has corrected errors in the past when appropriate.
- Burden of proof: Rests with Hutchins, not the reporter.
Bottom Line
Until Tre Hutchins provides clear and convincing evidence that he was misquoted, the MDJ deserves the benefit of the doubt. Its legacy of accurate reporting, and its adherence to journalistic ethics, outweighs an unsupported denial from a public official with a history of questionable claims.
