Arkansas Blog: The rest of the story -- UPDATE II

By the time it was published in today's Democrat-Gazette, some 45 newsroom staffers signed the letter briefly posted here earlier objecting to the editorial department's publication of Mike Huckabee's op-ed critical of reporting by Seth Blomeley on the governor's destruction of computer hard drives and other final-hour actions as governor.

As the letter notes (text on the jump), Huckabee was inaccurate in the course of complaining about the Democrat-Gazette's reporting. He was also inaccurate in a reference to the Arkansas Times and I hope the newspaper will soon publish a short letter I submitted on the erroneous statement.

UPDATE: The letter in the Democrat-Gazette today was shorter than the version sent to us originally, perhaps edited to meet the word limit on the letters page. So I've substituted the longer version.

Copy and paste this link to see the letter as printed in the Democrat-Gazette.

http://www.nwanews.com/adg/Editorial/180463/

UPDATE II: A newsroom ceremony was held at 1 p.m. for Reporter Blomeley by Frank Fellone, the deputy M.E. Blomeley was given a bonus check for "excellence in reporting." And we have here a genuine copy of the list of 45 names on the letter published this morning (and some others may have wanted to sign, but were unable to on account of not being at hand). The honor roll:

Rick McFarland, Brandon Tubbs, Amy Schlesing, Jack Schnedler, Bob Wigginton, Karen Martin, Laura Steves, John Deering, Sandra Tyler, Nell Smith, Philip Martin,Celia Storey, Kristin Netterstrom, Linda Satter, Jay Grelen, Joe Riddle, Noel Oman, Laura Brown, Heather Wecsler, Glen Chase, Van Jensen, Garry Hoffmann, Steve Keesee, Daniel Nasaw, mtyler, John Lynch, Katherine Marks, Bill Simmons, Alyson Hoge, Jack Mitchell, Laura Kellams, Jake Sandlin, Michael Wickline, Kyle Brazzel, Jack Weatherly, Matthew Cate, Charlie Frago, Jack Hill, Michelle Hillen, Rick Fires, Andrew Davis, Jim Brooks, C.S. Murphy, Amy Upshaw, Cathy Frye.

LETTER TO THE EDITOR

In the Jan. 19th and Jan. 20th editions of the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, state Capitol bureau chief Seth Blomeley wrote articles regarding the destruction of some computer hard drives in the Governor's Office during the last days of the Mike Huckabee administration, as well as the depletion of a state emergency fund used by the office.

Seth made attempts to contact the governor for his stories. In his first story, published Jan. 19, Seth noted that Huckabee didn't respond to an email with questions about the hard drives or emergency fund, and his spokesman didn't return a phone message. On Jan. 20, Huckabee's spokesman commented on the issue. Again, however Huckabee didn't return messages left for him directly.

On Sunday, the newspaper printed, on the front page of the Perspective section, an op-ed piece by the former governor. We believe that by printing the piece, the newspaper gave Huckabee the opportunity to address the issue on his terms and to avoid answering a reporter's questions about the issues — an opportunity that is not afforded to other subjects of the newspaper's coverage.

The back-and-forth of question, answer, and follow-up question lies at journalism's foundation. But the op-ed format employed by the former governor ensures his assertions will remain unchallenged.

Also missing from this format was an editor's note explaining that the former governor had been given opportunities to comment before the stories were published. This omission makes the op-ed piece's headline — "And now, the rest of the story" — even more troubling to newsroom staff, for it implies Seth's coverage was unfair or incomplete.

We stand by our colleague and his story.

As reporters, we write stories every day that are disputed by the people we cover. Those complaints are routinely addressed via a newspaper policy that involves the reporter who wrote the story in question and those who edited it. Any resulting clarifications or corrections are written and approved by reporters and their supervisors.

We also are reminded regularly that the news-gathering and opinion sides of the newspaper operate independently of one another. And they should. But in this case, a delicate balance was violated. We allowed a subject unhappy with our coverage of an issue to attack a reporter and his stories, knowing there would be no follow-up questions. We also put his op-ed piece on the front page of the Perspectives section, rather than in the usual inside spot alloted for guest columns or submissions.

Good, solid journalism depends on following precedent in the interest of fairness. In this case, the newspaper deviated from its usual course, leaving its reporters confused and disturbed. What, we now wonder, will happen when other unhappy sources call? Will they be told they should have commented on an issue at the time stories were published? Or will they, too, be given premium op-ed space?

Jim Brooks, Alyson Hoge and 40 other newsroom employees

Comments

Why was this printed letter almost completely different from the letter posted on the Arkansas Times Blog the other night?

Why didn't the ADG run the full letter? Was the letter obtained by the Ark. Times a phony?

If the ADG refused to give the space to published the entire letter, then that again says volumes about the newspaper's editorial staff.

They give Huck all the room he wants but they make the rebuttal letter receive heavy editing?

What's the real story here?

ARK. BLOG: My letter is "real." One employee offered the guess that the letter was shortened for space reasons. They do impose a word limit on letters. But that's all I know.

Posted by: Newspaperboy | January 31, 2007 11:10 AM

Why did the DoG managers start butt suckin with Huckabee? Whose policy decision was it?
You insiders, please inform us. Why this galactic shift?
_

Posted by: Lwood | January 31, 2007 11:10 AM

Will you post the reporters who signed the letter?

ARK. BLOG: Don't have them. I'll see if they are available.

Posted by: Vincent Vega | January 31, 2007 11:19 AM

Am I the only one who thinks it's pretty sorry for the ADG to chop the rebuttal letter like that?

I mean, come on, they gave Huck the front of Perspective.

Also, I say kudos goes to the A.G. office for looking into Huck's missteps. I can only hope they will find something to charge him with.

Posted by: Newspaperboy | January 31, 2007 12:02 PM

Do we now expect that someone from the Arkansas Democrat Gazette will respond or comment on this letter in print? Or will this be treated like any other letter to the editor?

Being married to an ex-newspaper reporter all these years has taught me a lot of things. First of all, any U of A journalism grad on either side of 50 had ethics beat into them. The country may have been busy drinking Billy Beer at the time, but the education my wife received was awfully high minded when it came to such things as getting it right in print.

The sad thing I'm afraid is if every one of these letter signers quit today in protest, they'd have no better luck in their next job...assuming they'd find one today with newspapers in decline. The Donrey chain was a miserable bunch to work for. At least the pay improved a little when Stephens bought the old frog's holdings after he finally finally died.

But The Fort Stephens Times Record is a fine example of how far newspapers have fallen in this post-Dixie Chicks age of profit over ethics. Today there was an announcement that the Times Records has become the business partner of our Chamber of Commerce.

Not only that but the publisher of the Chamber's monthly newsletter which will be inserted in the paper containing ads sold by the Times Record sales staff.

Big deal!? Well...it won't bother the obituaries much, but how will we ever trust anything the Times Record reports in the business section from now on out? Which one of the Chamber's 2000 plus business members will their new partner, the Times Record dare to offend by reporting bad news about them?

We'll just have to see if it makes the paper should someone be killed packing Whirlpools bags for Mexico due to some kind of shoddy equipment failure. We'll probably quit hearing about embezzlements, business fraud, bust ups and throw downs......wouldn't want to offend a paying Chamber member now would we?

I'm glad it's not the Roaring 20s anymore, not many gangland shootings, fewer floating bodies in the river. But in BushWorld the changes are tiny, but deadly and more and more the news is what some rich folk wants it to be. So if the staff of the Arkansas Democrat Gazette decides to jump ship in protest, they'll only be jumping from the kettle to the fire.

I guess they can go to work for the Chamber of Commerce......oh wait...perhaps they already do.

Posted by: Deathbyinches | January 31, 2007 12:13 PM

The Huckster should have been told to buy an ad.

Posted by: Piper | January 31, 2007 12:34 PM

Deeb, I wouldn't use the Chamber of Commerce as an example of journalistic degeneracy in the LR paper's case, given the recent spate of stories on the Convention and Visitors Bureau in the Democrat-Gazette, stories the Greenberg Page crowed over, as I recall.

But if your point is that Republican attacks on the free press are insidious and sometimes cunning, you are right.

Posted by: 24fps | January 31, 2007 01:05 PM

Wonderful job, Seth. I am glad this came to a good resolution. Signees should be comended.

I think it is only appropriate that the AG be investigating...

Posted by: Basil | January 31, 2007 02:09 PM

Romesko now has this posted on his Poynter site.
http://www.poynter.org/column.asp?id=45
Release the national media hounds...

Posted by: Crash Davis | January 31, 2007 03:36 PM

Good for you, Seth -- and for your colleagues. Watch out, tho, Huckabee might want a cut of that check since it was all his doing that prompted this little saga.

Posted by: Quapaw | January 31, 2007 03:56 PM

It would be nice if the DemGaz would put something in print about recognizing Seth. The paper will be hammered over how it allowed the Huckster to put his tripe on the front page of Perspectives..

Posted by: msquare | January 31, 2007 07:57 PM

Let it be noted that 12 editors signed - just when I'd become convinced they were soulless automatons!

I guess they're not soulless.

Posted by: Journalism4Dummies | January 31, 2007 08:04 PM

Arkansas Blog

The rest of the story -- UPDATE II

Comments

Post a comment