Home > View from the Newsroom > Archives > 2008 > May > 09 > Entry
It’s a political year
Newspaper editors and political reporters don’t need a calendar to tell them that it’s an even-numbered year. Even-numbered years are election years. We can tell that because those are the years when we get complaints from politicians and their handlers. It’s as predictable as Rick Wagner staking out a position to the right of just about everybody else.
We got a couple this week, and I think they are instructive. One was nothing more than a political handler trying to bully a reporter, the other a legitimate question about why we failed to do something. One was ugly, the other a genuine discussion between people who saw the same thing differently.
First the ugly.
Early in the week Democratic Senate candidate Mark Udall proposed the government quit stockpiling gas in the strategic petroleum reserve.
Reporter Mike Saccone, as any good reporter would do, called Udall’s opponent to get a response. Republican Bob Schaffer is very seldom available. He called Dick Wadhams, Schaffer’s campaign manager. I don’t think he ever even got to tell Wadhams why he was calling. The minute Wadhams got on the phone he launched into Mike, telling him he was a biased reporter, that he’s taken cheap shots at Schaffer and asking when we were going to do the same thing to Udall. I listened to the tape of the conversation. Mike seldom got to complete a question. Every time he tried Wadhams interrupted with yet another complaint about Mike and/or our coverage. He did manage to ask Wadhams for specific instances of biased reporting or cheap shots and Wadhams provided none.
The exchange was amusing. I don’t know what Wadhams was trying to accomplish other than to try to get our reporter to go easier on his candidate in future stories. Whatever it was it will have no effect whatsoever on how we cover the Senate race. We’ll continue to cover it as completely and fairly as possible.
Then there is Mesa County commissioner candidate Jim Doody, a pol with much less experience than Dick Wadhams, but one who chooses not to come out guns-ablazing when he doesn’t like something we did - or in this case didn’t do - but instead just wants an explanation.
Former state representative Matt Smith very publicly helped Doody gather signatures for Doody’s candidacy petition on Tuesday and we had nothing in the paper about it. We had a reporter and a photographer there and the reporter returned and wrote a long, and very good feature story about the event. We opted not to run it. Doody politely asked why. Here’s my response and Doody’s:
“Jim,
“The call to not run anything today was ultimately mine, and it came down to whether we thought it was news. The story as written was a feature, and a very good feature. The problem was that had we run it, then we would have been committed to doing the same thing for every candidate in that race. Had we not, readers might perceive the story to be nothing more than an effort on the part of The Daily Sentinel to drum up support for your candidacy. We decided we didn’t want to commit to doing more stories about that race at this time. We will do stories about all the candidates when there are significant dates looming, i.e., the deadline for filing petitions, the primary election, etc. It’s a problem we run into virtually every election cycle, and it is, admittedly, difficult. Just as I’d hope readers wouldn’t read any institutional support for your candidacy had we done a story, I hope you don’t think that our lack of a story means we are opposed to your candidacy. We haven’t taken a position on your candidacy, and, on the news pages, won’t. I hope that answers your question. Please feel free to get in touch with me if you’d like to discuss it further.”
“Denny -
“Thank you for your reply. Though I disagree with your logic I respect your professional opinion regarding local politics and the high standards you hold for the Daily Sentinel. I personally do not consider myself as a candidate (either does my opponent) just an aspiring one that may happen when I obtain enough signatures to get on the ballot. I do believe there is reportable news when a prominent person (Matt Smith) in the community wants to publicly announce his endorsement of another who has distinct differences about what our future could hold.”
We weren’t quite sure whether Matt Smith had formally made an endorsement on Tuesday, and that’s why we ran nothing. We typically run a brief when a candidate gets an endorsement. On second thought we decided that Matt did indeed endorse Doody and we ran that brief today.
Dealing with rants from handlers like Dick Wadhams goes with the territory of being in the newspaper business. But it’s a lot easier to deal with the likes of Jim Doody.
Comments
By Bill Menezes
May 9, 2008 11:17 AM | Link to this
I don�t know what Wadhams was trying to accomplish other than to try to get our reporter to go easier on his candidate in future stories.
Denny, you hit the nail on the head. Based on Wadhams’ well-documented history of manipulating the media using bullying and misinformation, that is exactly what he was trying to accomplish. Kudos to Mike for keeping his head on straight by asking Wadhams to substantiate his allegations (which, being Wadhams, he would not). That’s more than we’ve seen a lot of reporters do.
By Dennys Dreaming
May 9, 2008 3:16 PM | Link to this
It is easier to accept the likes of Jim Doody type politicians because they gently accept your poor excuses and give you the benefit of the doubt when you don’t deserve it.
The Sentinel’s Yellow Journalism is well known throughout Colorado political circles. Most if not all veterans to Colorado politics accept it as fact.
Your hubris is also well known as you pedal your flimsy excuses for your total lack of ethical reporting.
Yet the fact remains that you have no scruples as you stump for your favorite candidates and trash the ones you don’t like (even if you continue to deny it).
Finally it is refreshing to see well known national campaigners call you on it!
By Dave Haynes
May 9, 2008 5:36 PM | Link to this
Here we go again. A politician is mad at a journalist, and all because the reporter is biased. Yawn. With 15 years of experience in the Sentinel newsroom, I can assure our readers that we have no stake in the outcome of elections. As professional journalists, we know our credibility is our only stock in trade. To let bias creep into our reporting is to sacrifice that credibility. The colleagues I have known here take far more pride in their work than to let that happen. But the recurring theme of this job is that zealots from the political fringes are always going to be screaming “yellow journalism,” despite their ignorance of what the term even means. Tearing down reporters never goes out of style with politicians who take comfort in such cliches. These are the same people who can’t distinguish between editorial opinions and news coverage. They are offended by unfavorable opinions expressed on op/ed pages, and this is what constitutes “bias” by their definition. That’s completely wrongheaded, but it’s useless to point that out to someone who refuses to consider any viewpoint but their own. What emerges is the stereotype of a crybaby who can’t handle the rough-and-tumble of politics, then blames the handiest of all scapegoats for their professional failures. The gutless approach of flaming reporters and refusing to identify themselves in their posts naturally fits that stereotype.
By Gary
May 9, 2008 6:13 PM | Link to this
When will these extremist wacko Republicans learn? Wether it be Josh Penry with his juvenile attacks on reporters or the loser Dicky Wadhams showing his well known Doug Bruce kind of temper, it never bodes well for the Republican party image. I believe that Schaffer finds himself so far behind in the Senate race that the frustration is wearing on the Wad and he is making the same mistakes he did in assuring that George Allen had a losing campaign.
Is it any wonder the R’s are prepping the extremist Penry for a leadership position? Could the Democrats be any happier that these Republicans with such character flaws are in leadership positions? And tell Mike to keep up his excellent work. Don’t let these losers throw you off your professionalism.
By politeness is rare
May 10, 2008 11:54 AM | Link to this
This is very instructive and sheds Jim Doody in a very good light. Doody understands that you can disagree with someone and still be civil and polite. It is fairly clear to me that Doody didn’t agree with Denny Herzog, but chose not to spit fire at him.
Our society has lost that skill, so it appears from reading many blog comments from the likes of “Denny’s Dreaming.” It’s disappointing that disagreeing with someone has de-evolved into simply being disagreeable and ugly.