I blogged yesterday that the Signal's Executive Editor Jason Schaff had emailed regular Signal columnists the following:
That email went out to all local Signal columnists (Gary Horton, Vanessa Wilk, Kevin Buck, Charlie Vignola, John Zaring, Lori Rivas, Tim Myers, Steve Lunetta and David Hegg) early Tuesday afternoon.
Gary Horton had written a column endorsing Lee Rogers that was to be published Wednesday. As I noted yesterday, the column never appeared in the paper.
Well, it's not hard to imagine what happened next. Because they're columnists (old school bloggers), they got into a big email discussion. Horton said he was "set back" when the Signal spiked his column based on the new policy. Then conservative columnist Steve Lunetta said in the email chain that the "Signal policy has a clear purpose in stopping "drive-by" attack pieces that cannot be addressed before the election."
After that, well, someone added Buck McKeon to the email chain and it's now public so I'm posting it here for you. Emails are posted top to bottom in chronological order:
From: Jason Schaff
From Lori Rivas:
From Gary Horton:
I do agree with Gary. However, the Signal policy has a clear purpose in stopping "drive-bys"-
It's interesting to note that not only has The Signal re-published Carl Goldman's piece refuting the claims of Mark Archuleta & attacking Lee Rogers for the mess his layoffs created, but just today, the paper has published Kevin Korenthal's endorsement of Scott Wilk, Todd Zink, Steve Knight, Alan Jackson, and Buck McKeon.
On Friday, less than a week before the election.
Yet the paper gives the Schaff't to Gary Horton and won't publish his endorsement of Lee Rogers. It seems this rule only applies to liberals, or perhaps more specifically, to columnists who want to endorse Lee Rogers.
Now to be fair, a former Signal journalist emailed me yesterday to say that Schaff's policy wasn't new:
What a pathetic local media we have. Good journalists like Carol Rock are thrown under the bus while management apologizes to Buck McKeon's office over coverage. And good local columnists -who, let's remember, write columns for little or no money!- get spiked and muted if they endorse the wrong guy.
Have you ever seen such cowardice before? When you go to J-school or even take a couple of journalism classes like I did, you learn about the heroes of the craft, people like Woodward & Bernstein, or war correspondents. Fearless writers, publishers, and editors who server the truth no matter the cost.
What we have in town is like the inverse of that. Our local media is told what the truth will be, and then force their writers to comply. If they don't comply, they're fired or muted. It's disgusting.
-----------------
Signal muzzles Lee Rogers endorsements
Hi everybody:
I’d like to clarify a few things. It’s one week before the election and the last day (today’s paper Tues.) that we are publishing any political endorsement related columns related to the election either written by columnists or candidates in order to give opposing sides time to respond. We welcome discussion of non-endorsement election issues by columnists through our Sunday publication and then that’s it until the election.
I know most people vote by mail these days, but others don’t and we feel it’s appropriate to draw the line somewhere. Once again, thanks for contributing.
That email went out to all local Signal columnists (Gary Horton, Vanessa Wilk, Kevin Buck, Charlie Vignola, John Zaring, Lori Rivas, Tim Myers, Steve Lunetta and David Hegg) early Tuesday afternoon.
Gary Horton had written a column endorsing Lee Rogers that was to be published Wednesday. As I noted yesterday, the column never appeared in the paper.
Well, it's not hard to imagine what happened next. Because they're columnists (old school bloggers), they got into a big email discussion. Horton said he was "set back" when the Signal spiked his column based on the new policy. Then conservative columnist Steve Lunetta said in the email chain that the "Signal policy has a clear purpose in stopping "drive-by" attack pieces that cannot be addressed before the election."
After that, well, someone added Buck McKeon to the email chain and it's now public so I'm posting it here for you. Emails are posted top to bottom in chronological order:
From: Jason Schaff
From John Zaring:Hi everybody:I’d like to clarify a few things. It’s one week before the election and the last day (today’s paper Tues.) that we are publishing any political endorsement related columns related to the election either written by columnists or candidates in order to give opposing sides time to respond. We welcome discussion of non-endorsement election issues by columnists through our Sunday publication and then that’s it until the election.I know most people vote by mail these days, but others don’t and we feel it’s appropriate to draw the line somewhere. Once again, thanks for contributing.
Jason & Lila,Per your email below, it was my understanding that the Signal was no longer running columns related to the election?Therefore, I am forced to ask why Carl Goldman’s guest column (http://www.the-signal.com/section/33/article/79635/) was published? His position paper, which reached a stunning 959 words, is clearly political and in fact, takes a direct swipe at Lee Rogers while trumpeting KHTS’s endorsement of Congressman McKeon. Will Rogers now be given an opportunity to respond to Goldman’s column? I certainly hope so.Furthermore, Goldman directly contradicted statements made by Mark Archuleta at last week’s City Council meeting (which unfortunately, was not reported by the Signal). What Goldman called a business decision was labeled a firing in his public testimony by Archuleta, who also alleged multiple instances of editorial interference and malfeasance at KHTS. Will you provide Archuleta and Rock a forum to challenge Goldman’s unanswered (and unsubstantiated) claims?On a related matter …As you surely know, the majority of your community columnists are frustrated, many feel undermined, while some are considering quitting in protest. Of course, we are all replaceable, and I’m sure easily so. Personally, I believe the Signal faces a bigger, more grave problem than losing a few unpaid columnists, and that’s the very real danger of losing the trust of the community it has served so well for so long. As Goldman is experiencing at KHTS, once journalistic integrity is lost (or perceived to be in question), the problems can grow exponentially, and quickly.Any rational observer can see that the Signal’s resources are quite limited, and your small and often inexperienced staff is beyond stretched. Do the paper’s out-of-town owners have a full understanding of the challenges you face in delivering a daily edition, and more importantly, are they committed to sustaining their asset in our community? If nothing changes, I fear it might only be a matter of time before the Signal, like many small-town papers before it, becomes just another footnote in history.Perhaps it is time for the owners to be brought into this conversation?My best,jz
From Lori Rivas:
This is a good letter, John, and I'm glad you wrote it.I'm a little late to the party, but count me in among those objecting to the Signal's seemingly arbitrary policies.Lori
From Gary Horton:
From Steve Lunetta:Dear Lila and Jason,As you know, I too was set back when you would not publish my column for this past Wednesday. This, after I invested perhaps six or seven hours in its preparation! (A $10.00 value!) Instead, we continue to have out of towner, not-connected, syndicated "columnists" (read paid lobbyists) show up on the editorial pages, in what I believe will be a most unread fashion.People WANT to hear and read these local Op/Eds, regardless of whether they are from our right side or left. Steve Lunnetta and I will surely agree on this point! Opinions are a big reason your readers subscribe. Now, in the very heat of the hottest point of the fight, we are forcibly muted and your readers read muted mush. I don't care if these columns are pro Buck or pro Lee, pro Headington or pro Wilk - local folks like to read this stuff and stay up on the ebb and flow. (They are not going to get this stuff from NPR, you know.)So, the LA Times rages on. Still, the Valley News rages on. Still, the national press rages on, but the Signal will not hear one more opinion on elections?How considerate of the management towards the mental well-being of our readership to keep them comfortably in the dark?I would ask you one more time to reconsider your position while there is still meaningful time.We would all like one more shot at an opinion piece for these crucial local elections.Sincerely,Gary
I do agree with Gary. However, the Signal policy has a clear purpose in stopping "drive-bys"-
From John Zaring:attack pieces that cannot be addressed before an election. That makes sense.And, let's face it. This affects everyone equally. Lila and Jason are not being preferential.I appreciate their wise and enlightened leadership.
From John Zaring:Steve,Just to be clear, since I launched this conversation, I was not suggesting the policy didn’t affect both sides equally. In my opinion though, that just makes it bad for both sides.And with regard to attack pieces, the easy way to avoid “drive-bys” is for the Signal to judge a column based upon the merits of what’s in the column. The editors have the option to edit it, or not run it. In my opinion, Carl Goldman’s treatise is a blatantly uncorroborated “drive-by”, and a long one at that.And finally, since you’ve shockingly elected to bring Congressman McKeon into what heretofore had been a private, internal conversation among Signal columnists and their editors, I’ve now copied Lee Rogers, as well as Rich Simmons of the LA Times. Wow …Have a nice evening!
From Lori Rivas:Steve,My apologies, I just noticed that it was Gary Horton who brought the Congressman into our internal conversation. I’m still appalled.Rich,Likewise, I see that by writing this in the near-midnight hour, I butchered your last name. Simon, not Simmons. I knew that ... Sorry!Good-night moon,jz
And that's the last email in the chain, so far.I join you, John, in being appalled. Good to know this is now a public forum.I concur with both John and Gary sentiments. An intelligent and thought-provoking opinion piece based on facts is exactly what I look for in a newspaper, especially during election season; is this not the essence of an opinion page? To sort through the issues of the day?Hi Lee. Hi Rich.Loriwho is so tempted to add her own pals into the conversation
It's interesting to note that not only has The Signal re-published Carl Goldman's piece refuting the claims of Mark Archuleta & attacking Lee Rogers for the mess his layoffs created, but just today, the paper has published Kevin Korenthal's endorsement of Scott Wilk, Todd Zink, Steve Knight, Alan Jackson, and Buck McKeon.
On Friday, less than a week before the election.
Yet the paper gives the Schaff't to Gary Horton and won't publish his endorsement of Lee Rogers. It seems this rule only applies to liberals, or perhaps more specifically, to columnists who want to endorse Lee Rogers.
Now to be fair, a former Signal journalist emailed me yesterday to say that Schaff's policy wasn't new:
Regarding The Signal's "no more endorsements" pronouncement, it's nothing new. The same practice was in place when I was at El Signal. I'm not weighing in on whether or not it's a good practice, I just think it's fair to note that this isn't some new, draconian measure conjured up in the paper's Free Speech Dungeon by Jason Schaff.That's fine if this policy has been in use for before, but it's definitely not being equally applied. Review the email sequence yourself. The policy was only announced when Horton's piece was ready to run.
What a pathetic local media we have. Good journalists like Carol Rock are thrown under the bus while management apologizes to Buck McKeon's office over coverage. And good local columnists -who, let's remember, write columns for little or no money!- get spiked and muted if they endorse the wrong guy.
Have you ever seen such cowardice before? When you go to J-school or even take a couple of journalism classes like I did, you learn about the heroes of the craft, people like Woodward & Bernstein, or war correspondents. Fearless writers, publishers, and editors who server the truth no matter the cost.
What we have in town is like the inverse of that. Our local media is told what the truth will be, and then force their writers to comply. If they don't comply, they're fired or muted. It's disgusting.
-----------------