Say Anything Blog

After self paragraphs of self-serving nonsense about the objectivity of the media, and how hard it is to determine how important an event like the tea party would be before it actually happens.  As if the 750 - 800 people who attended tea parties in the state on tax day weren’t indication enough.  The Tribune puts this defense of itself under the headline “Charges of bias concerning Tea Party are off base,” yet in the editorial itself they claim that in hindsight it maybe would have been a good idea to have a reporter on scene.

Which kind of indicates that the criticism was, in fact, “on base” no?

Here’s the crux of the the Tribune’s defense of itself:

The Tribune covered the tea party “protest” on July 2 as it would most staged events, a brief announcement that it would be held and a photo and caption of the event, explaining that those in attendance were concerned about President Barack Obama and tax increases, the federal bailout, growth of government and government-run health care.

None of that was “good enough” for some of those in attendance. The Tribune, I was told, took a beating on a radio show and a few blogs. It seemed there was an orchestrated phone campaign to complain. Some callers blistered me with charges of personal and newspaper liberalism, so appalling it was forcing them to cancel their newspaper subscriptions.

We talked and I hope all decided to remain readers.

And here’s the kinda-sorta apology:

Our judgments are not always right. In hindsight, a reporter “covering” the Capitol tea party event would have been a good call, primarily because of the large turnout. But predicting, in advance, the number of people likely to attend an event is not an exact science. There are other considerations as well, including advance notice, staffing, other news of the day and fairness.

What’s funny is that the Tribune refers to the tea party as a “staged event” (what kind of a planned-in-advance event isn’t “staged”), and the response to their lack of coverage of it as “coordinated.”  As an organizer of the event I can tell you that, other than me (and maybe others involved, though I’m not specifically aware of that) encouraging people at the tea party and on the blog and on the radio to simply circumvent the traditional media.  Since the tea party I’ve answered numerous questions from readers and listeners about what we can do to get more coverage for conservative issues like the tea party in the traditional media, and my response was to stop trying.  Stop writing letters.  Stop commenting on their website.  Cancel your subscription.

We’ve been fighting this battle for so long that I don’t think it’s worth fighting any more.  So it’s time to ignore them.  Find other sources for your news and opinion, and stop waiting for a bunch of people who still think they’re the gatekeepers to what the public will and will not know about to stop pretending like they’re some paragons of objectivity and balanced reporting.

Kudos to the Tribune for at least admitting that they made a mistake in not covering the event.  But it’s clear that they’ve still got a lot to learn about this brave new world where the public is increasingly seeking non-traditional sources for information.

Oh, and next time maybe the Tribune can mention me by name instead of making anonymous allusions to “radio” and “blogs” as if they don’t know full well who I am.