Document Actions
Monday: ...What?
posted at 2008-03-10 21:55 | Last modified 2008-03-10 22:16
The N&O’s Michael Biesecker finally got an interview with the elusive Governor Mike Easley yesterday on Crane-Gate and the paper’s mental health series. From his article:
"Easley said he recently received a handwritten letter from [Odom] explaining why she didn't want to talk. When asked for a copy of the letter, which would be a public record under state law, Easley said he had dumped it in the trash.
"'I chunked it,' Easley said. 'When I read something, unless it's charts or something or budgetary stuff, when I read it I get rid of it. I throw it away.'"
Hold on. You’re in the middle of a firestorm over the collapse of the state’s mental health system. You fire a longtime, highly-respected agency spokesperson for, you say, convincing the former agency head not to talk to the press. You get a letter from that agency head in which she explains why she doesn’t want to talk to the press. You throw the letter away.
If the Governor’s version of the story is accurate, shouldn’t Odom’s letter have backed up his complaint about Crane’s involvement? If it did, why would he “chunk” it? Even if the letter came before the series ran, this expose should’ve been no surprise - the N&O’s been working on it for months. Easley had to know these questions would come up.
Am I the only one to whom this makes no sense? Or am I missing something here?
That said…
I was almost as bewildered by the testosterone oozing from yesterday’s column by N&O Exec Ed John Drescher. Easley needs to “man up”? Really? What does that look like? Would steroids help?
"Easley had a tenuous grasp of the facts and was churlish enough to limit three N&O reporters to one question each. He scolded one for asking a follow-up question.
"After 16 minutes of answering questions, he was gone."
The one-question thing is standard operating practice for Easley when there’s a room full of reporters with questions of their own That may seem churlish if you’re the N&O, but the rest of us generally appreciate the chance to ask a question without having to shout over the guys in the front row.
And 16 minutes? Sad to say, that’s pretty good. That’s the real story here – accessibility and transparency – and it’s a good story, too. But unfortunately, it’s getting lost in the "man-to-man" sideshow this saga’s become.
Holy (bleep)
The NYT reported this afternoon that the feds caught NY Gov. Eliot “The Crusader” Spitzer hooking up (on tape!) with Kristen, a “petite brunette American” call girl.
The complaint, available at the Times site, is even ickier. “Client #9” was apparently well-known to the girls at the Emperor Club VIP.
Wall St. is reportedly laughing its assets off. Rumor has it Spitzer’s resignation is imminent, though not as imminent as Fox News would have it. A Fox anchor announced this afternoon that Spitzer had already resigned.
Nope, not yet. But even if he isn’t charged with a crime (which is by no means certain), it’s hard to imagine he’ll survive the investigation, let alone Silda, his wife of 21 years and mother of his three daughters. She looked downright murderous at today’s press conference. Who could blame her?
Stop the Presses?
A breathless Reuters headline announced today that “Most Americans don’t read political blogs.” You’re shocked, right? The article says a new Harris poll found 56% percent of respondents said they never read political blogs, and 23% said they only read them occasionally.
Given that Reuters is in the traditional media biz, a little smugness about blogs is to be expected. But they missed the story, which is that 22% of respondents said they DO read political blogs on a regular basis (i.e. several times a month). The biggest demographic? Readers over 65, where regular readership is at 26%. (Dang, there goes my “fringe cred.”)
Granted, the poll is very iffy. It’s an online poll, so it isn’t a reliable cross-section. And Harris, we’re informed, doesn’t calculate a margin of error because it might be “misleading.” (You could say that about some of its polls, too.) Still, it’s an interesting story, maybe less for the poll than for Reuter’s write-up of it.
Comments? Drop me a line.
