1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Paper FOIAs Emails From Mayor's Office To Other Paper

Discussion in 'Journalism topics only' started by Flying Headbutt, Mar 12, 2008.

  1. Flying Headbutt

    Flying Headbutt Moderator Staff Member


    Interesting story, though nothing seemed too inappropriate to me.

    And here's a follow up from the Post's metro columnist.

  2. Stone Cane

    Stone Cane Member

    interesting story

    thanks for posting the links
  3. Interesting stuff. I've worked news, and had good relationships with the town officials I covered, but never that good. His editors must be pleased.
  4. MacDaddy

    MacDaddy Active Member

    Another fun FOIA is a request for all FOIAs filed during a particular period; sometimes it can be interesting to see what others (especially the competition) are looking into.
  5. It didn't seem inappropriate that the reporter only talked to a city hall-approved source on the superintendent story?

    I'm not arguing with you, but that was a bit over the line to me. I've been given stories ahead of time before, but not with such a restriction. Usually, we agree ahead of time when it's appropriate to start making phone calls.

    I understand the Post's point in the column - about the fact they can interview the other side on the next day - but for an entire day their story was intentionally one-sided.

    Other than that, it's fine but it still makes me a bit uncomfortable. Keep that crap out of emails.
  6. Flying Headbutt

    Flying Headbutt Moderator Staff Member

    Write, you're right, that original article was a bit glowing, just as the Mayor's office would prefer I'm sure. At the same time, that person has been the subject, continuously this year, of some of the biggest and most controversial news out of city hall ever since. So it was clearly a big deal, and a coup, to have this first before even the DC Council did.

    In fact, that's prime example number one of several instances where the Council thinks they've been getting ignored and bypassed by the mayor the same way Bush does to congress. So the next day they had the firestorm piece about some people questioning that person's experience, qualifications, and why so many people who should have known and been in on the process weren't, even after some promises were made. If I recall correctly, those two stories ended up balancing out over the course of two days. And since then it's been pretty even reporting as one big broohaha after another develops involving that issue.

    BTW, it's become kind of a joke that the mayor's office is always giving shit to the Post. He's Mr. Media, showing up pretty much where ever a camera might be to see him. On the other hand, while he has his faults, he does appear to get some shit done so it's not like he's all fluff.
  7. I guess my point is whenever you're giving someone preferential treatment, someone else is getting the shaft. So while the mayor gets his A1 scoop - the council doesn't get a word in. And when it's council's turn, they're expected to talk to a newspaper that not only helped the mayor keep his secret but kept them from making a comment about it.

    So didn't the Post become part of the firestorm story?
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page