Bent: I’ll Take Peck Over Smith

27 comments on this post so far. Add yours!

• 

  Fishwife on March 25 at 8:45 a.m.

  Peck: Professionalism; good employee morale
  Smith: Sensationalism; dictatorial style

• 

  moscow_minidoka on March 25 at 9:32 a.m.

  So, is this why the coverage and services towards subscribers on the Palouse has evaporated over the past 5 years? Can I blame Smith?

• 

  DFO on March 25 at 9:42 a.m.

  >Can I blame Smith? — Moscow Minidoka<

  I consider Smith’s decision to pull back so much in North Idaho to be the worst that he made in his time with the SR. I understand, of course, that the economy and state of the newspaper industry were also factors in decisions to down-size. But our retreat in North Idaho didn’t have to be so deep. Nor was it handled properly. Kootenai County is Spokane County’s playground. There’s a great deal of interest in eastern Washington in the Coeur d’Alene area. On the other hand, Smith deserves full credit for allowing me to grow Huckleberries Online. His vision for online newspapering and this blog must be considered before anyone reaches for the tar and feathers.

• 

  JeanieSpokane on March 25 at 9:49 a.m.

  I totally agree with Fishwife - btw fantastic avatar!

• 

  moscow_minidoka on March 25 at 9:57 a.m.

  DFO - I don’t intend to reach for the tar and feathers… but for the last 9 months, every time I pick up the SR from my porch and find North Idaho news (or Betsy Russell’s articles) buried on page A9 or whatnot, I think to myself “Why am I still subscribing to this stupid newspaper?” When first started subscribing to the SR, it proudly said The IDAHO Spokesman-Review on the masthead of my edition. Some guy named “Oliveria” wrote for the “Handle” section. As I’ve complained before, we in Moscow are now the red-headed stepchildren, and don’t get a “Voice,” or anything that DFO writes - not in print, anyhow.

  The SR is engaged in a death spiral, and it is THEIR OWN FAULT! They have made cuts that reduced the quality of the newspaper, leading people to cancel subscriptions, leading the SR to reduce coverage, leading people to cancel subscriptions, etc. As I’ve said before, the only things keeping me subscribing are the comics and the fact that I know enough about what’s going on in Spokane to make small talk with my in-laws who live there.

• 

  Bent on March 25 at 9:54 p.m.

  DFO, you are right. Smith deserves credit for leaving YOU alone and alowing YOU to transition an already “must-read” column (which easily could be defined as a prehistoric blog) into the blogosphere. But Smith’s involvement with HBO began as a classic example of:

  “If, at first, you do succeed, try to hide your astonishment…”

  Smith lucked out and inherited some incredibly developed journalistic talent. Problem is his ego wouldn’t let him see it, so he couldn’t figure out how to use it right… In fact, he ruined a lot of it. I thank Goodness, that he was on his way out the door just as he started to seriously monkey around with HBO…

• 

  Sam on March 25 at 10:04 p.m.

  I think Bent has blinders on in terms of this whole thing (considering how he views the West stories as a dude just being a different orientation, which wasn’t the story, but he keeps ignoring that) but I do flat-out agree that Smith and Cowles did bad, bad things when they pulled out of N. Idaho. It was a perfect market to expand into, they weren’t at all aggressive enough nor really tried to really market the talent in the N. Idaho office. I was lucky enough to see it with my own eyes and honestly I was probably out of my league being there.

  Nobody held a candle to the N. Idaho bureau. At all.

  You had Hagadone’s advertising reps lying to people saying the Spokesman was dying, etc. with DFO trying to disprove rumors only for Smith et al to make those remarks prophetic, and that sucks.

  But I still disagree with Bent on the overall STORY of the West coverage. Like I said the other day, I”m iffy on how the story was obtained, but you’re flat-out ignoring what the story actually was, sir.

• 

  Bent on March 25 at 10:20 p.m.

  “…which wasn’t the story” — Sam

  You’re right sam. Frontline got the ONLY story on this subject in my opinion. An editor made his newpaper the story because he couldn’t get the story he thought he had. That’s not journalism the way I learned it. Someday you’ll see that…

• 

  Sam on March 25 at 10:33 p.m.

  No I won’t, Bent, because I’m not a child. I’m literally a professional in this industry and, I know you think I’ll always be green, but I’m pretty good what I do. And I’m not an idiot.

  The story was gifts being given to people a public official was hitting on.

  That is not ethical, and that’s news.

  You refuse to see that. And I suppose we’ll never agree.

• 

  Ron_the_Cop on March 25 at 10:35 p.m.

  Just thought I would say hi:-) I guess I’m back from the “undead.” Neither are on the top of my dance card. Peck called former Spokane Mayor Talbott a civic terrorist. That was over the line. As for Mr. Smith I do miss our debates. But I did caution him his days were numbered:-)

• 

  Bent on March 25 at 11:26 p.m.

  “The story was gifts being given to people a public official was hitting on.” — Sam

  Sam, so who did the SR get on the record? Who actually recieved a gift from West for sexual favors and went on the record in an SR story?

  Sure the SR had a hired investigator on the record, who was paid to catch the mayor in the act. And yes, if you believe the transcripts, West alluded to taking an intern on a lobby trip to DC.

  But I missed the part where that intern spoke on the record with the SR saying he did it in return for sex, or the part where West told the investigator that he would give him and internship in return for sex.

  Oh and then there was the guy who was offered $100 to swim across a pool naked, but he didn’t do it. He was also allegedly offered a lucrative job, but he didn’t take it. He ASSUMED he would have to have sex with West to get the job. He also said he was put off by West’s politics, hmmm. Of course West denied any of this happened, but considering what the paid investigator insinuated, don’t you want to believe the worst?

  Who exactly was it that actually went on the record saying they took a gift from West in return for sex? I missed that story.

  I am not saying West was innocent. I never have, Sam. Never. I’m saying the Spokesman did not have anything more than a bunch of highly sensational inuendos.

  If you want to see how a REAL editor managed a much larger but REAL story of the same nature, study the Statesman’s handling of the Larry Craig story. They had a source before they ran with it…

  For the record … you called me out on this one, Sam. And I haven’t called you a cub for awhile now, but I would suggest you leather up a bit. If you are the seasoned reporter you claim to be, you wouldn’t have to declare it here. You’d just show it…

  Sam, I see more than you give me credit for. Before you start accusing me of slipping on the blinders on, I suggest you ask yourself this: am I really the one who has the blinders on?

• 

  Sam on March 25 at 11:38 p.m.

  Bent, I’ll keep disagreeing with you on this, and when I have time I’ll respond in kind. but i’m not at all saying I’m seasoned as a journalist. I just letting you know I’m not stupid. And nobody has to be a reporter to have reading comprehension skills. I just don’t like you treating me or anyone else like we’re stupid because we don’t agree with you on this simply because you’re pissed at how Smith treated the Idaho newsroom. Look, I don’t like it either, but it doesn’t cloud everything I think about the people that worked at the S-R while Smith did. Most of them worked there before he got there. And that’s how I look at it. I also still think he was a good editor who allowed for aggressive reporting and accountability. How much money did the S-R spend on public records lawsuits before Smith (that’s an honest question, actually, I’m not saying they spent more than Peck, because I don’t know. But I’d like to learn that stat).

  And yes, I totally called you out. I’m not sure why you bringing that up matters. I’m calling you out because I enjoy the discussion and nothing more, Bent. I’m not trying to insult you, but you have an opinion on this that I like to learn about and want to engage you in. That’s all.

• 

  Bent on March 25 at 11:40 p.m.

  BTW, Sam. I am not the one trying to argue with you lately as you stated on another thread. We may have different views on certain issues, and I’ll poke fun at you, but I still consider you a friend.

  I would suggest you re-read who is calling who out lately. I can count two threads where you specifically called me out tonight.

  Sam I don’t begrudge someone for having a different opinion from me, and I rarely challenge someone’s OPINION — until they attempt to discredit or dismiss mine

• 

  Bent on March 25 at 11:47 p.m.

  Sam, my opinions of the reporters at the SR have nothing to do with Smith. I have personal experiences that go way back with one of those reporters I mentioned, and I have good reason for what I said. I am glad you like them … I am sorry if you are upset that I don’t like that reporter or Smith.

« Back to Huckleberries Online

• ›Scanner traffic