By: Joe Strupp The ombudsman of The Blade in Toledo, Ohio reported Sunday that the paper?s lengthy story on the investigation into a former reporter drew little reaction from readers.
He also indicated the paper deserved some of the criticism it received for choosing to run the investigation itself instead of utilizing outside journalists, as some other papers have done in similar situations. But he gave the paper equal credit for presenting a lengthy report on the incident.
Jack Lessenberry, a Michigan college instructor who writes on newspaper issues for the paper, said the 3,200-word story in the May 28 paper about recently fired scribe George Tanber drew some mixed comment from other journalists, but hardly any from Blade readers.
?Every time The Blade writes one word about Hillary Clinton, I hear about it. When the paper publishes a picture showing too much cleavage, forgets to list the political party of some indicted official, or says anything at all about Israel or the Palestinians, I hear about it,? Lessenberry wrote Sunday. ?But I heard very little from ordinary Toledoans about the long report last Sunday into the investigation that led to the firing of longtime reporter George Tanber. Other journalists wrote and called me. Some admired our candor and were shocked that a reporter would betray his colleagues.
?Others complained that the investigation was headed by our investigations editor and thought The Blade should have hired an independent outsider to run it. The rank-and-file readers, however, said nothing, and I think I know why,? he continued. ?Virtually no other profession -- perhaps no other, in the private sector -- feels the need to give a public accounting of its failings. And contrary to popular opinion, few professions are as honest, as ethical, and moral as is journalism. Certainly journalists worry and argue and agonize over being honest and ethical and fair and moral all the time, far more than you might think. They are constantly checking and double-checking facts, and examining their own consciences and those of their colleagues for fairness.?
The self-investigation followed the firing of Tanber, a 14-year Blade veteran, who had written an anonymous letter to the Pulitzer Prize board in March alleging that some aspects of the paper?s ?Coingate? series had been tainted. Tanber alleged that Blade editors had known about some elements of the scandal up to a year before they were reported.
Tom Noe, a longtime state GOP fundraiser, was at the heart of the story, having lost millions of dollars in state funds through a rare coin investment scheme that went sour. Noe, who has been convicted on a number of charges related to the sandal, also came under investigation for allegedly laundering campaign contributions to President Bush?s 2004 campaign.
Tanber?s letter accused the Blade, and especially former politics reporter Fritz Wenzel, of holding off on elements of both stories until after the 2004 election. The ?Coingate? series was a finalist for the Public Service Pulitzer when the anonymous letter was written, but did not win, losing out to the Sun Herald of Biloxi, Miss. and the Times-Picaynue of New Orleans for their Hurricane Katrina coverage.
After the Pulitzers were announced, Blade Editor Ron Royhab revealed the anonymous letter, as well as the Blade?s response to Pulitzer officials. Both Royhab and Pulitzer Administrator Sig Gissler have said they did not believe the letter impacted the final prizes. Still, Royhab launched an internal investigation into who had written the letter, which ended nearly two weeks ago when Tanber revealed he had written it. He was fired two days later.
Last week?s report alleged that Tanber had been a disgruntled employee who had previous problems at the paper. Tanber, who was apparently not sought for comment by Lessenberry, has denied such an approach, claiming he simply wanted to call the paper?s actions to attention.
In his column today, Lessenberry offers blame to both Tanber and the Blade, stating, ?The editors of The Blade pretty much let it all hang out, in the report written by Dave Murray and published last Sunday. What is most admirable about that effort is that it doesn't make The Blade look blameless.
?You can read that report, as I did, and conclude that the editors did not ask enough hard questions about Fritz Wenzel's objectivity and fairness,? he continued. ?You can read that report, as I did, and wonder why George Tanber hadn't been more severely disciplined for his behavior earlier. You can disagree with other parts of that investigation, but I don't think you can conclude that The Blade doesn't care about fairness and accuracy and serving the public. And that's why I am proud to be associated with it.?
Comments
No comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here