Posted on 09/28/2001 7:33:27 AM PDT by gdani
SEPTEMBER 27, 2001
Columnists Fired After Criticizing Bush
Publishers Won't Tie Decisions To Columns
By Joel Davis
SACRAMENTO, Calif. -- Two columnists for dailies in Texas and Oregon have been fired after writing pointed opinion pieces critical of President Bush's handling of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks on the United States.
Columnist Dan Guthrie, an employee of the Grants Pass, Ore., Daily Courier since 1991, and Tom Gutting, 23, city editor for the Texas City (Texas) Sun since June, were fired within days of writing columns that incited overwhelmingly negative reader response. Both papers apologized in print for the columns.
Publishers at both dailies would not say if the columns led directly to the firings, but they appear to have played central roles, especially at the Texas City Sun, where Gutting wrote, among other things, that Bush on Sept. 11 "was flying around the country like a scared child seeking refuge in his mother's bed after having a nightmare."
While Publisher Les Daughtry Jr. declined to discuss Gutting's firing, he did write a Page One apology in the 5,966-circulation, Southern Newspapers Inc.-owned Sun as well as an Op-Ed piece titled, "Bush's leadership has been superb."
Although Gutting regrets not showing the column to the publisher or managing editor before it appeared, he told E&P it was not required, which Daughtry acknowledged in the apology. Gutting added that this was his first newspaper job, that he was routinely allowed to write columns that went into the paper unseen by colleagues, that he was "encouraged to write controversial stuff," and that he "really believes" he was fired because of the column, though he said he was not given a specific reason.
In Grants Pass, newsroom veteran Guthrie was let go after penning an acerbic column for the 16,987-circulation, family-owned Daily Courier titled, "When the going gets tough, the tender turn tail" that criticizes a variety of people, especially Bush.
Both Publisher Dennis Mack and Editor Dennis Roler denied that the column specifically led to Guthrie's ouster, though Roler -- who read the column before it was printed and then wrote an opinion-page apology after it ran -- conceded it played a role. "We shouldn't go after somebody personally when talking about public policy. If you descend to that level, it shouldn't be a level we operate at," Roler said. Guthrie could not be reached by E&P.
Ironically, a Walter Lippmann quotation that currently sits atop the Daily Courier Web site (http://www.thedailycourier.com) reads, "The theory of a free press is that truth will emerge from free discussion, not that it will be presented perfectly and instantly in any one account."
Ethics and First Amendment experts contacted by E&P said that while the newspapers had the right to fire the columnists and write apologies, they were concerned that doing so sends a message that unpopular or dissenting views may not be tolerated.
"Certainly, the editors and publishers have a right to demand a certain kind of content in their newspapers," said Paul McMasters, First Amendment ombudsman for the Freedom Forum. "But once they've given permission to an individual on staff to express opinions, then generally the widest latitude is given."
Aly Colon, a member of the ethics faculty at the Poynter Institute in St. Petersburg, Fla., voiced a similar opinion, while also questioning the wisdom of letting columns into the paper unseen by a second pair of eyes, as was the case in Texas. "I think that's unfair to [Gutting]," he said. "All writers benefit in some fashion from an editor's feedback."
Quick - does the first amendment guarantee the right to have a space in a newspaper?
I'm sure CNN is hiring.
These guys stepped over the line in a market that isn't fond of anti-Americanism, especially at a time like this.
Those of you who refuse to understand that things have changed, need to get a clue. P.C. is OUT.
When someone employed by a paper writes something that the public finds objectionable, the newspaper needs to respond, otherwise it loses customers.
That is not comparable at all to the Taliban, where the government forcibly dictates what is acceptable or not, and imprisons or kills those who speak out against the regime. These authors still can write, they still can speak, they just cannot use the papers which used to employ them as their microphone for their speech.
No. But I sure hope this doesn't become a pattern. If firing people for being criticial of the president becomes widespread, we will effectively have censorship ... albeit self-imposed (out of fear). This will work the same way the Left has successfully silenced people criticial of homosexuals, etc. By making people "pay a price" for speaking un-PC things, writers begin to censor themselves. When writers begin to do that, we all lose. We need a marketplace of ideas that freely flow.
Thank you for expressing the idea so well. Why do so many others have trouble understanding it??
This is the part I don't understand. They read it before it was printed, then fired him for it. Was he set up?
You should really think before you write. Idiocy is not a form of intellect. They were fired because their columns were too stupid and their judgement was bad. Happens all the time. Also, freedom of speech means no prior restraint by the government. It doesn't mean the owner of a newspaper can't fire an editorial writer.
It's no wonder The Bee would be interested. If idiocy became grounds for dismissal, most of the entire staff would be forced to fire themselves.
Dan
Political criticism is one thing. Name-calling and outright distortion of the facts is another. The newspapers were probably telling the truth when they said that the columnists were not fired because of articles criticizing Bush just after 9/11. Anybody who would write such tripe about 9/11 probably has a pattern of yellow journalism. There were probably looking for a reason to get rid of them anyway.
Why (again) the double standard?
Because the press is not liberal.
The press is Jack Welch, Rupert Murdoch and Roger Ailes.
Dan
The press is Jack Welch, Rupert Murdoch and Roger Ailes.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA STOP IT YOURE KILLING ME!!! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
No -- as no one can mention a single time when a reporter has been fired for saying bad things about Bush.
And you can say "The press is not liberal," or just wear a T-shirt saying "I am an idiot who has learned nothing in the last twenty years."
I see you already made your choice.
Dan
Nothing has changed. In fact, it has gotten worse. Bush is more interested in hate crimes than action.
Only an absolute idiot, like yourself, would believe that the president of the US stepped in to get a guy fired from a paper with a circulation of 5,966.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.