Plain Dealer Reader Rep Ted Diadiun Runs Away From Blogfight: 'I'm Sorry I Bothered'

CLEVELAND (TDB) -- Jeff Jarvis at Buzzmachine deconstructs a Sunday column by Ted Diadiun, The Plain Dealer readers' rep. Diadiun contends the newspaper's experimental and now dead political blog Wide Open expired over ethical conflicts. When the newspaperman jumped into the Buzzmachine comments section trying to clarify what happened, Jarvis then gave
Diadiun even more heat as an apologist and cheap shot artist. Rather than slug it out and defend his position, Diadiun retreated from the online confrontation. His final words, "OK, I'm sorry I bothered."

Diadiun's response, unfortunately, comes off like this: If I don't get the last word, I quit. And that's disturbing, because newspapers and newspaper people need to adapt to the new media and forums, they need to enjoy the mixing it up and duking it out, the collision of divergent opinions. Diadiun's retreat to his corner before the bell resembles a cry of "no mas, no mas."

The link to Jeff Jarvis' blog is above in the first paragraph. The exhange of comments starts here:


Ted Diadiun Says: November 7th, 2007 at 7:41 pm
Jeff,
I’d like to clarify something, if I may:
You commented that “they (the Plain Dealer) see this as a story of control,” and offer as proof a quote from my column that, “in general, the bloggers did what he (Dubail) wanted them to do.”
But that statement didn’t mean the bloggers generally did Dubail’s bidding — it meant, as I noted earlier in a part of the column you didn’t quote, that the bloggers’ mission was to “opine daily about the political scene, play off each other and generate response from fellow online politics junkies. They got free rein on what they could write.” THAT’s what Dubail wanted them to do, and that’s what they did.
This was never an issue of control or political pressure. It was always about long-standing newspaper ethical concerns, about conflict of interest. The bloggers were never told they couldn’t comment about whatever political issues they wanted, never were censored. It was only after the newspaper discovered that one (and later, two) bloggers had contributed money to political campaigns that they were told they couldn’t write about those campaigns while being paid to write on a Plain Dealer blog.
That separation is so well established in the newspaper world that it usually goes without saying. But with this arrangement, those ground rules should have been discussed up front. Quite simply, it occurred to no one — not the editors and I will take on faith not the bloggers — that it would be a problem.
Everyone feels bad about this. I think that reasonable people can disagree, as you and I do, about whether the newspaper should have established different ethical guidelines for the Web site that would have acknowledged the bloggers “involvement and transparency,” as you put it.
That is a discussion worth having. I think it’s too bad that the discussion degenerated instead into conspiracy theories about political pressure and why The Plain Dealer “really” took the steps it did.
The Plain Dealer makes congressmen angry all the time, and publishes many stories they hate. To imagine that some complaints from a congressman could bully the newspaper into silencing a blogger is ludicrous.

Jeff Jarvis Says: November 7th, 2007 at 8:20 pm
Sorry, Ted, but that’s utter crap, complete bull.
You say that your rules “go without saying.” Apparently so. You hired bloggers with clear opinions who are involved in their communities but then when you find that they contributed to campaigns — which in any other quarter would be considered a mark of civic participation — you accuse them of being unethical. That is grossly insulting. You are imposing YOUR standards on the perfectly normal and acceptable behavior of citizens whom you hired to be citizens. But you didn’t know what to do with it.
i found your column appalling. You can keep denying your meme about political pressure. But the bottom line here is that you revealed yourself to be utterly clueless about blogging and citizenship, You didn’t try to listen or learn. You imposed your worldview on them.
You embarrass me.

Ted Diadiun Says: November 7th, 2007 at 8:43 pm
Et tu, eh? I thought that here at least, we could have disagreement without personal attack.

More Wide Open Mopin': Do Tell Other Names Considered

CINCINNATI (TDB) -- Jill Miller Zimon is still storm tracking the F-5 cyclone that roared through the 'sphere and blew the roof off Wide Open last week. But there is something still unsaid. What other names were considered for the flattened Plain Dealer-financed homestead that was shared by the MSM and indy bloggers? Was it always to be Wide Open? Or something saucier?

Somewhere along the line, I recall reading that Jill was not exactly sold on the nameplate that wound up gracing the experiment on Cleveland.com. At least, that is what I think I recall. Maybe Wide Open was jinxed from the start. Sailors believe names are important. Ships with unsuitable names are thought unseaworthy; they risk the lives of their crew and can disappear under the waves at the mere hint of a ripple.

The bloggers who no longer blog for the newspaper all used clever or stolid names for their personal sites -- Nixguy and Bizzyblog and Ohio Daily and Writes Like She Talks. Wide Open always seemed a little weak compared to monikers like those.

Another Midwest Newspaper Blogger Axed: Indy Star Says He Went Too Far

CINCINNATI (TDB) -- The crash landings seem to be outnumbering the takeoffs. While the Ohiosphere fulminated over the departures of indy bloggers Jill Zimon and Jeff Coryell from The Plain Dealer's now closed Wide Open, there was another ugly episode involving newspaper blogging at the metro daily in Indianapolis. An African American editorial writer at the Indianapolis Star was sent packing for what his newsroom bosses considered a racially crude posting about a city official, who also is black.

RiShawn Biddle's attack on the city and county council president was quickly pulled down from Expresso, the paper's blog. Expresso went decaf. The Star's editor, Dennis Ryerson, put up a note that apologized and said the comments "did not meet the standards of the Star." Ryerson has a tie to The Plain Dealer -- years ago he was the newspaper's editoral page editor, a post now held by Brent Larkin.

Former Star Columnist Ruth Holladay said on her own blog that the paper ran into trouble when it tried to take the muzzle off a writer. He bit somebody. So the muzzle is back.

"With so few blacks working at the Star, Ryerson and Co. now have a real credibility crisis on their hands. They let Biddle unleash; now they have to put the muzzle back on and make nice with the brothers and sisters. Will they fire RiShawn? Or will he just 'disappear' for another six months. What a crazy place."

While the Indy incident and the Cleveland uproar are different -- nobody says the Ohio bloggers used inappropriate language -- they do share a theme. Newspapers get wigged out by stuff that the blogosphere seems to be able to take in stride. Harsh language, insults, political action by bloggers, the list goes on, and it is recognized for what it is -- the detonations, loud noise, mixing of volatile compounds and personalities and issues on a non-print platform. The 'sphere is raw and for percussion. Bloggers don't seem to flinch when politicians, be they congressmen in the Cleveland suburbs or council chiefs in Indianapolis, send messages of aggrievement. Editors seem to take the complaints more seriously, some would say too seriously.

This week two big Midwest newspapers folded in the face of controversy stirred up by bloggers. The press wants a launch on the Web, but it gets nervous, leery, and freezes at the stick instead of juicing the afterburners.

OH-14 Steve LaTourette: No Pressure From GOP Congressman In Dem Blogger Firing

CLEVELAND (TDB) -- Capitol Hill insiders insist Republican U.S. Rep. Steven C. LaTourette did not pull strings with top newsroom managers at The Plain Dealer to have a Democratic critic in the Ohio blogosphere sacked. The blogger, Jeff Coryell, was ousted from his post Tuesday as a paid contributor to Wide Open. There have been numerous reports saying LaTourette used his influence to have Coryell bounced. Another of the Democratic bloggers on Wide Open, Jill Miller Zimon quit today in solidarity with Coryell and said the fact she had given money to Democrats in Ohio would probably limit her freedom to say what she wanted on the newspaper's site.

Sacking Coryell is generating a blogstorm, with critics (mostly Democrats) lining up to say LaTourette had him dumped. Although the congressman has widely been portrayed as the heavy, sources The Daily Bellwether spoke to all agreed that LaTourette did not ask for a firing, played no role in the sacking of Coryell, did not express anger, nor put pressure on the newspaper or threaten it in any way. The sources do agree that LaTourette spoke to The Plain Dealer's editorial page editor, Brent Larkin, briefly earlier this month about Coryell's work appearing on the newspaper's Web site. Coryell's name reportedly came up when Federal Election Commission campaign finance records were made public, and LaTourette mentioned to Larkin that Coryell had given money to the congressman's Democratic opponent, former Ohio Court of Appeals Judge William O'Neill. LaTourette is supposed to have said something like "what's up with that" during a brief chat, but did not suggest or demand that Coryell be fired, the sources say.

According to the insiders, the seven-term congressman -- whose district includes the eastern suburbs of Cleveland and Akron in a region near the Lake Erie shoreline known as Ohio's snowbelt -- never met formally with anyone at The Plain Dealer about Coryell. They added that he did not send an email or a letter of complaint, nor did he meet with The Plain Dealer's editor Susan Goldberg.

"Absolutely did not ask for anyone to be fired," is how one insider put it, and said the only conversation LaTourette had about Wide Open was with Larkin.

The insiders say that Larkin could back up their accounts, and that they expect and hope he will write something describing The Plain Dealer's handling of Coryell's ouster. They said it should help remove suspicions that the congressman pressured the newspaper.

One source said "there's nothing, nada. He didn't ask to have anybody fired. The only person he spoke to was Larkin and it was just a remark that the blogger had given money to his opponent, something like $200. I don't think that is out of bounds or pressure, to wonder what's up."

These insiders also say that LaTourette never spoke to Jean Dubail, the newspaper's online editor. They contend that anything Dubail told Coryell about the congressman would not have come from the congressman.

So far, LaTourette has not spoken publicly, nor has his office issued any kind of statement. Perhaps he never will. But if the story grows legs -- that a Cleveland area congressman was able to lean on his hometown newspaper and get someone fired -- he'll probably have to speak out and describe his version of what happened.