Edwards Vs. the N&O

The tension between John Edwards and The News & Observer goes back to the 1998 Senate race.



During that campaign, John and Elizabeth – along with some of their Washington consultants and gung-ho young staffers – believed the N&O was treating them unfairly.



They decided somebody should storm down to the paper’s offices, confront the tormentors and give them a piece of their minds.



I passed. The N&O’s coverage was fair. And I had seen how that kind of face-off usually turns out.



The Edwards staffers who went (Edwards did not go) made no headway. The N&O’s reporters and editors were – as one of them later told me – “loaded for bear.” The meeting produced only ill will.



Executive Editor John Drescher’s column Sunday makes clear that things did not improve:



“Our relationship with Edwards grew so strained, Rob Christensen said, that only our long-running grudge match with the late Jesse Helms could rival it.”



The N&O clearly is sensitive about how it handled rumors of Edwards’ affair. The paper is accused, alternately, of being too tough and too soft.



N&O staffers may also resent that The Charlotte Observer got credit for breaking the stories that forced Edwards to fess up, even though the stories also ran in the N&O and were produced by the papers’ joint political staff.



They should stop beating themselves up, as Edwards might say. They have nothing to apologize for in their coverage – both before and after Edwards’ confession.



And readers should chill out. Try putting out a daily paper that is all at once concise, comprehensive, informative and entertaining. Especially if you’re not sure you’ll have a job next week or next year.



What outsiders see as a media conspiracy is nearly always human error. And journalists usually admit error more quickly than politicians do.




Click Here to discuss and comment on this and other articles.

Avatar photo

Gary Pearce

Categories

Archives

Recent Posts

Edwards Vs. the N&O

The tension between John Edwards and The News & Observer goes back to the 1998 Senate race.



During that campaign, John and Elizabeth – along with some of their Washington consultants and gung-ho young staffers – believed the N&O was treating them unfairly.



They decided somebody should storm down to the paper’s offices, confront the tormentors and give them a piece of their minds.



I passed. The N&O’s coverage was fair. And I had seen how that kind of face-off usually turns out.



The Edwards staffers who went (Edwards did not go) made no headway. The N&O’s reporters and editors were – as one of them later told me – “loaded for bear.” The meeting produced only ill will.



Executive Editor John Drescher’s column Sunday makes clear that things did not improve:



“Our relationship with Edwards grew so strained, Rob Christensen said, that only our long-running grudge match with the late Jesse Helms could rival it.”



The N&O clearly is sensitive about how it handled rumors of Edwards’ affair. The paper is accused, alternately, of being too tough and too soft.



N&O staffers may also resent that The Charlotte Observer got credit for breaking the stories that forced Edwards to fess up, even though the stories also ran in the N&O and were produced by the papers’ joint political staff.



They should stop beating themselves up, as Edwards might say. They have nothing to apologize for in their coverage – both before and after Edwards’ confession.



And readers should chill out. Try putting out a daily paper that is all at once concise, comprehensive, informative and entertaining. Especially if you’re not sure you’ll have a job next week or next year.



What outsiders see as a media conspiracy is nearly always human error. And journalists usually admit error more quickly than politicians do.




Click Here to discuss and comment on this and other articles.

Avatar photo

Gary Pearce

Categories

Archives