Andrew Warner

I am Callinan and, yes Andrew you are correct that I don't have the time or inclination to blog these days. But I respect your respectful challenges of mainstream media and I will respond. We make hundreds of decisions each day and while the blogosphere may want to pick each to shreds and dig for hidden agendas....sometimes we just have to publish the news and hold our noses and wish for the good old days when public discourse was more dignified. This story disgusted many...including me. But the facts are the facts, distasteful as they may be. Several editors agonized over the play of this story...and I imagine they come from all spectrums of "agendas." In the end, news is news. End of story.

Callinan, no one believes that bullshit when you put it in the Enquirer, and no one believes it here.

Try to make friends with Andrew Warner by leaving flattering comments on his blog, but no one is falling for your nonsense.

Facts are facts, which include the editorial decisions made in writing headlines, or secondary headlines.

The verb "links" is a strong verb which connotes concrete connectivity.

Here are a couple of options your paper did NOT choose:

-Blackwell turns to negative attacks, makes offensive accusations.

-Blackwell resorts to insults, innuendo

You also can't have it both ways, Callinan. On the one hand, your comment indicates that people in your business make "hundreds of decisions each day" -- almost as if we should not hold you accountable because you think you have a large workload. (BTW, we've been reading The Enquirer, Callinan, and we hardly think the decisions you've been making are the sort that really bog down someone's psyche -- "Should we run another Giovanni piece about the word 'bitch,' or should we cover some real news?")

At the same time you complain about your workload, you say that there is no "agenda" behind how you frame news. Yet, you go on to state that "several editors agonized over the play" of this story. Then you conclude with a cliche -- news is news -- and apparently you think you have made some kind of point.

But you are wrong, again. Don't have us expect to feel sorry for your hundreds of decisions, stating they have no agenda -- only to say that several editors agonized over a single decision, consider the spin-potential of that decision.

Either The Enquirer's decisions are deliberative, circumspect, or the decisions are based on whim, a complete lack of thought, and mindlessness.

Either way, you lose. Again.

Now crawl back to your cubicle and count the days till Gannett reassigns you to another paper to ruin.

Dean,

I think you made some good points. Especially in regard to the diction choices.

I don't, however, see how Callinan engaging a piece of criticism is "leaving flattering comments" on my blog. I raised a question and he tried to answer it. I don't see that as something that raises motive questions.

I'd like to hear discussion on other parts of your criticism though.

As usual, we were just about to have a civil, constructive conversation here before the Dean showed up and started throwing around ad hominem attacks.

I don't mean this as a defense of our decision. Perhaps it's just a commentary on our culture, for better or worse. But I checked the online traffic this morning and the governor's race turns ugly story led with 33,071 page views. Next was the gatorade bottle story with 12,278. The nude prosecuter got 7,708. Way down was a traditional high interest story....the Ohio AP football poll with 2,711.

As much as we may cringe at seeing these smarmy political stories unfold, it'd be pretty difficult for us to downplay them.

Thought you'd be interested in those numbers.

Callinan, the headlines said "predators" and "gay" -- of course it got more online clicks. Hell, you probably got some early morning porn traffic from the porn-bots or some lonely guy using Google to find his morning relief.

So, what is it? "News is news," or "anything for a click?"

What is your responsibility? Have you any, or does the bottom line of your journalistic ethic end at delivering advertisers to consumers?

I mean, that's all your advisory panel covers. I answered about twenty questions about what model car I would be likely to drive, and which car layout I found more pleasing, before your computer figured out my answers were inconsistent and booted me off the server.

Go check the CincyNewsAche blog. One of your own is spreading the word about how bad it is inside your newsroom. Your own employees are turning on you, Callinan.

But be careful about what kind of memos you send to threaten them. They just might find their way to my inbox.

Andrew, I was just referring to his line, "But I respect your respectful challenges of mainstream media and I will respond."

I don't believe it. I have made plenty of "respectful challenges." The problem is that when Callinan realizes he's about to get busted for his nonsense, he becomes non-responsive.

I do remember, however, how he said on his old blog that he remembers the days when angry people would just barge right into his office.

Your dream may still come true one day, Callinan. I've got the passion for it, brother.

Mr. Callinan, I respect the fact that you're responding to these criticisms.

I don't think the coverage was good and that it's legitimate news. A legitimate news story would be Ken Blackwells role in the unprcedented and massive disenfranchisement of African Americans. This is well documented and not by the Enquirer.

Blackwell's conflict of interests in his role of SOS/b and candidate. His failure to disclose his tax records and explain how he became a multi-millionaire as a public servant.

I have seen some improvement in your political coverage. You did give some time to the independents, though still not enough.

It's unfortunate that media outlets cover the horse race more than the issues. I hope to see more improvement in this regard, but thought it should be pointed out when there is some small improvements.

Never forget we citizens need the fourth estate to question those in power. Our democracy and your career depends on it.

The fact is that the Enquirer chose to emphasize Blackwell's accusations for days on end. It wasn't just one sensational story. It was a series that gave weight to the unbelieveable sleaze coming from the Blackwell campaign. And to endorse Blackwell just proves the point.