Left In Lowell

Jim Campanini Declares War On Bloggers

by Lynne at 1:01 pm.

Mimi and Dick Howe had their say, I just have a few other points to make.

An editor that views his analysis via the lens of his personal relationships, and what is more, failing to disclose them so that readers can make up their own minds, is no editor, but a political being, pretending to be an editor. It’s a shame, because the talent at the Lowell Sun and their ability to create real journalism is quite impressive when they are not slapped down by Campanini.

It’s fun to watch the pot call the kettle black. The Column has ever and always published, in print format, in a supposedly reputable paper, unsubstantiated rumors and unsourced bull, some of which turns out to be completely false. Meanwhile, on this blog, I have only ever published items that I do have some sort of a reliable source for, that I’m confident about posting, and what’s more, have always made the disclaimer regarding said items, in order to make sure the reader has all the tools necessary to judge the commentary. (Maybe the Editor is still fuming about being scooped on Cox’s resignation?)

Any journalist knows that working with anonymous sources, and protecting them if need be, is par for the course. You’d prefer not to do it, but sometimes it’s the only way to get information from people who for one reason or another don’t want to go on the record. Of course, we here at LiL are no journalists - and have never claimed to be. So why do we have better journalistic standards than the editor of the local prominent newspaper, who had consistently made personal political choices in carrying out his editorial duties? Heck, he’d rather spend precious inches spitting baseless personal attacks in his Column rather than actually analyze election results.

Or rather, analyze election results in a reality-based fashion. Observe, as I swat down his points like so many miniature flies…

For more than a year, Left in Lowell bloggers greedily published undocumented negative rumors and unverified comments pertaining to Cox, while pushing the “professional” government of the pro-Lynch crowd.

Oops, already refuted (see above). I stand by what I’ve published, and the manner in which it was written…can the Lowell Sun say the same? As Mimi says, have they apologized to Councilor Elliot yet? Or countless others? And as for comments by readers, we are not responsible for them, though we try to moderate as much as possible without squashing the conversation. (Comments are a lot akin to Backtalk, aren’t they? Does the Sun endorse every view they publish from its readers?) Obviously, Campanini still hasn’t figured out how blogs really work.

And if we are for professional management, well, how horrible…I mean, we must be for puppies and lollipops too!

In the end, the bloggers’ blather for control of cyberminds — and votes — lacked credibility and had no impact. Every Cox candidate they blasted, except one, won council seats.

The most laughable point ever!! Campanini is so transparent it’s painful to watch - he must find a Cox-lined cloud in the election, because the alternative is unthinkable for him. First, he fails to acknowledge that every incumbent that ousted Cox got reelected, and those most associated with it, Mayor Bill Martin and Councilor Broderick, did really well. In fact, Mayor Martin got his highest finish ever - third - and he was most definitely in the cross hairs of the Cox crowd. Councilor Broderick, who has taken so many media (read: editor-driven) hits for his pre-election motion for a 2-year contract extension for Lynch, and who has a personal history of bucking the Coxians (so, double jeopardy), should have by all rights done poorly. Yet he came in 6th, very close to 5th, and 155 votes from fourth. Yup, a resounding rejection of professional city management all right.

What’s more, Campanini ignores the sheer money spent by the two challengers that won and their community visibility and their amount of time spent campaigning, on top of the fact they campaigned on being pro-Lynch after abandoning the earlier failing anti-Lynch strategy. All candidates won praising Lynch and the status quo this election. And the Lowell Sun, with a few notable exceptions, was complicit in allowing these candidates to blur the line between the camps. We got very little context, history, or analysis from the Sun. Could that be because its Editor had an agenda? Inquiring minds would love to know.

Jim Campanini is no editor. He’s a political bully, using his paper pulpit to punish anyone who dares question him, while promoting friends and allies. It’s as plain as the print on the paper, and has been for some time. Count the coverage for foes versus friends - certain incumbents and challengers who never get anything but grief, if they are covered at all. How do you possibly accuse a blog - whose name is LEFT in Lowell, it’s not like we hide it - of bias and complicity when you haven’t removed the log in your own eye?

The Sun could be a great paper, one I could be proud to subscribe and read daily. If Mr. Campanini truly wants to be a mover and shaker instead of a newspaperman, he should resign his post and run for office. He should not be mixing the two to the detriment of this city, and its citizens. His nasty tone and lack of objective arguments show him for what he truly is - a political hack. And to paraphrase the great Jon Stewart…please, stop…you’re hurting Lowell.

Of course, we here at LiL are not running for anything. So if he wants to waste time publishing nasty comments about us (thanks for the new readers, Campy!) it means less room for unwarranted attacks on the people doing the real work. If that’s how it’s gotta be, I’m okay with that.

[Filed under Local politics, Media] [link]

46 Responses to “Jim Campanini Declares War On Bloggers”

Eleanor Rigby Says:
November 11th, 2007 at 1:22 pm
To tell you the truth I got a good belly laugh from The Column. Why is the Sun picking on the blogs? Because they see the handwriting. Is Campy right that the blogs don’t have influence, sure he is. Right now the blogs about Lowell are very small but growing, that has them concerned so they are trying to minimize them.

I thought the more telling story in today’s paper was their attack on the Lowell Devils for pulling their ad money out of their paper! It apparently became obvious to the owners of the Devils that their advertising relationship with the paper was not paying off, so rather than throw good money after bad they cut their losses.

I predict that the Devils are doing a market analysis and looking to see where their advertising dollars would best be spent. If they ask me, and they didn’t, it would best be spent on Boston TV and (hide your eyes) the Boston Herald. The Herald has an outstanding sports section. (Of course NHL rules may come into play here since the Bruins have the final say on many things that do and don’t happen in the area)

The paper points out the Manchester team is able to put fans in the seats but they don’t point out that in Manchester, unlike Lowell, there is a widely read statewide newspaper and in Manchester, unlike Lowell there is a major TV station that covers the team, and unlike Lowell, there are sports radio stations that people actually listen to!

Advertising with the Sun hasn’t put bodies in the seats, so like my mother always told me, the definition of insane is doing the same thing over and over and over again and expecting a different result every time!

Those two attacks speak volumnes about the concern over at the museum!
K-R-S Says:
November 11th, 2007 at 1:33 pm
ER, you make a great point. From my observation, likely, by the end of the work day, there are very few, if any Boston Herald’s remaining on the stands, while our local paper and the Boston Globe remain many.
Mr. Lynne Says:
November 11th, 2007 at 1:38 pm
One other comparison to the other markets… other papers don’t pepper their sports section with so much horse racing, which can only be interpreted as a very popular (and possibly profitable to cover) sport if your editors hang around with a disproportionately ‘horse racing’ crowd. Sound like anyone familiar?
K-R-S Says:
November 11th, 2007 at 1:49 pm
Mr Lynne, do you mean, trips to Saratoga?
Mr. Lynne Says:
November 11th, 2007 at 1:52 pm
I mean from the first time I’ve seen the Sun’s sports section, the only lasting impression I had was ‘my God… who over there is a horse nut and who’s the editor who give this so much space? Do they honestly think this is the story I can’t wait to get a paper for? I hate the Herald, but I love their sports section.
Prince Charming Says:
November 11th, 2007 at 2:27 pm
Lynne et al.: Just one question, how come you folks are the only ones allowed to go negative and personal? I’m not busting cookies here, but I’m all for a kinder/gentler nation here. It’s obvious, the Sun didn’t endorse anyone who could be considered a threat to them, so if they wasted precious ink on your blog, it stands to reason that you’re doing something right. Consider it a badge and remember, there’s no such thing as bad publicity.
Ryan Says:
November 11th, 2007 at 3:00 pm
Mheh, I think it’s well past time to get a little angry and use that anger against the mainstream media, politicians and the like. We’re slowly losing our country and being nice guys who aren’t getting angry about it has been a continuing recipe for disaster.
Eleanor Rigby Says:
November 11th, 2007 at 3:51 pm
Hey there PC, I didn’t think my post was ‘negative’ I thought it was factual observation. How else do you explain the Sun’s ‘negative’ attack on the Devils while leaving out some of the major causes of poor attendance?

Going negative? That’s usually what conservatives charge liberals of doing when the liberals point out that the emperor is wearing no clothes! LOL

As for LiL and the other blogs, they provide a forum for the great unwashed without Campy’s spin. He can see the future and it doesn’t involve him, he’s not happy and coupled with loss of a major visibility opportunity, the Devils, he’s worried. Nothing negative about that. Just factual observation.
Prince Charming Says:
November 11th, 2007 at 4:11 pm
Ellie: I wasn’t referring to your post, but the main post. You may not care to hear this but I agree with 99% of everything you post. Now that Mimi’s “so yesterday”, care to be my Princess?
K-R-S Says:
November 11th, 2007 at 4:18 pm
Prince- I bet you say that to all the girls…
Lynne Says:
November 11th, 2007 at 4:26 pm
PC: It’s because this is about more than an editorial by Campanini or a dig in the column where he plainly shows his hand. If this phenomenon was confined to the editorial page, it would be annoying, and I would be here refuting the illogic, but this attitude of his - a non-journalistic attitude - affects his every decision as lead editor of a newspaper which purports to have integrity. It’s because I know his reporters are better than this, but yet the paper overall has fallen down on the job in covering and analyzing this race and other events so that readers can make up their own mind.

It’s in the titles of articles, and in the content (what is missing, what is covered)…it’s in the photos that are chosen to represent candidates that are liked versus ones that are not…it is an undermining of every standard of journalism you can think of in pursuit of an agenda. It means Campanini should be something other than the editor of the paper, because he doesn’t act like one.
Eleanor Rigby Says:
November 11th, 2007 at 5:25 pm
PC, you’re making me blush…let me get my face in the jar by the door!

It will be interesting to see if other major regional advertisers follow suit and begin to do market analysis of their advertising dollars instead of just giving them to Campy because ‘that’s the way it’s always been done’!

This was a wake up call to the museum folks, now we’ll see if they’re awake.
jdayne Says:
November 11th, 2007 at 7:04 pm
I’ll take the Mr. C’s Sun comments as a lovely invitation to get more involved, be more visible at City Council and other important governance meetings and go into the next election cycle with more organization so that more folks hear the message of proactive, positive change. So thanks, Mr. C, for reminding me that, while the folks who tend to vote today are less likely to read a blog than not, the folks who vote in 2 years may just surprise the “powers that be” [or C].
MVP Says:
November 12th, 2007 at 1:34 am
I have never read “back talk” comments referring to individuals as “Bud-lite” or “mobsters” so there is NO comparison with this blog!!……Campanini ignores the “sheer money spent”? You ignore the SHEER MONEY RAISED by these candidates! I think Lynne may be missing the point. The nastiness and negativity of this blog helped those individuals to raise the $$$ that they did. Call it what you want. I find it ironic!
HowieJames Says:
November 12th, 2007 at 3:46 am
Great Post Lynne,as always I am in the middle of this debate cause I live in Dracut,but I AGREE the sun is more interested in selling papers than reporting accurately,and both sides of the John Cox controversy took their pound of flesh…I said it was going to be a wash and I am sure it will with the Nangle Situation,we may have a councilor named Ali in a few months…I always liked a good fighter named Ali,they do the work and promote their cause,the worse thing anybody says about him is he s a nice hardworking guy…
Lynne Says:
November 12th, 2007 at 10:19 am
MVP: But I thought we were inconsequential? You can’t have it both ways. I doubt that we had much to do with anything in regards to how much these people were able to raise. They were angry at having their monopoly over city policy knocked down with or without us. Give me a break. These are some of the same people who participated in the I’m-For-Cox People for Lowell rallies.

Secondarily, you (the “general” you) either think we curb free speech when we delete or edit inappropriate comments, or you blame us for letting them through. We’re more open than the Lowell Sun, and we are not your mother or your gatekeeper. But we are also not responsible for everything everyone in comments says. The commenter themselves is responsible. If you don’t get that, than you don’t get the internet or blogs.

Or, for that matter, what an open conversation is, either.
joe Says:
November 12th, 2007 at 10:42 am
They said the same thing about Kos and the netroots after the 2004 elections. Ha ha, those silly bloggers, they think they can actually influence elections!

How’d 2006 turn out again?
Sarah N. Says:
November 12th, 2007 at 10:44 am
I think the main point people are missing - is this is a blog for a certain purpose to trade ideas and where seemingly likeminded people would connect. Whereas the Lowell Sun is a newspaper that is supposed to be objective and print the hard facts. I just started getting the Lowell Sun this past year and I will say I am sometimes suprised at what is found in it… but at other times they seem to really do good work. I think that can happen when there is a 1 newspaper town.

Just some observations….
jdayne Says:
November 12th, 2007 at 10:56 am
Perhaps an idea out of all this is that, while talk (blog or streetcorner or talk back) is cheap, organization is difficult. And yet it is organization, not talk, that is required to get new faces and new ideas elected.

What I have not seen demonstrated in Lowell is that sort of effective organization that delivers a message and then votes. Sam Yoon, Progressive candidate for City Council in Boston–with no name recognition outside of a few activists in Chinatown–managed to be elected to Boston’s City Council (the original definition of “status quo” politics) because he worked like mad on the ground and he mobilized other progressives, most all of whom had never heard of him before, to work hard at the grassroots. Not talk, but action.

I would like to see more action attached to talk here in Lowell. Sadly, my single experience with political action here in Lowell gave me real pause about whether or not the most vocal “talkers” were able to come through when the task required the actual, genuine work of getting members of the progressive commuity to a political suppport event. Proving Mr. C wrong is not going to happen with talk, defensive, offensive, thin skinned or thick skinned. I would find it useful to have some discussion of action. Where do political progressives meet? what is the typical agenda or areas of interest? who has the clout to bring invites to a political fundraiser? who can mobilize door knockers? and, yet again, where do progressives meet so that the planning can start now?
GOP Footsoldier Says:
November 12th, 2007 at 2:17 pm
I have to admit I laughed pretty hard when I read this “article”, I think President Clinton would have called it a “conservative hit job”. It was clear to me especially listening to Rita Mercier two days after the election say “I don’t owe Rodney Elliot anything” and the tone in her voice and that she was “looking forward to the unity breakfast.” that this is a 5-4 council. She made it very obvious in her praise of Mercier, Caulfield, Lenzi, and Kazanjian that those guys are her team. Nothing but glowing praise for the four of them. Not a word about the others except for venom for Martin and see the above for Elliot. Anyone who tells me or anyone else reading this otherwise is either naive or outright lying to your face. If you don’t matter why even waste the ink on you? I don’t agree with most of what is written here but I like to see what the enemy is thinking at all times. I think that you have your niche and that the 20-30 loyal posters on here all have their purpose as well. The Sun is doing what the globe does all the time. Dictate to you the reader what THEY think is important. The Herald goes for the big headline and the controversy sure, but at least to me they cover news with the motto “EVERYONE is fair game.” Just do what I do. Don’t buy it.

For years the Bruins were a huge part of my childhood, when I figured out that they wouldn’t invest in their own team I stopped going to games, watching them on tv, and buying their products. We as a community also have that duty/right. Don’t like the Sun? Don’t buy it. Enough people follow your lead and example and Jim C. will get whacked and replaced. Just like Harry Sinden did. The senior citizens (read: Lowell Sun readers) can’t live forever, and all newspapers are having a tough time right now. The internet and talk radio and cable news are replacing them and the network news. Then you get your last laugh……
Prince Charming Says:
November 12th, 2007 at 2:58 pm
Footsie:great post.
GOP Footsoldier Says:
November 12th, 2007 at 3:59 pm
I do what I can with what I have….
joe Says:
November 12th, 2007 at 5:30 pm
If you don’t matter why even waste the ink on you?

Ding ding ding ding! We have a winnah!

Old Media trying to hold back the barbarians.

Tsk tsk, Lynne, now you’re not going to get into the VIP Tent at Winterfest.
waittilnextyr Says:
November 12th, 2007 at 7:29 pm
The Sun will spend a lot of its ink this holiday season promoting the Santa Fund, but there may be other local charities that you would prefer gving to, such as the Salvation Army, the Lowell Wish Project, the Merrimack Valley Food bank, and others.
K-R-S Says:
November 12th, 2007 at 7:45 pm
DOn’t worry Joe, the barbarians will invade the VIP tent (WinterFest) yet!

**(I feel there should be a hearty barbarian cry to accompany this comment).
Tim Little Says:
November 12th, 2007 at 8:15 pm
Yop!
Mike Says:
November 12th, 2007 at 10:38 pm
I knew when I read that thing that this place would be spinning with defensive posts.

I like this place far better than the Sun, but what I would love to see once in awhile here is conceding a point (or better yet Mr. Lynne jumping in to DISAGREE with Lynne instead of back her every point). Now that would be something different.

But seriously, it’s just that it’s pretty obvious you guys have had it out for Cox and said some pretty rotten things over the years - basically portraying him as a good ole boy, corrupt old politician. The guy spent five years presiding over a city that’s been held up as a great example during that time, and did so without a spec of corruption. To be put in a negative light like has been done here, to me, is just too much.

It would be great just to read a “well, you know, maybe we did go overboard once or twice”. It would make everything a lot more believable. But the defensiveness just makes it look worse. And I know this post will just generate more of those type of posts too and that’s not what is intended.

If I was the Sun, I’d stay above the fray and ignore you guys. But you must annoy them too much, for which I say congrats! If you didn’t mean anything to them they wouldn’t be writing.
Mr. Lynne Says:
November 12th, 2007 at 10:58 pm
Please explain what was “overboard”.
Eleanor Rigby Says:
November 12th, 2007 at 11:49 pm
Apparently the tow contracts weren’t corrupt, apparently the Ethics Commission fine against Cox when he was a state rep doesn’t fall into that category either. And hey, what’s 6 or 8 Million dollars between friends? No worries…they’re back!!!!

Disclosure by the newspaper publisher of close ties to Cox…whatever for? Disclosure of the former owners of the newspaper of their financial benefit in the Jullian Steele project they pushed hard for? Now we’re just being silly!!!
Mimi Says:
November 13th, 2007 at 8:35 am
Mike:

it isn’t just us guys; you and others are part of this community. So your voice for the past 2 years in praise of the previous CM is also part of the conversation. We have never prevented you from explaining yourself. You have not yet convinced most of us, but keep trying.

As for the Sun, I really do not care what they think about us; their opinion of this blog is irrelevant to our purpose. What bothered me about Campy’s sarcastic rant is that he is suppose to be the editor. He is not a political columnist in the Howie Carr mold; he is the editor. He is using his position to settle political scores. How biased can you get? If he does this to someone like Dick, what is he doing to those who have no voice? Where is the paper’s journalistic standards?
joe Says:
November 13th, 2007 at 10:37 am
As for the Sun, I really do not care what they think about us

Oh, Mimi. Yes, you do. Of course you do. Remember If you don’t matter why even waste the ink on you?

Same thing.
GOP Footsoldier Says:
November 13th, 2007 at 11:02 am
Mimi,

Same place the Boston Globe and the NY Times “journalistic standards” are. The Sun is dictating to you the reader what they deem newsworthy with their agenda and spin. Who sets the tone for those papers? Or for the nightly network news? The powers that be right? The only difference in this case is that the EDITOR is making the comments, however if you look at the blurb at the end he only “contributed” and it doesn’t say exactly to which portion. So we the readers are left to make informed speculation instead of possessing concrete proof. He is falling into the trap that many sports writers in Boston do- making themselves the story rather then telling me one. Furthermore, if you look online you’ll see that Jim C. also lists himself as the editor AND a political blogger, with a link to his “blog”.

Like I said earlier, you don’t like it, stop reading, visiting their website, and buying the paper. Eventually the ad revenue will dry up and then he’ll be looking for other work!
Lynne Says:
November 13th, 2007 at 12:17 pm
The problem with “stop reading it” is that then you are not informed about what the one major newspaper of your town is saying…about anything.

I don’t subscribe to the paper or pay for access, and I don’t intend to. (Previous to this, I was thinking about trying their new online pay service, but forget it, it’s not worth it.) But I do intend to use this platform to do some serious media critique, and I can’t do that if I totally ignore the Sun. I wish I could reward the hard work of the reporters there with my revenue, but until they actually have a decent editor at the helm, it’s not going to happen.

RE caring about what they think about us, joe, we don’t. (And as someone said, there’s no such thing as bad publicity…and I expect people who were referred here by that Column can make up their own minds.) We do have to care about what they say in general, however, as they are the biggest media outlet in town.

Mike: No offense, but does a rein and bit come with those blinders? Have you basically let nothing about the last 6 years penetrate? I know we can agree to disagree, but if you willfully don’t want to see what was going on here in “those years,” we can’t really have a conversation, can we? Do you think I enjoy or get something out of exposing the Cox types? I’d rather I didn’t have to. (I’d MUCH rather I didn’t have to.) Unfortunately, the evidence points out otherwise.
Mimi Says:
November 13th, 2007 at 1:08 pm
Joe:

Let me repeat myself, I do not care what they think of us. Do not compare LiL to the Sun; they are an institution in this City. One that at times does not fulfill its responsibility to the community it serves.

They are a newspaper with a circulation of about 46,000; they are the only newspaper in Greater Lowell; as a matter of fact they are the only major media outlet in Greater Lowell. That is a powerful force.

As for the Globe and NY Times, do you think either of their editors would behave this way? I think they respect their profession a little bit more than the current editor of the Sun. Furthermore, they both have plenty of media competition; the Sun does not. Although you are right, that all media outlets do have an agenda, both the Times and the Globe are under constant scrutiny. If it wasn’t for the blogs, no one would publicly criticize the newspaper.

I do not intend to ignore them nor do I intend to stop reading it. I will keep talking about them in the hope that they improve. By the way, they have some very good reporters.
GOP Footsoldier Says:
November 13th, 2007 at 1:42 pm
Mimi,

That’s all well and good; I think you may be missing my point though. We as the readers or the consumers have the option to do what I did with the Bruins. Stop watching; stop going, in short voting with our feet and pocketbooks to not support whatever or whomever we choose. So in the end Jim C. won’t be hurt by his commentary, in fact we on this blog give him more ammo for next week or next month.

Do I think the Globe or the Times Editors would be this blatant about it? No, but that’s why their in the big leagues and Jim isn’t. They are better at spinning their agenda as “legit news.”

“the Times and the Globe are under constant scrutiny. If it wasn’t for the blogs, no one would publicly criticize the newspaper.”

I doubt you watch the O’Reilly Factor but he rails against other forms of media (be it papers or other TV shows) for doing exactly what “the column” did last week amongst other things. Considering he’s #1 in the ratings PLENTY of people are aware of the hypocrisy of the Globe (remember the U.S. Army soldiers with “Iraqi women” sex non-scandal with the online porn pictures on the front page above the fold?) and other papers as well. So does Drudge and Breitbart. If you know where to look it’s everywhere. What I love about Drudge and especially Breitbart is they are much like the Herald in that NO ONE is off limits including members of the GOP.
Mimi Says:
November 13th, 2007 at 2:30 pm
Footsoldier:

You are right, I do not watch O’Reilly. If I do what you suggest, that is not go on line to read the Sun (I do not buy the hard copy), how do I get my local news?
Eleanor Rigby Says:
November 13th, 2007 at 2:31 pm
I would love to see where you got the numbers remotely suggesting O’Reilly is #1, but you missed Mimi’s point.

She was talking about if blogs like this one and Dicks didn’t exist then no one in this city could publicly criticize the newspaper…the Sun.
GOP Footsoldier Says:
November 13th, 2007 at 4:34 pm
ER,

He’s the #1 news show on TV. Drudge runs the ratings as a headline all the time. Cable and Network.

Mimi,

Well I guess the Sun has a gun to our collective heads. Read our paper or else.
Brooksie Says:
November 13th, 2007 at 9:34 pm
GOP,

I’m not sure I agree about reading the paper or else. I often read the Sun (usually takes about 3 minutes so not worth buying)but primarily get my news through the Globe or Herald. For local news I read LiL or use the Sun website (which in itself is pathetic). I guess I’m saying my world wouldn’t end if I didn’t read it.

Mimi,

Despite my comments above I agree about the reporters. Many are excellent but I increasingly hear that they feel beaten down by Campanini’s style and agenda. As a result many are looking to get out. Don’t be surprised to see a whole new set of reporters in the not too distant future.
Mimi Says:
November 13th, 2007 at 9:45 pm
Brooksie:

It is unfortunate that Campy does not get beaten down from these reporters’ style and lack of agenda. The City will loose if some of these quality reporters leave for greener pasture.
Eleanor Rigby Says:
November 13th, 2007 at 10:35 pm
GOP Footsoldier, O’Reilly is the #1 CABLE TV NEWS show, not the #1 TV News show…big big difference, but then again Drudge and the conservatives are used to leaving out fact that doesn’t back up their fictional version of things.

As a matter of fact I went to the Drudge site and used his link to see what he said about O’Reilly’s ratings, and while 60 Minutes is ranked #15 among all programming, not just news shows, O’Reilly isn’t listed under either all programming or cable programming! (60 Minutes African-American viewers alone dwarf O’Reilly’s numbers!)

According to the latest numbers, Week of Nov 5, even last place CBS Evening News with Katie has a larger audience than O’Reilly by about 6-MILLION viewers.
http://www.mediabistro.com/tvnewser/

So keep telling yourself what you read on Drudge is true…remember, it was Drudge that broke that big bombshell of a story during the 2004 campaign that John Kerry has slept with an AP reporter! No lack of credibility there!
Mike Says:
November 13th, 2007 at 10:41 pm
Lynne, I don’t think you’ve exposed anything about Cox.

Like I said, you’ve tried to portray him in a certain light here. That is very clear. But exposed?

I don’t understand the Stoklosa School audit or what happened there…..legit question. Has Bernie cleared that up either?

The deficit…well, it’s not uncommon for an incoming mayor/c.m. to “expose” a “surprise” deficit and then “save” the city. Not saying it happened here, but it’s happened in mannnny other places.

What else? An ethics violation from when he wasn’t City Manager? Where are the ethics violations from him being C.M., if he’s being portrayed as this backroom cigar smoking good old boy? If you’ve exposed those, I missed the posts.
LOL Says:
November 14th, 2007 at 6:45 pm
Let’s recap, shall we?
1) Ad hominem attacks are allowed against Campanini, Wallace, et al., for more than a year.
2) Campanini points out in a few paragraphs that the empress has no clothes, that the thundering upheaval of city government predicted here was more of a burp.
3) LiL says Campanini has “declared” war on the site, and responds to his few words with a lengthy, kicking-and-screaming scree.

Folks, please go back and read this thread carefully. I mean, really. Don’t support a local charity? You support underpaid reporters, but won’t support them with your wallet?

You have made me ashamed that I voted for the Lynch slate. In two years, I’ll vote for anyone who isn’t in either camp, as long as they aren’t in jail.

PS to GOP Footsoldier: I didn’t remember the Globe porn issue. I looked it up. I didn’t know that “Page B2″ means “front page, above the fold.”
Lynne Says:
November 14th, 2007 at 7:30 pm
Oooh look! A concern troll! Neato.
Mr. Lynne Says:
November 14th, 2007 at 8:58 pm
Ok… sorry but this is a pet peeve. Ad hominem is a term for a logical fallacy which says that an attack on a person making an argument’s character does not provide disproof of the argument they were making. Lynne would be committing this if and only if she didn’t provide arguments to back up her point. Any commentary on Campanini, while critical, is not ‘Ad hominem’. It is just that… criticism. I guess we should make sure not to criticize anyone ever lest someone accuse us of ‘ad hominem’.
joe Says:
November 16th, 2007 at 11:05 am
You have made me ashamed that I voted for the Lynch slate.

As a lifelong Democrat, I am writing to express my disappointment…

Whatev.

November 11, 2007

Jim Campanini Declares War On Bloggers

46 Responses to “Jim Campanini Declares War On Bloggers”

Leave a Reply

LeftinLowell Tweets

Pages:

Recent Posts

Search

Categories:

Archives:

Other:

Email us!

Lowell Area Bloggers/Forums

Lowell Politics

Mass Bloggers

Media in Lowell

Media in MA

Other Daily Reads

Politics Online

Progressive Local Orgs

Snark and politics

The Arts in Lowell

M	T	W	T	F	S	S
« Oct				Dec »
			1	2	3	4
5	6	7	8	9	10	11
12	13	14	15	16	17	18
19	20	21	22	23	24	25
26	27	28	29	30