The Democrat and Chronicle's new editorial blames the whole "packing" controversy on blogs taking comments out of context. Their new line is that the context of the comment was new security measures at the Capitol, not protests.
My message to the D&C: what you wrote couldn't have been clearer. Here is the whole paragraph, which had the heading "Protesters":
Kuhl said that he wasn't at his offices when the protesters in Bath and Fairport were there. When I asked him if he had ever protested, he said "Yes, when I walked off the floor in Congress recently." I asked if that means he thinks the protesters have a right to do so and he again said "yes, just not over the line." He said that the types of protests have caused him to rethink security at his offices and that means securing doors. He said they are "more protective now" and that he "thought about packing."
The context of protests was provided by the D&C, not the "blogosphere". According to the D&C, we were supposed to "check the facts with the editors and reporters at the meeting. Or with Kuhl himself." That line is a laughable desertion of basic journalism by the supposed paper of record for Monroe County. If you want to be considered a "professional journalist", you need to report what's said in an interview correctly. There are no "facts" to be checked other than those generated by the D&C itself.
Speaking of facts, here are a few: the "packing" remark was reported on the D&C's blog at 1:12 PM on Tuesday by an editorial board member. It was followed by two posts by D&C reporters, including the editorial page editor. If the remark was out of context, it could have been corrected by them then. Wednesday morning's editorial said the following (emphasis mine):
Kuhl said, not in jest, that he has thought of arming himself, given the perception — not accurate, he said — that he is an inflexible supporter of President Bush's approach to the Iraq war.
This watered-down paragraph is less clear about the context of Kuhl's remark, but it leaves the impression that the reason Kuhl wants to pack has to do with opposition to the war, not heightened Capitol security.
It was not until Wednesday afternoon, at 1:45 to be precise, that Tom Tobin decided that Kuhl's remark was "a casual reply". His colleague, James Lawrence, wrote this at 2:38 p.m.:
But I believe Kuhl wanted to make the point that he was concerned about personal safety and that of staff at his district offices in the aftermath of demonstrations there by anti-war activists.
Today's editorial called it "friendly banter" and re-cast the context of the remark as Capitol security. Who knows what the D&C's next version of the story will be, but I'll bet we haven't heard the last from them on this topic. It appears that they'll say anything after feeling a little heat from readers and Rep. Kuhl.
The proper way to address a mistake, if that's what the D&C believes they made, is to publish a correction. The unprofessional and cowardly way to deal with a mistake is to blame it on others. Today, the D&C took the latter route.
Comments
Great Post!
for anyone that isn't a fan of Kuhl, this editorial is really bad for Kuhl.
It appears exactly the opposite that it helps to exonerate him, and turn him from Krazy Randy Kuhl, to Jokingly Krazy Randy Kuhl.
This is why...
This story has for the first time, jumped from the blogs, to the mainstream media, and now that the D & C has written about it in their actual newspaper, its fair game for everyone.
The Daily News blog and Huffington Post are only online, and so was the D & C 's original quote. Now the story will live on for at least another news cycle.
When stories live on for more news cycles, its not good for the person who is portrayed in a bad light.
Kuhl only has one choice, the entire Rochester voting public, has already turned against him, and those that havn't are in the process.
He is going to make this story, an "us versus them story". That a Rochester paper, made up stuff about a Southern Tier Congressman when "out of towners" came to the southern tier to protest the Southern Tier's own. This is his only chance.
Earmarks, Iraq, and everything else are now secondary, now that the entire campaign is now about, "is randy kuhl qualified to serve in congress."
Eric Massa might very well make the push to the southern tier, that he is from the southern tier, and when redistricting takes place in 2012, if randy kuhl is around, they are definitly going to lose their seat, because of who he is, anyone objectively outside the southern tier, seems him for who he is. So the only way for the Southern Tier to have a chance in redistricting to save "their seat" is to elect Massa.
I think you're taking one gotcha comment and turning it into a Massa victory a little prematurely.
I think the comment was one of those unfortunate things a politician says and regrets. Randy Kuhl has a 20 year track record, and making him out to be a crazy man isn't enough to have him lose an election. I think any Massa supporter who believes that making Randy look crazy will win the election is indulging in dangerous wishful thinking.
It's going to take a lot more than a couple of poorly judged, offhand comments to unseat Kuhl. That's why I really don't like to make too much of comments like these. My point in this post was that the D&C is trying to weasel out of responsibility on the backs of bloggers, when they should just own up to their mistake.
You will be hard pressed to find bigger egos anywhere than in the ranks of Editors. Weasel they will if they think that their reputation will take a hit. While there are certainly exceptions, this is true for the most part at any size newspaper.
Think Kuhl's office chewed the D&C a new one?
Absolutely, but the blame is entirely on the D&C for this.
Kuhl's press people are doing their job, trying to blame the messenger for his dumb remark. It's the D&C's job to decide whether they misreported, and therefore owe Kuhl a correction, or if they got it right and owe Kuhl nothing. Instead, as Elmer puts it (correctly), they are being weasels.
I have written a letter to Kuhl, specifically asking for a clear and unambiguous disavowal of these statements. I will let you know his response, if any.
You folks are going way overboard. It is not unusual in the southern tier to own or carry weapons. Randy is a product of the southern tier. He insuated that the weapon was for protection, not to threaten anyone.
I've often joked that my little town of Campbell could hold off the Third Marine Division for three days because it is so well armed. The neat thing is that there are no violent crimes in Campbell, hardly any crime at all. The culture in Rochester is not to carry weapons. Seems like all I read in the D&C is about murders.
Paige: I'll be interested to hear the response. I'll bet you'll get one, especially if it was a letter sent via the US Mail.
Elmer: I agree that this is definitely a North/South difference in attitudes towards guns. I live in the North but grew up in the West, and having a gun was pretty much a given there, too. However, gun owners seem to keep pretty quiet about it in Pittsford. So, I don't think Kuhl's comment was smart, given the attitudes in part of the district, but I can't really get too upset about it.
In fact, the only thing that gets under my skin about this whole little dust-up is today's editorial.
For what it's worth, Kuhl's office, on Monday, the day of the protest, was filled with children--toddlers and preschoolers who were with their mothers at a peaceful protest. They were singing and playing and were great company! ("This is what democracy looks like") There was Nothing threatening about the scene. Rep. Kuhl would have been able to see for himself if he'd bothered to show.
OK, I retract my patchouli comment. The only risk to Kuhl staffers was nasal irritation from the smell of toddlers' diapers. (And I am joking, OK?)
"...toddlers and preschoolers who were with their mothers at a peaceful protest..."
Randy sponsored a bill in the NY Senate which would have defined protesters (for example) against veal producers as terrorists. He's not crazy, and he may have just been looking out for his farming constituents, but on the face of it his pushing that bill seems a little paranoid.
His recent reference to "all his years in congress" also seems odd, though he may have just misspoke. I don't think that anyone thinks that experience in the NY Senate counts toward time in the US Congress.
Elmer, would people in the Tier use the phrase "packing", though? I think of that as rap terminology.
I'm curious -- I don't know the answer about how widespread that usage is.
Ha ha--Jokingly Krazy Randy. That is funny. There may be some truth to this, despite the circus atmosphere.
Exile - No "packing" is not a term used by anyone I know. It probably is rap, but I don't listen to that so I'm not really sure
context is there in the blogs, local district offices. kuhl's own words are what caused this.
I've been to one of the protests in Bath, and reported on the other from Americans Against Esclation in Iraq. Take a good look at the photos in my blogposts. I look kind of scary at times, but do the older folks and ministers in those pictures look like poeple Randy Kuhl needs to protect himself from? The point of the anti-war movement is to stop violence, not perpetrate it. Randy Kuhl is trying to make himself the victim.