Monday, October 22, 2007

Cautionary Tales: an Update on a Recent Nasty Post

I recently wrote a nasty post about the Wilderness Society teaming up with industry to plan timber sales in Western Montana. Not all that unusual a thing as it turns out in the public/private post-high-capitalist patronage-based non-profit/for-profit smarmy, toadying, obsequious, eternally-suppliant environmental industry.

I checked out the Website the coalition had up at the time I wrote the post but could not, at that time, find a list of the organizations involved, so I went with what the Missoulian reported.

It seems I missed the link on the Website. Turns out a long-time critic of timber sales and one of Montana's (and the West's) most tenacious forest activists is on the coalition too! I'll be danged. Obviously there is more to the story than nasty jump-to-conclusions ideologue Zadig reported.

So anyway I also said some nasty things about Michael Moore, a long-time reporter for that disgusting, awful, timber-pimping newspaper. Moore has been around a long time and his articles in my limited experience were always pretty good. Thorough stuff that makes you think he's doing what maybe Chuck Bowden should have stuck to. But that's another story.

Anyway, Moore wrote the following to us and I think he deserves a hearing and anyway, we here at DL can take our licks when we deserve them:

Dear whoever you are,

Just so you know, that story was longer when I wrote it, and included several paragraphs about how Juel had attended meetings. Ekey talked a bit about why they felt it was important to include WildWest and others in the discussion. For the record, I was the one who asked those questions on the conference call -- specifically I asked about Matthew Koehler -- although Ed O'Brien of KUFM also asked a followup.

So that stuff was in the story when I turned it in. But sometimes stories get cut for length. I guarantee you the publisher had nothing to do with editing the paper. He never does. Finally, we included the link so people like you all could see exactly who took part.

I think it's fine for you to criticize the paper and whatever else you feel like criticizing, but before you criticize me personally, why not give me a call?



There you have it folks. Thanks for writing, Michael.


1 comment:

Interesting said...

Very interesting post, especially the message from the Missoulian's reporter. So just who at the paper edited out significant portions of Moore's story? Was it intentional? Is this a common practice?