Archive for the ‘Independent’ Category

by jhwygirl

Northern Broadcasting Network’s Aaron Flint of the Flint Report broke the news late yesterday afternoon regarding that the not-so-free-thinking Missoula Independent’s permanent severance of its relationship with long time political columnist George Ochenski was essentially the result of editor Robert Meyerowitz’s decision to not accept Ochenski’s planned column on the Indy’s 21st birthday and the importance of a free press in Montana.

So we have a political opinion columnist wanting to discuss the importance of the free press in Montana being censored by the editor of a newspaper that prominently features the byline of “Free Thinking” under its name “Missoula Independent”?

Now we know that’s another one of the quirky little whimsical things the Indy does. “Free Thinking”

Ha. Funny funny. Hilarious.

Goddess knows – and others – that I am a firm believer in the free press and that lovely thing we call The First Amendment.

So much so – and ya’all know I love them – that even some of my fellow bloggers on this page have expressed their disappointment in my lack of any interest in censoring anonymous commenters that sometimes all-too-frequently grace the pages here at 4&20blackbirds.

It’s perplexing, to say the least, that a newspaper would censor an award-winning political opinion columnist on a column regarding the First Amendment – especially when you consider that the Indy’s President, Matt Gibson spoke quite eloquently and passionately on these very pages about his firm believe in the unequivocal protections of the First Amendment:

I understand the profound concern people have about the pernicious influence of money on politics and policy, but an assault on our first amendment rights to assembly and speech will destroy more than it protects. Without free speech guarantees for corporations, virtually every newspaper will lose constitutional protection for its news reporting and editorial writing. The majority in the Supreme Court decision explicitly warned that the government has no reliable method to discern earnest editorial commentary from corporate advocacy. I don’t want to live in a country or operate any kind of news reporting outfit where every newspaper column or broadcast commentary is potentially actionable because it violates corporate restrictions on political activity.

Trying to silence groups of people who might disagree with you seems fundamentally wrong to me anyway.

On the other hand, I’m strongly in favor of stringent requirements to quickly and reliably report the identities of individuals and corporations engaged in political speech. The people behind public policy campaigns should be easily identifiable and held accountable in the court of public opinion for their openly professed views.

Matt Gibson
President
Independent Publishing, Inc.

I will proudly add that I was the sole person who rated that comment 4 stars. Which will – again – probably get me in a little trouble.

Gibson has a few other comments on JC’s post regarding Missoula city council’s resolution to amend the constitution to eliminate corporate personhood – all on the subject of free speech.

His comments being somewhat ironic considering he takes the time to correct me – rightfully so – on this post by showing his knowledge on the history of bribery in Montana elections.

And so aside from what I have heard over the years from the many reporters that have graced the Indy is Gibson’s (perhaps slight) intolerance for this anonymous blogger right here…Gibson, it seems supports free speech.

Or did.

Without an explanation from the Indy – either editor Robert Meyerowitz or president Matt Gibson (or publisher Lynne Foland) what are readers left to think?

Especially when Montanans – statewide – now have to read that Ochenski was silenced because he wanted to write about the value of the free press. In Montana.

If the Indy thinks they are right, that is one thing – but I again reiterate in what I believe are the interests of a newspaper that I have come to deeply respect over the years: The Missoula Independent has an obligation to its readers to address the departure of its twelve year award winning political commentary columnist George Ochenski.

Right now, they seemed determined to ignore the issue. While virtually all calls to the Indy offices (406-543-6609) went to voice mail today – this mainly due to the fact that the Indy doesn’t have a receptionist – no one that I knew who called got a return phone call. And I certainly hope some of those calls were advertisers like The Good Food Store, Rockin’ Rudy’s, Ten Spoon Winery and Butterfly Herbs calling to hold the Indy to some certain amount of accountability.

Alexis Bonogofsky, a conservation program manager for the National Wildlife Federation and a goat rancher on the Yellowstone who continues to suffer the ill-effects of the Exxon spill on the Yellowstone wrote to the Indy asking about the departure of Ochenski and his column:

Mr. Meyerowitz and Mr. Gibson,

It recently came to my attention that George Ochenski is no longer with the Independent. His column is extremely important, relevant and necessary to all of us in Montana that follow politics.

I am waiting for the Independent to come out and explain why his column has been terminated. I think a man who has produced quality journalism and analysis of Montana state politics for your paper for over a decade deserves as much.

Sincerely,

Alexis Bonogofsky

Gibson wrote back:

Thanks for your note, Alexis. I hope you will find the Indy continuing to publish extremely important, relevant and necessary content from all of our contributors in the future.

Alexis – who should be a reporter for her persistence for an answer – responded:

Thanks for the response but I’m more interested in what happened to his column? Are you no longer going to publish it or address it at all?

Gibson ended the exchange with:

George won’t be writing for the Indy anymore, but that doesn’t mean we won’t have strong content in the future. Beyond that, I think it’s between us and George.

Gibson’s last exchange came just a few minutes before Aaron Flint reports on their censorship of his weekly political column. Perhaps now they may feel a need to state what has transpired.

The reality is that the truth is out there. Gibson knows this as does Meyerowitz. They are newspaper veterans, and to put their heads in the sand on an issue near and dear to a community (maybe I should say “market”) of Missoulians when there are alternative sources for both news and advertisement is, it seems, pretty risky.

Failure to address Ochenski’s departure will hang over the Indy. It will cloud their respectability as a “Free Thinking” newspaper – and it unfairly disrespects a departure that would be better left with the Indy taking a high road and giving its deserving loyal readers (and a columnist who helped in a very big way make the Indy what it is today) the truthful explanation and closure all parties deserve.

Advertisements

by jhwygirl

Any regular reader of this blog knows that I have a deep admiration for George Ochenski, opinion columnist extraordinaire for the Missoula Independent.

For twelve years, the GO has graced the pages of the (not so)Indy(anymore) with his laser analysis of Montana politics. Of national politics. And of everything else that matters.

Ochenski’s analysis and opinion is solid. It’s why we read the Indy. Check this gem out from 2005: Vampire wires: The energy corridors are coming

I mean – How friggin’ spot-on can a columnist get?

So Thursdays are a treat for me. George Ochenski Day. I admit I have on occasion been privvy to a head’s up or two. So perhaps it was that the GO didn’t want to have me get bummed out (or pissed off) any sooner than needed.

To come to find this week’s Indy barren of Ochenski’s column was..well….just plain wrong. The fact that the Indy didn’t have the decency to offer its (maybe now not so) loyal readers an explanation is perplexing.

Twelve years and that’s how its missing primary this-is-why-we-grab-the-Indy column is addressed?

You simply don’t do this to your readers.

I mean – I like the Indy, but I kinda feel like someone pissed in my Wheaties this morning.

~~~~
It’s early and I have to get to work. I certainly don’t want to wake George with what I hope is a temporary departure. Or a mistake at the printers. Or one of George’s fishing trips gone too long.

And quite frankly, given my reaction, maybe I understand why George didn’t let us know. Or at least me.

The Indy, though, should have rerun a column – because the Missoula Independent isn’t independent without Montana’s sole independent political columnist George Ochenski.

By JC

While all eyes are focused on the upcoming elections and the big picture about the makeup of the next Congress, many people have been watching the undercurrents, reading the tea leaves for indications about the makeup of the 2012 republican primaries. While the common wisdom has Sarah Palin underperforming in a wide open republican primary, not everybody thinks the same. The CW goes like this, as Moorcat succinctly put it last week:

Palin stands zero chance to be the next president. In every poll run on a possible matchup for the 2012 election, Palin has been (at best) third behind Romney and Huckabee.

But in an article yesterday by John Heilemann in the NY Magazine, “2012: How Sarah Barracuda Becomes President,” he lays out the scenario:

1) The t-party pushes Sarah through to the republican nomination;
2) Obama’s popularity wanes even more amidst republican intransigence aimed to get Sarah Palin elected;
3) Michael Bloomberg enters the race as an independent, intent to assure that grownups (pragmatic centrists) persevere

Then all that needs to happen is the following (the first 2 scenarios being an Obama reelection or a Bloomberg upset):

But there is a third scenario, one that involves a more granular kind of analysis-cum-speculation. By the accounts of strategists in both parties, Bloomberg—especially with the help of his billions—would stand a reasonable chance of carrying New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, Florida, and California. Combine that with a strong-enough showing in a few other places in the industrial Northeast to deny Obama those states, and with Palin holding the fire-engine-red states of the South, and the president might find himself short of the 270 electoral votes necessary to win.

Assuming you still remember the basics from American Government 101, you know what would happen next: The election would be thrown to the House of Representatives—which, after November 2, is likely to be controlled by the Republicans. The result: Hello, President Palin!

Now, if you happen to be a Democrat, your first instinct might be to dismiss all of this as a dystopian anti-fantasy, or the kind of spook story told around a campfire, scary but ultimately harmless because it’s make-believe, or maybe the ravings of a madman. (I wouldn’t argue with that last one.) Certainly, it qualifies as far-fetched.

But, then, everything about Palin’s story is far-fetched: McCain’s selection of her as his running mate, her ascension after abruptly quitting the highest post she’d ever held, her status as one of the front-runners for her party’s presidential nomination. But here she is, a phenomenon nearly—nearly—unprecedented in modern politics, a figure so electrifying to the most hopped-up segment of her party that at times she seems unstoppable.

“She’s a supernova,” says McKinnon. “The only parallel is Barack Obama. And look what happened to him.”

Talk amongst yourselves as you watch the returns next week. Things will start moving much faster and with more clarity.

Me? I’m thinking of putting up a big fence around my farm, maybe dig in a bunker or two, and start stockpiling some 2nd amendment remedies.
sarah

by JC

One good bit of pr0n deserves another! ;-)

Slow day at the office… Enjoy!

by jhwygirl

I don’t know about you, but I’m intrigued by Carl Ibsen, a candidate for sheriff who’s running for the office under the premise that a sheriff should have no political affiliation.

Refreshing.

Ibsen has worked as a law enforcement officer in Missoula for 37 years.

He lists DUI and alcohol issues and domestic violence as two of his issues on his main page.

Check that…we’ve got far too much of both, both here in Missoula and here in Montana.

Next up he lists training and recruitment, which are good things for both officer AND citizen.

Ibsen also has the county’s Detention Center listed on that front page, along with a page of his thoughts and concerns on the issue – and that is not only brave, but quite forward thinking and open and needed in this community. Issues concerning that detention center have headlined here far too long.

I’ll be looking more into Carl Ibsen. I hope to meet him – he sounds like the kind of candidate that is worthy of serious consideration.




  • Pages

  • Recent Comments

    Miles on A New Shelter for Vets or an E…
    success rate for In… on Thirty years ago ARCO killed A…
    Warrior for the Lord on The Dark Side of Colorado
    Linda Kelley-Miller on The Dark Side of Colorado
    Dan on A New Shelter for Vets or an E…
    Former Prosecutor Se… on Former Chief Deputy County Att…
    JediPeaceFrog on Montana AG Tim Fox and US Rep.…
  • Recent Posts

  • Blog Stats

    • 1,668,844 hits
  • Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

    Join 2,738 other followers

  • April 2019
    S M T W T F S
    « Oct    
     123456
    78910111213
    14151617181920
    21222324252627
    282930  
  • Categories