UPDATED after post
Week after week, Republican Brent Boger, losing candidate for Clark County Prosecutor faced the scorn and biased slapping handed out by Vancouver’s bankrupt newspaper, the Columbian. After a reluctant co-endorsement in the primary election, I just can’t recall a kind or even handed word published about Mr. Boger, a Senior Assistant City Attorney.
For whatever reason, Boger lost the race to Democrat Tony Golik.
You would think the Columbian would be happy the candidate they backed easily won the election and move on, but not so in regards to Managing Editor Lou Brancaccio who seems unable to resist taking pot-shots at others in our area.
If you remember, it was Brancaccio who penned columns attacking blogger Kelly Hinton and falsely trying to smear Republican candidate for the 18th legislative district, Ann Rivers, who won in her race, by linking the two of them.
Brancaccio continues his journalistic assaults in today’s paper with a column, “Ya gotta love our politicians!” where his opening shot is, you guessed it, another pot shot at Brent Boger.
Boger, like most other political candidates, develop some thick skin to this type of journalistic misfeasance. However, for reasons he and his wife have been discussing for some time, Boger decided to cancel his subscription to the local paper today. On his facebook page, Boger made a comment of, “Looking forward to returning to private life. Cancelled my Columbian subscription today” earlier this morning. No reason given, no anger expressed, no slapping back at the Columbian, just a plain simple comment.
Apparently seeing, or being informed by someone about the cancellation, Brancaccio decided it just isn’t right that someone who has been continually bashed by his paper and undermined in their campaign, ridiculed and mocked on a regular basis should decide to cease contributing to his paycheck.
In the comments section of the article linked above, the 11th comment showing states,
“Hey all. I’m doing a follow-up column to this one for Saturday. It’s about folks — in this case Brent Boger — who canceled his subscription to The Columbian after this column appeared. Probably because of this column mostly but we also didn’t endorse him.
I liken this to the old thing when we were kids and we’d show up in the empty lot to play baseball and one kid would bring the bat and ball. Most of the time, no problem.
But every once in a while the kid with the bat and ball would threaten to take his bat and ball and go home if he didn’t get everything the way he wanted.
And that’s my view of folks who cancel their subscriptions over something they don’t like in the paper. Hey, buck up. You’re not always going to get your way.
Your thoughts?
If I get something good (usable) I might include it in my column. Thanks.
Lou Brancaccio (Columbian Staff) — November 4, 2010 at 1:46 p.m.”
Brancaccio is actually whining over one citizen cancelling their subscription? One citizen that was their target for weeks?
A call to Boger revealed to me that the cancellation has been a frequent discussion between Boger and his wife for quite some time, seeing the journalistic talent displayed in the Oregonian as superior.
Brancaccio would have you believe that his one column is why Boger cancelled, which just isn’t so. However, if it were the reason, does Boger deserve even more ridicule because he decides to take his paycheck elsewhere? Is this the way they teach you in Chicago? Subscribe or else?
Showing just how low-class and tasteless Brancaccio’s comment was, is seen in a reply to Boger on his facebook comment from Democratic state Senator Craig Pridemore,
“You still read The Columbian? You ran a good campaign, Brent. Don’t listen to Lou — they hate people who serve.”
Careful Craig, you’ll be the next one to be on the pointed end of Brancaccio’s poison pen.
Will Brancaccio begin seeking out any and all who cancel their subscription to ridicule in a weekly column in hopes of coercing them to continue buying the paper?
Will enough citizens stand up to this journalistic thuggery to force Brancaccio into a daily column mocking cancellations?
In defending his comment Brancaccio says,
“I’m just pointing out something interesting that goes on more today than it used to. If you don’t like something you read in the newspaper, cancel. I’m making the argument (discussion) that we should be able to agree to disagree without just walking away.”
What Brancaccio fails to grasp is that the Columbian is a product, a commodity that is sold to the public. As with any product that promises some level of service, in this case news and commentary to customers for a fee, if the customer is no longer satisfied with that service, they go elsewhere and should be able to without facing public mocking by the very product they are dissatisfied with.
Lou also first says,
“People are free to subscribe and not subscribe as they wish.”
Shouldn’t they be free to do so without being hit with,
“that’s my view of folks who cancel their subscriptions over something they don’t like in the paper. Hey, buck up. You’re not always going to get your way.”
Hey Lou, buck up. You’re not going to get your way in increasing subscriptions this way either.
See also Clark County Politics
UPDATE: I have to give Brancaccio credit. Saturday’s column contains, “Was I too tough on him? After getting into several discussions on this topic and listening to several of my critics, I’d have to say the critics were right and I was wrong.”
