Tag Archives: AGN Media

This anniversary got past me

Anniversaries and other memorable dates usually pop into my skull as they occur.

I’m quite good at remembering birthdays, wedding anniversaries (starting with my own) and important dates that come and go.

But this past Friday, a fairly memorable anniversary slipped right on past me. I didn’t even recall it until two days after the fact.

It was 20 years ago, on Jan. 9 that I started a new job in Amarillo. I reported for work at the Amarillo Globe-News on Jan. 9, 1995 after making a two-day drive from way down yonder, in Beaumont, to the High Plains.

I actually remember quite a bit about my arrival at the newspaper.

I had met the staff with whom I would work on a previous visit. We were acquainted, but I would need some time to get to know them, and for them to know me. I remember thinking how blessed I was to be able to work in an environment that enabled me to actually delegate responsibilities to others and to depend on them to do as I asked. They never let me down.

We published two newspapers then. The morning Daily News was the dominant edition; the evening Globe-Times — despite its Pulitzer Prize-winning history — had become second banana in this market.

But oh, man, was it fun to produce those two editions every day.

My task as editorial page editor was to coordinate the work of two editorial writers, each of whom was primarily responsible for providing editorials for a specific edition.

Our secret weapon was our administrative assistant, whose job was to verify letters to the editor and guest column submissions — most of which came unsolicited. She then would edit them, turning raw text into readable essays. She exhibited great patience with our contributors and great skill in working with the text.

We had a part-time editorial cartoonist who illustrated commentary for the Globe-Times. He was, shall we say, a one-of-a-kind character, as most cartoonists tend to be.

The business would evolve over time from those heady days.

Not many years after my arrival, we debuted an online edition. That’s when the change began to accelerate.

I recall early on in the development of our online edition, the young man we hired to run the digital edition boasted that we had 44,000 visitors to the page in a single month! That was big news for us. Well, the numbers kept growing. I don’t know what they are now, but I’m guessing the paper reaches 44 grand about every hour or two.

The changes kept coming.

The fellow who hired me retired in 2002. The young man who replaced him instituted even more changes.

I’m sorry to say that it became less fun as time marched ahead. One of the writers left the paper; we didn’t replace him. Our cartoonist had retired. Our administrative assistant, aka our “secret weapon,” was reassigned to another department. Then our remaining editorial writer was reassigned to another department as well.

I was left to do it myself.

On Aug. 31, 2012, my time at the paper ended. There was no fanfare. Just a “reorganization.” I was told I wouldn’t be doing what I had been doing here for nearly 18 years and for more than three decades all told. The reorganization plan allowed me to apply for another job. That was fine, except that I was qualified to do one thing, which I had done pretty well — or so I thought. Silly me.

I decided to quit. Then I left.

Maybe it was the nature of my departure that brought so little attention to the anniversary of when I arrived on the High Plains.

No worries. Life has been good. I’m still blessed, but in ways I never imagined 20 years ago.

Time to clean files

Even though I long ago disavowed making new year’s resolutions, partly because I hardly ever keep them, I do find one new year’s rite worth doing at the beginning of the year.

I clean my files. I mean the hard-copy files. The big stack of paper that piles up over the year, or over many years.

This weekend brought a revelation as I cleaned out one of my filing cabinets.

I tossed what I had kept for years in my files. I called them my “Praise and Damnation” folders. I copied the title of those folders from a former editor and a current friend who had kept them when he was active in daily journalism. They comprised messages from readers who either agreed with what I wrote or disagreed with me. Those who agreed were categorized as “Praise”; the others, well, you know how it goes.

My daily journalism career ended a couple of years ago, but I kept the files that previously had been stored in my office downtown, at the Amarillo Globe-News. This weekend, they went into the trash.

I felt rather cleansed, actually, in getting rid of them.

Before I tossed them, though, I perused a few submissions. I ran across an exchange from two individuals here in Amarillo. Their approaches are vastly different. They have wildly differing political views. One is a partisan Democrat, the other is an equally partisan Republican.

Here’s the crux of their disagreement, not just with each other, but with me.

The Democrat’s name is Jim. He accused me of being a right-wing mouthpiece for the Republican Party. He just couldn’t understand how I could be such a rabid, frothing-at-the-mouth ultraconservative “tea bagger.” He detested submissions from the other side. He would single out a few contributors whose work he hated with special vigor.

One of them is named Ricky, who would write occasional letters to the editor and guest columns. According to Ricky, I was a left-wing, squishy, bleeding heart liberal whose views had no legitimate standing in a community such as ours. This is the Texas Panhandle, for crying out loud, and how dare I espouse those lefty views here?

One guy called me a right-wing “nut job.” The other guy called everything just short of being a communist.

All this falls right back into what I told both of them: Their own bias frames their view of the work I did.

I actually tried to get them to talk to each other. Jim would have none of it. He had no desire to sit down over coffee to discuss his differences with Ricky. I don’t recall Ricky stating a specific objection to meeting with Jim.

But as the object of their mutual scorn, I learned to roll with it.

I’m glad to be free of the huge pile of paper — and to be liberated from the hassle of dealing with individuals who cannot see through their own bias.

 

Bank it: Trump isn't running for president

My former colleagues at the Amarillo Globe-News have run a column by a guy who fancies himself as a player in Republican political circles.

He is Matt Towery, a former Georgia GOP state legislator and a pal of Newt Gingrich. He’s also a friend of the Globe-News’s corporate ownership, which is the major reason he is published occasionally in the local paper.

Towery thinks Donald Trump is considering seriously whether to run for president in 2016. What’s more, Towery is infatuated with the notion of Trump actually becoming president.

Let’s clear the air.

Trump isn’t running. He’ll never run for president. He is talking like this because he likes — no, he loves — the sound of his voice. He loves getting people all worked up over the goofy things he says and he takes himself far too seriously on these matters.

However, the real reason he won’t run is because he has a lucrative TV deal that he cannot surrender. It’s that apprentice show of his on NBC-TV, the one where he tells celebrities “You’re fired.”

He’s going to give that up to earn a paltry 400 grand a year making decisions involving the future of the nation?

Towery took pains in a column published this week in the Globe-News to poke a little fun at President Obama’s experience prior to moving into the White House. He belittled his community organizing experience and noted that Obama served briefly in the Illinois Legislature and then the U.S. Senate before being elected president in 2008.

Meanwhile, Trump keeps bellowing about whether the president is constitutionally qualified to serve in the office he holds. You know, the “born in Kenya” crap. Give me a break.

Towery equates Trump’s “star quality” with Ronald Reagan. Sure. Except that Reagan actually governed a huge state for eight years. Trump’s government experience? None.

And let’s not look askance at the importance of actually working with government.

No, Donald Trump is among the least-suited men possible for this incredibly nuanced and sophisticated job. He should keep his day job “firing” washed-up celebrities.

President Trump? Perish the thought. Forever.

A perk awaits semi-retired journalist

Now that I’m no longer a full-time journalist, I plan to accept an invitation I otherwise might  have declined.

I look forward to this event.

On New Year’s Day, Potter County Judge-elect Nancy Tanner is going to take office as the presiding officer of the county’s Commissioners Court. I’ll stand and applaud when she takes her oath of office.

Reporter Decorum Rule No. 1 prohibits such outward displays of support from the media. Reporters, editors and opinion writers are supposed to maintain a public appearance of neutrality. I couldn’t cheer for speechmakers at the two national Republican presidential conventions I attended — New Orleans in 1988 and Houston in 1992.

I did, though, attend the Democratic convention in Charlotte in 2012, but that was about a week after I had been “reorganized” out of my job at the newspaper where I worked for nearly 18 years. I had obtained press credentials for the convention and planned to cover it, but since I was a “civilian” when I got there, I was allowed to cheer.

Back to the present. I’m still a civilian. Sure, I might have attended the swearing-in as a journalist, but I’d have to put on my best professional face and demeanor.

Nancy Tanner was elected county judge this year in a clear statement of good sense and reason from Potter County’s voters. I am quite glad she won and I’ve stated so already on this blog and to whomever I’ve spoken about it since her victory.

Tanner sent me an invitation to attend the swearing-in at the Santa Fe Building in downtown Amarillo. Barring a catastrophic illness or some other unforeseen emergency, I plan to be there. I am likely to give the new judge a hug and will wish her well as she embarks on this new phase of her public service career.

Yes, indeed. Semi-retirement does have its perks.

 

Severance package for Officer Wilson? No

Darren Wilson’s departure from the Ferguson (Mo.) Police Department well could provoke a protest among those who believe he deserves a severance package.

Allow me to argue that he doesn’t deserve it.

Wilson was cleared by a local grand jury of criminal charges in the August shooting death of a young black man, Michael Brown. The incident produced a firestorm of protest and the grand jury no-bill has reignited community — and indeed national — anger over the white officer’s role in Brown’s death.

He quit his job. Resigned voluntarily. What he’ll do next is anyone’s guess. I wish him well.

Wilson doesn’t deserve a severance package; the police department has said it won’t offer him one.

I have a bit of personal knowledge about this kind of issue.

I left my last job in daily journalism under duress. The company reorganized its newsroom operation, rolled my once-autonomous department into the newsroom, asked everyone to apply for jobs; I applied for mine, but it went to someone else.

“Well,” I thought, “I think I’ll just quit.”

During my final visit the next day with my soon-to-be former employer, I inquired about a severance. He all but laughed in my face before telling me “No. You resigned.” We talked a few more moments. Then I left, never to return as an employee of that operation.

Wilson’s departure from the Ferguson came totally of his own volition.

Severance package for quitting? Not a chance.

 

Republican wave douses Potter County

Just how serious is this Republican wave that the GOP is proclaiming from the Tuesday mid-term election?

Consider what happened in one justice of the peace precinct in Potter County, Texas. It had been served since 1998 by a Democratic justice of the peace, who on Tuesday got drummed out of office by a first-time candidate who –near as I can tell — no one had heard of.

My pal and former colleague Jon Mark Beilue talks about this in a blog he wrote this morning.

http://amarillo.com/blog-post/jon-mark-beilue/2014-11-05/anyone-republican-would-win-local-election

Texas is seriously Republican. The Panhandle of our state is even more so. Democratic stronghold pockets are dwindling with each election cycle. Another of them bit the dust Tuesday.

JP Nancy Bosquez soon will be a former justice of the peace. Her successor will be a fellow named Richard Herman, a retired Army sergeant.

Potter County’s Precinct 2 long has been considered relatively “safe” for Democrats. No more. To be a Republican running for anything in Texas, let alone the Panhandle, is now to be a juggernaut. Herman won even though he’s lugging some considerable personal baggage, which includes multiple arrests on felony charges.

The Republican tide Tuesday was real. It swept out a dependable officeholder who had the misfortune of being from the “other” party.

However, here’s one head-scratching element to this story. The county commissioner from that very precinct, Democrat Mercy Murguia, was elected to a full term. She survived the GOP tsunami, while Bosquez was getting swamped.

Very strange.

 

 

'Reading between the lines'

A column in today’s Amarillo Globe-News encourages folks to “read between the lines of newspaper endorsements.”

OK. I usually do that. I also read between the lines of this particular essay, which contained a couple of points worth noting.

One is the timing of a particular endorsement mentioned by the author of the essay, Globe-News director of commentary David Henry. He writes about the paper’s impending endorsement in the Leticia Van de Putte-Dan Patrick race for Texas lieutenant governor. More on that in a moment.

Second is this: “The reason Patrick isn’t piling up newspaper endorsement is — let’s face it — his habit of saying politically incorrect things, and some editorial boards consider themselves above such behavior.”

I am almost ready to lay down some real American money and suggest that the Globe-News endorsement, when it comes, will back Patrick in the race to become the state’s next lieutenant governor. Columnists and editorialists usually don’t refer to political correctness unless they intend to make light of it, denigrate it, or say they outright they oppose it. The tone of the statement quoted on this blog suggests one or both of the first two points.

That’s fine. Any newspaper is surely entitled to endorse whomever they wish.

However, the timing is a bit troublesome.

The election occurs on Tuesday. The endorsement will come out on Election Eve or on Election Day. Either way, the response time from readers either endorsing or opposing the newspaper endorsement — whichever way it goes — is extremely limited. Readers likely will have little or zero time to write something, submit it and then get it published prior to the time voters go to the polls.

Oh yeah. They’ve got the digital edition. Readers can post comments online. Good luck getting to them if you don’t pay to read the digital version of the newspaper.

Back in the old days, when I ran editorial pages in Amarillo, in Beaumont, or back in Oregon, we had a policy that cut off campaign-related letters to the editor one week before election day. We sought to avoid what a former editor of mine would call a “last-minute dump” by foes of a candidate who would disparage a candidate without giving the other side enough time to respond.

Accordingly, we usually managed to get our editorial recommendations on races published well before Election Day. With the advent of early voting, indeed, it became imperative that we get our endorsements on the record prior to the start of the early-voting period.

I guess that’s changed these days. The timing of the newspaper’s endorsement in this highly important race amounts, in my mind, to a last-minute dump.

That’s their call. I’m still looking forward to reading what my former newspaper has to say regarding this important statewide race.

I might be surprised. Then again, probably not, if what I read between those lines is accurate.

 

'In support of abortion'? Hardly

The campaign for Texas governor is heading down the stretch and some state newspapers are weighing in with their editorial endorsements.

To no one’s surprise, near as I can tell, my local paper — the Amarillo Globe-News — is backing Republican Attorney General Greg Abbott. That’s their call and they’re certainly entitled to make it.

But there is a single phrase in the Sunday editorial that needs some, um, clarification. I will attempt to provide it here.

The fourth paragraph mentions Abbott’s experience as AG, state Supreme Court justice and his work as a “proven conservative.” Fine, so far — I guess. Then it goes on essentially to denigrate Abbott’s Democratic opponent, Wendy Davis, saying she is “best known for her marathon 2013 filibuster in the state Senate in support of abortion.”

Whoa!

In support of abortion?

Can we simplify this issue any more? Can we turn a topic for an intelligent discussion more graphically into a mere talking point?

This precisely is the kind of half-truth-telling bordering on demagoguery that launches me into orbit.

The bill that Davis filibustered — and which became law in a subsequent session of the Legislature — intended to put the brakes on a bill that would have limited women’s access to abortion if they so chose to obtain one. It does not “support” the procedure, as the editorial mentioned here implies. It intended to provide women the choice — which they deserve — in making arguably the most difficult decision any of them ever would have to make.

But no. Texas has turned “small-government conservatism” on its ear.

Conservatives claim to favor less-intrusive government — until it involves certain hot-button issues, such as abortion. Then they turn into big-government liberals, enacting laws that dictate to individuals how they should make decisions they rightfully should make in consultation with their own conscience, their loved ones, their physician or their faith.

The election is almost at hand. Abbott is favored to win the race for governor. Until then, may we discuss the candidates’ pluses and minuses with intelligence and avoid simple-minded slogans?

 

 

Town poised to join 21st century?

Canyon, Texas, is a lovely college community. It’s the Randall County seat, where my wife and I live, although our house is about 12 miles north of Canyon’s city limits.

It also engenders this perception among outsiders of being a place that’s a bit old-fashioned. Its residents seemingly adhere to some archaic social mores, such as its time-honored ban on selling alcoholic beverages.

Well, on Nov. 4, voters have a chance to drag Canyon into the 21st century by allowing the sale of alcohol, as in beer and wine.

It’s time for the city to let its municipal hair down just a bit and allow the sale of these products.

I do take seriously the opposition to this idea, which has been — pardon the pun — brewing for some time. A lot of hardened opponents think the sale of beer and wine at grocery stores is going to open the door to — gasp! — liquor by the drink, sold in bars and taverns.

I read a letter to the editor opposing the idea in today’s Amarillo Globe-News. The author of the letter is a gentleman with whom I’m acquainted and based on my knowledge of his political leanings, he no doubt would like to see a return of Prohibition.

Glen Stocker refers to the “Canyon crooks” who are “trying to push booze down our throats. “The lack of alcohol sales may not stop all drunken pregnant women,” he states, “but why make it easy for them?”

Sheesh! Let’s get a grip here.

The sale of this stuff doesn’t create a society of drunks. Nor does it promote alcohol abuse. It’s a realization that in our mobile society it makes no sense to ban the sale of such products when all one has to do is drive a few minutes (in this case, north to Amarillo) to purchase the stuff, bring it back home and swill it to their hearts’ content.

The very idea of dry cities and dry counties in this era of extreme mobility no longer makes sense. It might have at one time, when we traveled by horseback.

Those days are long gone.

Rove calls Holder a 'hack'

That’s the spirit, Karl Rove.

When Eric Holder, the attorney general of the United States steps down after nearly six years of service to the country, “Bush’s Brain” Rove calls him a “partisan hack.”

http://www.politico.com/story/2014/09/eric-holder-resign-karl-rove-react-111345.html?hp=l11

Therein lies a big part of the problem with today’s political debate. You have differences with an administration and then as the nation’s top lawyer steps down you inflame those differences with a statement that is stunning in its lack of self-awareness.

It’s been part and parcel of the right’s reaction to Holder’s impending departure. An editorial in my local newspaper, the Amarillo Globe-News, spent a good deal of space condemning him for various perceived and alleged errors while on the job. It made no mention of his sincere commitment to voting rights for all Americans.

As for Rove, the godfather of partisan hacks everywhere, it galls me to no end that he would hang that label on someone else.

The big picture at times is just too complete and puts too much context on someone’s public service to suit some of us.