People make mistakes, that’s fine. The Longmont Ledger made a couple of large ones recently, but at least they corrected it quickly. But, as always, there’s more to the story.
In a February 10, 2010 story titled “Longmont settles open meetings suit with newspaper” there were two factual errors (in bold): 1) That Firestone suit, another of the three raised during the fall campaign, is still pending, as is another against the city’s campaign-finance rules, and 2) The City Council approved an annexation for that project in 2007, but citizens overturned that decision at the in 2008. The original story was written by “Clay Evans“, the corrected version was by “Longmont Ledger“. Hmm, okay.
For a paper that’s trying to be a legitimate alternative to the Times-Call, and you’d hope someone at the Longmont Ledger actually lives in Longmont, or at least pays some attention to what’s going on here – how could they miss the quite large news that the campaign finance lawsuit was settled? Remember that $68,500figure?
But the second item is more troubling. The wording of the original and the correction is almost verbatim of a new leftwing website in Longmont. If you were a casual observer and had no idea what’s going on in Longmont, you could swear they are stating as fact that they got the anti-LifeBridge annexation question on the ballot! Well, they didn’t, but the Ledger apparently fell for it. This ranks right up there with falling for an internet hoax and spreading it around before doing a little bit of research.
But that’s not all. When Clay Evans was considering having one of us cover Longmont City Council meetings for the Ledger, he was concerned about our leanings. Don’t bust a gut laughing over that one, this is after all a former editorial page editor for the Daily Camera. Not long after he’s on lefty lovefest radio KGNU (don’t bother trying to find it, dog whistles and sonar have more listeners), and now he’s getting ideas for Ledger articles from the lefty screwballs in town and their blogs? Add to that some comments on the Ledger that were not friendly towards one of these screwballs, like around 30 total, that were all taken down. But the Ledger has no problem leaving up comments and letters that cast all kinds of aspersions towards me, by name? It’s getting harder and harder to take this entity seriously.
Here’s the deal: This site, Longmont Advocate, doesn’t pretend to be a purely news site, it’s mostly commentary and opinion. Sure, we may break some news that the paper either didn’t cover or not in very much detail, but that’s not the meat and potatoes of this site. Another site has popped up recently (the one the Ledger got fooled by) called Free Range Longmont (might as well say their name, they’re obsessed with us and/or the many sites/projects we have involvement with). It basically copies the concept of this site but from a leftwing perspective, and is ran from the people who were crushed in the last election. Our MO here was apparently so successful, who wouldn’t want to copy that?
Difference being is that they want the Ledger to succeed, always talk it up, and always tear down an actual local paper, the Times-Call. I don’t believe I’ve ever put a legitimate news operation in the position of getting this kind of egg on its face (a legitimate news operation wouldn’t allow it in the first place – I know, stating the obvious again). This leftwing echo chamber in town, which apparently has Mr. Evans ear, just made both the Longmont Ledger and Free Range Longmont look amateurish, and frankly, quite buffoonish.
Read each at your own risk. Or take as seriously as Mad Magazine or The Onion*.
* – no knock on The Onion, which I love and still have permission to use on this site and podcast.
(Image source: Twitter)