While it’s a nice little attempt to justify The Auburn Plainsman’s editorial last week, the editor’s column today doesn’t quite do it. Yes, it reads beautifully and highlights the agonizing state of The Plainsman’s finances. But it ignores the most important point of all:
General Manager Jan Waters turned in her retirement paperwork in December 2008. In other words, she had been planning to retire long before this low blow dealt by the editorial board.
If the staff members had taken their concerns directly to the source (i.e. the general manager), then I’m sure they would have known this. Or, better yet, they could have talked to her immediate supervisor, Dean of Students Johnny Green, before printing this editorial. One last plea for change could have prevented this entire mess.
I stand by what I’ve said all along: This editorial was unacceptable. If the editor and her staff had communicated their concerns like adults, the editorial would have never been written. The long column today is nothing more than hot air; a pathetic attempt to justify the unnecessary crucifixion of a woman who didn’t deserve it. I can’t stand the thought of the editorial board celebrating a perceived “victory” when in fact they only humiliated The Plainsman and, to some degree, the university.
It’s obvious to me that the editorial staff is still operating under the assumption that they “won.” Birmingham News reporter Stan Diel posted a breaking news item (it since been deleted) that said Waters announced her retirement “after the editorial ran.” Diel checked with Adviser Jennifer Wood Adams (please see editor’s note) and Editor Kristin Oberholzer, who both apparently confirmed that fact. Unfortunately, these two sources made the incorrect assumption that Waters’ retirement was something new brought on by this editorial. Or, maybe they did know and didn’t clarify that fact to Diel. Omissions can be misleading. (Conspiracy theorists: The News pulled the story because it wasn’t relevant to its readers. Simple enough.)
You’re welcome to check my facts. Call the Office of the Dean of Students. Call Auburn’s human resources department. Call The Birmingham News. It’s easy enough to fact-check — and if The Plainsman had bothered to do this, then it wouldn’t be where it is today.
Please, everyone, make some phone calls and do some checking if you care at all about what’s going on there. There are two sides to every story. As journalists, we like to think that both sides have valid points, and sometimes we can see that both sides are right. But there are times when right and wrong are clear. This is one of them.
For more, refer to the links below:
- From The Auburn Plainsman: The Plainsman is dying, and we thought YOU should know
- Editor Kristin Oberholzer’s column: Follow-up explanations about our front-page editorial
- My previous blog entries about this: The Auburn Plainsman’s slow demise: Who’s really to blame?, Another take on The Plainsman’s editorial
- A blog by Auburn public relations professor Robert French: Editorial board’s strategy and tactics questioned by alumni and fans
Editor’s note: This post incorrectly identified one of The News’ sources as Adviser Jennifer Wood Adams. The mistake arose from a misunderstanding in an e-mail and has been corrected as of Feb. 25. Adams said she has not spoken to Stan Diel or any other reporter about The Plainsman.
Tags: Auburn University, editorial, Jan Waters, Newspaper, The Auburn Plainsman
There is a lack of basic reporting skills that form the background of this editorial. A couple of questions put to the proper people could have cleared this up. This just gets sadder with each revelation. There is at least one basic lesson to be learned here: Sloppy reporting and lack of judgement shouldn’t be rewarded with employment in newspapers, broadcast “old media,” “new media,” “multimedia” or any media.
What the 10 readers of this blog need to know is that there is a framed photo in Ms. Jan’s office of Niki Doyle, Victoria Cumbow and Jan. Niki, why don’t you tell your readers about the time that your staff rebelled and you actually locked the Plainsman doors and forced them to sign “loyalty” oaths to get back in. You are entirely too close to this story to be impartial and it’s starting to show.
Hello, reader No. 11 … I’m also going to Jan’s retirement party next month. I apologize for the lack of full disclosure; I assumed my few blog readers knew I had a good relationship with Jan and tried my best to minimize the in-fighting between business and editorial. I’m afraid I failed.
Yippee! I guess that makes me reader number 12! I think it’s hysterically funny that these losers that worked for you at The Plainsman can’t just get on with their lives. Why are they bothering to read what you write? While I’m sure you were a pain in the ass to work for, your goal was to run The Plainsman like a REAL newspaper. That happens to include working with your manager and your business side, not against them. I wonder if any of your former staff were hired straight out of college without even applying, won a first place award for news reporting from the Alabama Associated Press Association and has been placed in the editor rotation at a paper the size of the Times? : ) They need to grow up or SHUT UP!
I worked under Niki, I never saw the problems others did. She was always fair, helpful and kind to me. Such bashing on her blog is quite immature.
- Supposed reader 13
Hmm, so Dr. Green has known about Jan Waters’ retirement since Dec. 11, 2008, but didn’t tell Dr. Gogue or The Plainsman staff about it. He let his supervisor have two meetings with The Plainsman staff without this information. Interesting. And Kristin and Dr. Adams were just passing along the information that they were given. Don’t blame them. For Jan and Dr. Green not to tell them, even during their multiple meetings, is merely shabby and tacky. But for Dr. Green to leave Dr. Gogue uninformed about it .. hmm, Niki .. that information could just get a person in a lot of trouble with his boss.