SALZMAN: Post's Singleton lets it all hang out

Odd front-page editorial audacious

Published November 10, 2007 at midnight

Text size

More Opinion Columns & Blogs

You may have noticed that The Denver Post ran an editorial last Sunday denouncing Gov. Bill Ritter's executive order creating a partnership with state workers.

The editorial was strange, for sure, but not a journalistic crime.

The owner of a newspaper has the prerogative to run a front-page editorial, even though some might think it looks like a temper tantrum over a minor union gain.

Post owner and publisher William Dean Singleton told Westword he mandated the front-page placement because the Post's editorial board felt Gov. Bill Ritter was allowing "special interests to dictate his actions."

The Post must believe this in a really big way, because running any editorial on the front page is hazardous for a newspaper.

For one thing, it creates the perception that the owner is meddling in the paper's news coverage.

I know the Post informed us under its editorial that the news department operates independently from the opinion pages. But many readers won't believe this and point to the editorial on the front page, where the news is supposed to be.

So I made a bunch of calls to try to find out if, in fact, Singleton dictates or manipulates the Post's news coverage to support his political agenda.

It's no secret that a lot of people have left the Post recently. Maybe one or more would tell me that Singleton has his hands in the newsroom, but I couldn't find anyone to confirm this.

Of course, the ones who'd know are the Post's former editors.

First I spoke with Dennis Britton, editor from 1996-1999: "On news coverage, he never once said anything about doing anything," he told me. "Except to say that was good or that was bad, he never directed coverage at all."

Next I called, Neil Westergaard, editor from 1993-1996: "Dean talked a lot about coverage but never tried to influence it in any way pursuant to some sort of editorial position he had," Westergaard told me.

Gil Spencer, editor from 1989-1993, told me: "Well, I can make this a very short conversation, because Dean never, during the entire time I was editor of the paper, never dictated news coverage. He didn't even come close to it."

Sure, you may be thinking, why would they tell the truth about this?

Maybe you're right, but strangely enough, after talking with those guys and others, I believe them, mostly.

I'm not saying the big boss doesn't influence the Post's news coverage to some degree, and subtle influence and self-censorship can be huge.

But, still, I think the Post's news coverage is mostly free from Singleton's political taint.

Part of the proof of this was the Post's own excellent news coverage of Ritter's executive order, which appeared alongside the paper's Page 1 editorial.

The coverage was fair and accurate, and it contradicted some misleading claims in the Post's editorial, as noted by Colorado Media Matters.

The Post's editorial claimed that Ritter's order will "drive up the cost of doing business in Colorado by forcing collective bargaining" on state employees.

But the Post's news coverage stated: "The executive order did not give state employees the powers of traditional collective bargaining - it contains a no-strike policy and specifies the new 'partnership agreements' will not result in binding arbitration." It added that "lawmakers could toss out any agreement that costs money."

The Post's news coverage offered the view, in contrast to the frenzied pitch of the newspaper's editorial, that Ritter's order wasn't very significant, quoting University of Colorado economist Jeffrey Zax as saying that in the absence of binding agreements, " 'why would the state have any incentive to argue in good faith?' "

In the end, I have to admit that I admire Singleton's audacity to place his odd editorial on the front page, when the Post's circulation is falling and journalism is seen as one of the least trusted professions.

He ran the risk of scaring off customers who perceive the paper as being biased. In other words, it was a dumb thing to do from a business perspective, but he did it anyway.

I hope his next bold move involves something like investing more in the news department.

Editorial board? If the Post runs another front-page editorial, it should do more than just tell readers that "The Denver Post's editorial board operates independently of the paper's news coverage."

Many readers have no clue what this means and would benefit from an explanation.

Political health. As the state legislature prepares to debate health care this session, it would be great to see the dailies illuminate the political expenditures of the health-care industry in Colorado.

How much money is being doled out and to whom? Has the pattern of political donations changed? Who are the major health-industry donors?

Jason Salzman, president of Cause Communications and board chairman of Rocky Mountain Media Watch, is the author of Making the News: A Guide for Activists and Nonprofits. Reach him at salzmanj@RockyMountainNews.com.

Subscribe to the Rocky Mountain News