Dueling Q&As

By now, I'm sure a few of you City Hall watchers have read my Q&A with Bob Bratina. I've gotten lots of feedback about that story -- many people have been sympathetic to our new mayor, but many others have argued that Bob didn't come off well.

Since then, Bratina has chosen not to comment to the Spectator. He has told several of my colleagues that he's the mayor-elect, not the mayor, and as a result, doesn't have the authority to comment on issues. If you've been watching closely, you will have noticed three or four Spectator stories that ran over the last week without comment from Bratina.

But apparently Bratina is willing to speak with other media -- specifically The Bay Observer, home to Bratina's new chief of staff Peggy Chapman.  The Observer ran a Q&A of its own this week, which is now  available online.  Peggy, an editor and reporter at the Observer, told me last week that she is staying on at the paper to help with the transition period and will be joining Bob's office on Dec. 1. However, there's no byline on the story, so it's not clear about who did the Q&A.

The optics of this situation aren't great. We have a mayor who is unwilling to provide comment to one newspaper -- and by extension its 260,000 daily readers -- but is willing to speak to a newspaper where his chief of staff is employed. (Or, at the least, was very recently employed).

But the Observer shares some responsibility here too. In the interest of transparency, why not put a byline on the Q&A? If Peggy was responsible for it, did she perform it before or after she accepted the job as Bob's chief of staff?  If she wasn't, why not clearly indicate that? 

Some people will dismiss this as sour grapes on  the Spectator's part. Fair enough. But one of the most important tenets of journalism is independence of the press, and right now, it seems that the lines between the Observer and Bratina's office are somewhat blurred.

What do you think?

 UPDATE: I wrote to John Best, publisher of the Bay Observer, for a comment on this issue. Here's the response I received from him.

A few days after the election Peggy advised me that she was accepting the position of Chief of Staff for the mayor-elect. Accordingly, I wrote all of the stories related to the Hamilton election. I did the sit-down with Bob Bratina. Peggy was not even present.

 

I would have been happy to provide this information before you had drawn your conclusions and posted the blog. Regrettably this is not my first experience with the Spectator writing first and asking questions later. Id appreciate it if this were posted on the blog.

 ANOTHER UPDATE: Howard Elliott, a managing editor here at the Spec, has asked me to post this as well.

A response to this blog post contains comments the poster says came from Peggy Chapman’s Facebook page concerning her appointment as the mayor’s chief of staff. Shortly after the post appeared, Ms Chapman contacted the Spectator and said she did not make those comments, saying in part: ‘those comments are fictional.’ She did not ask that we take any action on the matter. The Spectator decided it would not be appropriate to leave comments posted that are alleged to be fictional by the person identified as having made them. Since we don’t have proof one way or the other, I judged the best thing to do is to simply post the facts as we know them for a certainty, hence this update.

 

 

 

Comments

[The Hamiltonian Admin]

Mr. Bratina has always been receptive to The Hamiltonian. We've also found him to be willing to engage in the past online and off. That has been our experience.

The Hamiltonian Admin
www.thehamiltonian.net

[Hamiltonthisis]

There is no reporter byline on the Spec Q&A with Bob Bratina. I can't find a reporter's name anywhere in the piece. How is that different from the anon Observer piece? I do understand the grey area that Chapman finds herself in now.

[Emma]

Hamiltonthisis - You're right - it doesn't appear in the online version (an earlier version of the story). It did appear in the paper. We'll fix that.

[partisan]

I was involved in the Larry Di Ianni campaign. I did note that after the CHML debate Peggy Chapman was one of the panelists who commented on the debate. She took great pleasure in criticizing Di Ianni and extolling Bob's virtues. Granted this was before the election, but it seemed to us at the time that Peggy was very partial. Then she was offered a job...curious eh?

I am also told that she is being somehwhat rude with staff and councillors during the transition...not a smart way of influencing people on behalf of her new boss.

[Allison Gowling]

It seems that more and more people are not satisfied with the quality of the Spectator reporting.

The Spectator's quality of reporting, and what they choose to report on, is one of great concern to me.

I find the Spectator unwilling to write on the truly difficult, contraversial and important subjects, choosing instead to rerun what the Toronto Star publishes first.

Allison Gowling

[EmDixo]

Writing first and asking questions later? It cannot be that the Bay Observer has ever written a story about someone without bothering to call that person for comment first. Surely not. Otherwise how could John Best ride around on his high horse?

[EmDixo]

Peggy Chapman announced her own appointment as Chief of Staff on Facebook on October 30. She says in her new job Bob Bratina "is going to do what I say". Classy! Here is her post:

From facebook post on October 30 2010:

Peggy Chapman ok, let's get it out there. I'm going to work for Mayor Bratina. Done with the Bay Observer this weekend (WHAAAAHHHH). John Best, is just the best. Tears and tears. Have you ever had a boss who supports you 100% and TRUSTS you 100% and thinks you're smart and talented (even when you doubt it)? He did, and yet, I'm leaving him. I suck. HEY I'm chief of staff...He's actually going to do what I say... like all smart men do!!!! Kidding. Doug... get ready for a good change. Call me.

[Yves Dubeau]

Here are my thoughts to this matter, one letter to the editor ( hoping that the Spec would have published it) and an email to Berton editor of the Spec.

From: Yves Dubeau
Sent: October-30-10 10:54 AM
To: 'pberton@thespec.com'
Subject: supporting our new mayor

Mr. Berton
From the letters published in today’s Spec I am glad to see that others are like minded to myself. I do not know what the purpose of the Spec to publish all of articles and column on the subject of Bob Bratina to be negative in nature ( The Star is doing the same thing regarding Rob Ford) we the readers of the Spec are well aware of which candidate your paper supported and what I detect is sour grapes since your candidate showed an abysmal 3rd in the race. The electorate has spoken by electing Bob with a clear majority not a 500 vote spread like last election. Actually you must think that people are dolts and the newspaper is smarter but your negative practise of publishing negative articles is actually pissing off your readers, this put in simple terms. Below is a letter that I sent that went unpublish.
Regards
Yves Dubeau

From: Yves Dubeau
Sent: October-29-10 8:23 AM
To: The Spectator
Subject:

Will The Spectator ever accept and respect the choice that the electorate has made in our last municipal election? The Spectator has backed many loosing municipal issues such as the west harbour site (without a tenant) and Eisenberger as mayor among others . Since Bob Bratina was elected not one article or column published has been positive regarding the choice that taxpayers have made. The city has not have any mayors ,since amalgamation, last more than one term. It is long been recognized that city council to be dysfunctional and Andrew Dreschel’s column tells us about the upcoming challenges that Bob will face in dealing with councillors.
The common denominator over the years has not been with the mayors but effectively the councillors. The same councillors have lasted longer than the mayors and as such have to take responsibilities for lacking in the delivery of a working council. During Bob’s campaign he has warned council that he will stop the high jacking of council by councillors, this is good for the city, bad for councillors who most of them think of themselves as mayors of their own ward and act as such. I applaud Loyd Ferguson who said that he will work with the mayor while most other councillors are saying don’t screw with us or we will set you up to look like a fool.
If I can ask the question, is there any human being alive that our council will stand behind unanimously?
If the answer is yes then this person would be able to herd cats. Why don’t the Spectator start this new term for council by accepting the choice that voters made? By the way if Eisenberger think that he lost the election because Bob wants to revisit amalgamation, Fred is in denial of the real reasons.
Yves Dubeau

Emma
I know that you are not telling the whole story regarding your interview with Mayor elect Bratina. Maybe you should tell us regarding an undisclosed "recording action" that you undertook while not disclosing it to Mayor elect Bob.

[Emma]

Yves - yes, I did record the interview with Bob. I often record interviews for the sake of accuracy - especially for a Q&A format when we run responses verbatim. There's no way I can type or take notes quickly enough to reflect every word my interviewee says. A recorder is really like an electronic pencil that allows me greater accuracy in my stories.

Also, just for your own information, I often disclose that I'm recording, but I am not required to do so. In Canada only one person in the conversation needs to be aware that the conversation is being taped. You will find this law in the Criminal Code.

When someone is speaking to a journalist during a formal interview, everything is on the record (unless both parties agree to go off the record) -- so recording is just a way to ensure that I don't miss anything.

I hope that clarifies things for you.

[EmDixo]

The Spectator is simply doing what it should have done during the election campaign: Giving Bob Bratina the journalistic scrutiny that he deserves. The truth is Bob got a free ride during the campaign because no one in the media believed he was a serious candidate. That's how he got elected without presenting an election platform or even a single serious idea. Well, he got elected. But the free ride is now officially over! Maybe he can run and dodge and hide now. He can refuse to answer the tough questions and only answer soft ball questions from his pals at the Bay Observer. But on December 1 he can't hide any more. Angry Bob will have to face the music! Let the pen throwing begin!

[Sloaner]

Looks like the fun is just getting started for Mayor-Elect Bratina and his Chief of Staff. The two of them will need all the help they can get. Let's hope they realize that sooner rather than later. Oh, and as for the Facebook post: "HEY I'm chief of staff...He's actually going to do what I say... like all smart men do!!!!" -- sounds like this lady is one tough cookie. Is SHE the Mayor, or is Mr. B.? I wonder how his wife must feel? We'll see.

[Yves Dubeau]

One blogger mentions that the Spec did what they were supposed to do, vetting of candidates !!!!!! Excuse me, just like they did to Eisenberger ? They endorse him just like other lost cause that they endorsed. With Di Ianni they published an article on a poll from sources unknown that DiIanni was ahead with a solid majority, that is not journalism. The Spec was hostile with Bob after he got elected. Would you sit down with a media that had published 4-5 negative articles within a time frame of 2 days. Emma, do not feel bad, your sister paper in Toronto is also being snubbed by the mayor elect Ford for the same reason. Media has changed over the years the print media is not the only game in town.

[Plouffe]

Yves, stop being an apologist for Bratina. I just went over the number of articles and pictures of Bratina vs Di Ianni and Eisenberger. He had twice as many pictures in the paper as Fred and three times as many as Larry...give it a rest, Yves. Bob is his own worst enemy and a train wreck waiting to happen. We will see.

[Yves Dubeau]

Plouffe- I admit that I am siding on Bob's side on this issue. However to imply that I am apologizing I do not think that I am. My position however is not to condemn an individual on the basis of hearing one side of a story and it so happened that I was aware of Bob's issue of how the interview was handled as well as reading the Spec over a period of time that showed me as well as others that the reporting has been nothing but negative regarding the candidate who received an overwhelming majority of votes. Emma will just have to make nice with Bob if she wants access to the mayor's office. I would think that a reporter covering city hall should have access to the office.

[ed]

Great!! just more gossip for you city workers blogging at work.
What was the final payout to Michael Fenn?
If our integrity commissioner cannot take on cases and has done nothing since being hired, what the heck does that guy do all day, and did he get a raise in pay?
Since HECFI has admitted its a high-risk business the city is paying for, shouldn't we be saying goodbye? Everyone in the world knew the economy tanked except CEO Duncan Gillespie and he failed to make the proper adjustments, shouldn't he be fired immediately?

[EmDixo]

I enjoyed Andrew Dreschel's column today. Jayon Farr says he had an "energetic discussion" with Bob Bratina. If by "energetic discussion" he means a shouting match in public, in the parking lot behind city hall no less, in front of witnesses, then yes, I suppose it was an energetic discussion. Bottom line: There are only two new members on council and Bratina has had a shouting match with one of them even before the council is sworn in! So much for the new civility!

[Plouffe]

So, Bob's office is only hiring two people and 'contract' work. The two employees come from John Best's Bay Observer. Look for that contracting work to go to John Best.