By Antonio D. French
Filed Thursday, April 26, 2007 at 1:03 PM
The St. Louis American is at it again. Last week, the paper which bills itself as "the" black weekly became the first media to attack the city's first African-American ever elected as President of the Board of Aldermen — just two days after he was sworn in!
The reason for the attack? Its anonymous "Political Eye" column claimed that it was because the editors at the paper had not received an invitation to the bi-annual swearing-in of Board members (Is that why the American never breaks any stories, because they're waiting to be invited to cover them?), but that isn't really the reason.
Journalists don't get invitations to such things, supporters do. And St. Louis American publisher Dr. Donald Suggs, who endorsed Reed in his historic election, was mailed an invitation to his home address.
(By the way, the American's top-notch photojournalist, Wiley Price, apparently doesn't subscribe to his editor's "wait to be invited" philosophy, because he covered the event.)
So why did the paper's editor attack Reed then? Because editor Chris King has a problem with me.
See, King hates a couple of things about me and my PubDef.net — but as is often the nature of hate, it has more to do with King's own insecurities.
Last year, PubDef.net was the only media to cover a campaign event several black businessmen held for Republican Senator Jim Talent. The Talent campaign invited the American and others to cover the event, but I guess their personal politics got in the way of covering the story. But next week, low and behold, the "Political Eye" writes about and slams the black businessmen for presenting at that meeting a mock failing report card to Talent's opponent and eventual victor, Democrat Claire McCaskill.
"St. Louis American, WTF?" I wrote at the time. "There was no American reporter in the room... but no mention of our exclusive report or photos." The paper responded by calling me a "stealth black Republican."
Then in October, the "Eye" wrote about then-aldermanic candidate Kacie Starr Triplett, a black woman who was trying to become the city's youngest alderman and whose election would ensure blacks would not lose numbers on the Board. "If you want the political support of folks old enough to be your father or grandfather, next time talk to them about your candidacy before you quit your day job," they said.
But King couldn't waste an opportunity to take a shot at me. "Triplett also may not have a pitch-perfect ear for friends, as she is close friends with an avowedly independent local journalist [Antonio French] who seems to have at least one leg in the Republican Party, if attracting exclusive ads from the Jim Talent campaign are any indication."
(Of course, King failed to mention that the Talent campaign also advertised in the American, or that his publisher, Suggs, had in the past given money the campaigns of President George W. Bush and Senator Kit Bond.)
By October 26, I had had enough. "What is you guys' problem over there?" I wrote.
"In the absence of any kind of real reporting (have you broken a single story this year?) you've turned a once-great newspaper into a gossip rag, something people pick up just to see which local African-American you spit at this week."
That remains true. While Pub Def breaks stories, like the one about the Riverview Gardens School District losing its accreditation (which the American re-reports on its website without any attribution), the American is left to report made-up gossip about black officials.
While young African-Americans are out in the streets and in the corridors of City Hall and the State Capitol, and in front of books and computer screens trying to make real improvements to our city, the American focuses every week on tearing those same people down over pettiness.
But it is not just that his paper continues to lose the war for relevance. What Chris King seems to really have been hurt by was that I apparently was the first person to point out in public that King, the author of many of these attacks on black officials, is white.
Now, to be clear, I never attacked the American for having a white editor. Diversity is a beautiful thing, which I practice even in my own home. And I still long for the day when St. Louis has a newspaper with a newsroom that looks like the City of St. Louis and covers the entire city equally and fairly. Hopefully that day will come soon.
Again, the issue is not that King is white, it is that the American hides it that riles people. The American knows just like we all do that if their readers knew who was writing these attacks, they would interpret them differently.
And so here we find ourselves today where the city's new black President of the Board has been attacked twice by the white editor of the city's largest black paper even before he has led his first full meeting.
Is the American positioning itself to be to Reed what Sharon Tyus and Velma Bailey were to Mayor Bosley? When will we learn?
I have extended an olive branch to King, even inviting him out for a drink to sit down face-to-face and work out our differences. He declined.
Instead, it appears the American has found something better than the news to report: personal pettiness.
Like a jilted girl enraged at the sight of an old boyfriend standing with a rival cheerleader, this once-great paper continues to waste its credibility and reputation on short-sighted personal agendas while news happens all around and our people suffer.
We have for the first time an Aldermanic President who has made it a legislative priority to rebuild the long-suffering areas of north St. Louis. I believe we have in Lewis Reed our city's best chance at real economic parity in terms of public and private investment in areas that have for decades been under-served.
It would be beyond unfortunate for King and the American to allow pettiness to stand in the way of progress.
My offer still stands, Chris. A beer and a conversation at The Royale or a continuation of the same kind of personal destructiveness that has held our city back for years?
UPDATE: After exchanging a couple of emails, King and I have agreed to a détente. While we haven't set a date yet for that drink, we both agree that furthering the city and the black community remains a common goal — one that should not be derailed over minor personal beefs.
The reason for the attack? Its anonymous "Political Eye" column claimed that it was because the editors at the paper had not received an invitation to the bi-annual swearing-in of Board members (Is that why the American never breaks any stories, because they're waiting to be invited to cover them?), but that isn't really the reason.
Journalists don't get invitations to such things, supporters do. And St. Louis American publisher Dr. Donald Suggs, who endorsed Reed in his historic election, was mailed an invitation to his home address.(By the way, the American's top-notch photojournalist, Wiley Price, apparently doesn't subscribe to his editor's "wait to be invited" philosophy, because he covered the event.)
So why did the paper's editor attack Reed then? Because editor Chris King has a problem with me.
See, King hates a couple of things about me and my PubDef.net — but as is often the nature of hate, it has more to do with King's own insecurities.
Last year, PubDef.net was the only media to cover a campaign event several black businessmen held for Republican Senator Jim Talent. The Talent campaign invited the American and others to cover the event, but I guess their personal politics got in the way of covering the story. But next week, low and behold, the "Political Eye" writes about and slams the black businessmen for presenting at that meeting a mock failing report card to Talent's opponent and eventual victor, Democrat Claire McCaskill.
"St. Louis American, WTF?" I wrote at the time. "There was no American reporter in the room... but no mention of our exclusive report or photos." The paper responded by calling me a "stealth black Republican."
Then in October, the "Eye" wrote about then-aldermanic candidate Kacie Starr Triplett, a black woman who was trying to become the city's youngest alderman and whose election would ensure blacks would not lose numbers on the Board. "If you want the political support of folks old enough to be your father or grandfather, next time talk to them about your candidacy before you quit your day job," they said.
But King couldn't waste an opportunity to take a shot at me. "Triplett also may not have a pitch-perfect ear for friends, as she is close friends with an avowedly independent local journalist [Antonio French] who seems to have at least one leg in the Republican Party, if attracting exclusive ads from the Jim Talent campaign are any indication."
(Of course, King failed to mention that the Talent campaign also advertised in the American, or that his publisher, Suggs, had in the past given money the campaigns of President George W. Bush and Senator Kit Bond.)
By October 26, I had had enough. "What is you guys' problem over there?" I wrote.
"In the absence of any kind of real reporting (have you broken a single story this year?) you've turned a once-great newspaper into a gossip rag, something people pick up just to see which local African-American you spit at this week."
That remains true. While Pub Def breaks stories, like the one about the Riverview Gardens School District losing its accreditation (which the American re-reports on its website without any attribution), the American is left to report made-up gossip about black officials.
While young African-Americans are out in the streets and in the corridors of City Hall and the State Capitol, and in front of books and computer screens trying to make real improvements to our city, the American focuses every week on tearing those same people down over pettiness.
But it is not just that his paper continues to lose the war for relevance. What Chris King seems to really have been hurt by was that I apparently was the first person to point out in public that King, the author of many of these attacks on black officials, is white.
Now, to be clear, I never attacked the American for having a white editor. Diversity is a beautiful thing, which I practice even in my own home. And I still long for the day when St. Louis has a newspaper with a newsroom that looks like the City of St. Louis and covers the entire city equally and fairly. Hopefully that day will come soon.
Again, the issue is not that King is white, it is that the American hides it that riles people. The American knows just like we all do that if their readers knew who was writing these attacks, they would interpret them differently.
And so here we find ourselves today where the city's new black President of the Board has been attacked twice by the white editor of the city's largest black paper even before he has led his first full meeting.
Is the American positioning itself to be to Reed what Sharon Tyus and Velma Bailey were to Mayor Bosley? When will we learn?
I have extended an olive branch to King, even inviting him out for a drink to sit down face-to-face and work out our differences. He declined.
Instead, it appears the American has found something better than the news to report: personal pettiness.
Like a jilted girl enraged at the sight of an old boyfriend standing with a rival cheerleader, this once-great paper continues to waste its credibility and reputation on short-sighted personal agendas while news happens all around and our people suffer.
We have for the first time an Aldermanic President who has made it a legislative priority to rebuild the long-suffering areas of north St. Louis. I believe we have in Lewis Reed our city's best chance at real economic parity in terms of public and private investment in areas that have for decades been under-served.
It would be beyond unfortunate for King and the American to allow pettiness to stand in the way of progress.
My offer still stands, Chris. A beer and a conversation at The Royale or a continuation of the same kind of personal destructiveness that has held our city back for years?
UPDATE: After exchanging a couple of emails, King and I have agreed to a détente. While we haven't set a date yet for that drink, we both agree that furthering the city and the black community remains a common goal — one that should not be derailed over minor personal beefs.
Labels: Hatin', Media_Watch
15 Comments:
Most newspapers do not cover anything relevant to the severe problems which exist in our City.
St. Post Dispatch is apparently the worst urban newspaper in the US.
The American is equally vapid.
They also neglect to simply report the news.
They are obviously upset due to turf and envy.
They want to catch you riding dirty.
4/26/2007 2:11 PM
I'll pay for a beer for each of you if he accepts.
4/26/2007 4:47 PM
get over yourself. Who cares. Move on and talk about something important.
4/26/2007 8:25 PM
I agree that this is all very petty. I also hope Chris King takes you up on your offer.
4/26/2007 9:16 PM
Antonio,why don't you and him have a grudge boxing match for charity?I predict you will knock him out in the first round!The American does seem to have so many personal vendettas against so many people,I think they take themselves way too serious in their importance with their out dated "news"!
4/26/2007 9:54 PM
Why are you all upset with Antonio? Hey, this is his web site, he has acknowledged his connections to Reed and others, and hey, he is supporting someone he believes in.
Back off.
If one is going to throw rocks (American) then they should make sure they have plexiglass windows.
4/26/2007 10:02 PM
Don't sweat it Antionio. They're probably just jealous of your cost-structure [grin].
t
4/27/2007 12:00 AM
The American lost its credibility years ago.
4/27/2007 8:09 AM
Antonio, i wonder if you are old enough to remember when Eric Mink was a media critic at the Post Dispatch. He went from here to new York, and now he has charge of the commentary page---he seems to have lost interest in all things local.
He was great when he was a media critic here, and was very much disliked.
There has not been anything like him.
Do you have any interest in ever working at the pd? They need improvement---especially in the way local things are covered. Maybe it would be too much of a demotion from what you are doing now---I do not know how things work.
I sense that they do not work very well regarding local media coverage in st. louis.
4/27/2007 2:08 PM
At least you only have ONE leg in the GOP...
Take the high road, Antonio. (and if he accepts I'll pay for BOTH of your drinks!)
4/27/2007 10:19 PM
clarkent,
Just noticed your post. We can split the tab.
4/27/2007 10:57 PM
Did anyone notice anything about the pictures in the Sunday Post Dispatch editorial page? boards of advisers, etc.
4/30/2007 10:44 AM
"Did anyone notice anything about the pictures in the Sunday Post Dispatch editorial page? boards of advisers, etc."
I noticed the diversity of backgroudns and interests. My pastor, a former professor and Dean of Faculty of Covenant Theological Seminary, is included. It is nice to see someone from an orthodox and evangelical background and perspective is also included.
4/30/2007 12:09 PM
The seminary is doctrinally committed to the Reformed faith and Covenant Theology, and it believes the Bible to be the inspired and inerrant word of God.
Interesting place.
4/30/2007 2:22 PM
kjoe, glad to see you recognize the mission and purpose of the seminary. When I use the term "orthodox," I am referring to its commitment to long-term, traditional cardinal doctrines of the Christian faith, not to the Orthodox Church (Greek or Russian).
4/30/2007 10:00 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home