Author: Dan Kennedy

But what about 2002?

Scott Helman of the Boston Globe weighs in today with a curious — or perhaps I should say incurious — profile of Peter Flaherty, who is described as Mitt Romney’s “go-to guy for conservatives.”

Romney, of course, has engendered considerable skepticism on the right with his shift from moderate to conservative on social issues, especially abortion and gay rights. Flaherty’s job is to tell conservatives that Romney’s conversion is sincere and not a matter of mere political expediency.

Flaherty’s key talking point: “Obviously I’ve got to believe he’s for real, or I wouldn’t be wasting my time.”

Trouble is, the only evidence Helman cites that Romney used to be a moderate dates back to 1994, and to that illuminating YouTube video of Romney trying to out-liberal Ted Kennedy during their Faneuil Hall debate for the U.S. Senate. There’s no question that Romney has moved well to the right since then.

But there’s also no question that Romney has moved well to the right since 2002, when he ran for governor as a moderate — and, significantly, when Flaherty went to work for him, according to Helman’s story.

Take, for instance, this AP story from October 2002 in which Romney’s then-running mate, Kerry Healey, defended her boss as being every bit as pro-choice as his Democratic rival: “There isn’t a dime of difference between Mitt Romney’s position on choice and Shannon O’Brien.” Romney himself said that he “will preserve and protect a woman’s right to choose … I will not change any provisions in Massachusetts’ pro-choice laws.”

Or consider that in 2002 Romney opposed a constitutional amendment that would ban same-sex marriage. Or that, also in 2002, his campaign distributed pink-colored fliers at Gay Pride that read, “Mitt and Kerry wish you a great Pride weekend! All citizens deserve equal rights, regardless of their sexual preference.”

Which brings us back to Flaherty, who defends Romney’s conservative credentials on the grounds that he wouldn’t waste his time working for someone who did not genuinely hold such views. The obvious question is why Flaherty was so willing to waste his time in 2002.

The irony-deprived

That would be today’s Boston Globe editorial page. And MetroWest Daily News editor Richard Lodge. And Media Nation.

Think back over the past few days to how many people have defended the Mooninite pranksters on the grounds that they were promoting a well-known cartoon — well-known, at least, to a certain subset of teenagers and twentysomethings, a category that most definitely does not include, uh, me.

Does that mean that our governmental and public-safety officials must be expected to have an advanced degree in pop culture before deciding what to do about a bunch of circuit boards with batteries and wires sticking out? Such things have been known to blow up, you know.

How could we be so stupid? It’s simple. We don’t watch this stuff. We don’t know about it. We don’t have time. Sorry.

But Jay Fitzgerald is right — if Mayor Tom Menino tries to ban the “Aqua Teen Hunger Force” movie over this, then he really has lost his mind.

Identical triplets

Until this moment, Media Nation has resisted the conspiracy theorists who’ve been wondering about those nearly identical stories that appear in the New York Times and the Boston Globe on the same day.

But now there are three separate incidents, and as every journalist knows, when you’ve got three, you’ve got a trend. So let’s review, shall we?

We begin with “Animal House,” the Democratic congressional crash pad occupied by Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois, Sen. Chuck Schumer of New York and our own Rep. Bill Delahunt of Massachusetts. A worthy feature? Absolutely. Alex Beam certainly thought so, and his piece appeared in the Globe on Jan. 18. So did my former Boston Phoenix colleague Mark Leibovich, whose Times article (sub. req.) also appeared on Jan. 18.

Next up: Sen. Barack Obama’s days as a student at Harvard Law School, the subject of lengthy, front-page articles last Sunday in both the Times (by Jodi Kantor) and the Globe (by Michael Levenson and Jonathan Saltzman).

Finally — and shame on me for not reading the Times first thing this morning — it turns out that Jackie MacMullan’s Globe story on Ted Johnson’s debilitating series of concussions is competing with this front-pager in the Times by Alan Schwarz on — yes — Ted Johnson’s debilitating series of concussions.

So what is going on here? My guess is that it’s not a conspiracy, but it’s not a complete coincidence, either.

Obviously if the New York Times Co., which owns both the Times and the Globe, were looking to save money, it would simply run the same story in both papers. And if the Times Co. were coordinating coverage in some way so that the Globe could neither beat nor be beaten by the Times on local stories, I’m reasonably confident that the Globe newsroom would be leaking like Scooter Libby.

But pure coincidence? That seems pretty unlikely.

Which leaves us, then, with the usual journalistic sausage-making.

Let’s take the “Animal House” story, which is probably the most transparent. The Times is working on a story, and Delahunt figures his hometown paper, the Globe, will get pissed if he doesn’t say anything. So he makes sure someone at the Globe knows about it, as well as when the Times story is slated to run. (You could work this in reverse, too, with Schumer as the tipster. But what about Durbin and the Chicago Tribune? Pathetic. The Tribune picked up the Times piece off the wires 10 days later.)

With Obama, Harvard Law professor Charles Ogletree, to name just one possible suspect, is quoted in both stories. I’m not saying he tipped anyone off, but these things can come out in conversation through the proverbial friend of a friend of a friend.

Which brings us to MacMullan’s story. It didn’t register this morning, but now this passage makes a certain amount of sense:

Johnson toyed with going public with his story before. He shared his struggles with the Globe last summer, but later requested his comments be put on hold. The recent suicide of former NFL defensive back Andre Waters, who had multiple concussions and suffered from depression, finally prompted Johnson to come forward.

One interpretation is that MacMullan got word that the Times story was coming out, and that she wanted everyone to know she had it first — or, at least, she would have if Johnson had been willing to let her tell his story last summer.

The Times Co.’s ownership of the Globe is such a radioactive topic in these days of downsizing that many observers don’t want to hear any interpretation except the most nefarious. From what I can see, though, these three stories merely add up to One of Those Things.

Of Mooninites and pipe bombs

There’s a good Peter Gelzinis column in today’s Herald that places the stunt-gone-bad in the context of those two fake pipe bombs. Gelzinis interviewed Boston Police Commissioner Ed Davis and writes:

Until those guerrilla marketeers at Turner Broadcasting finally owned up to their Mooninite shenanigans late Wednesday afternoon, Davis said that the chorus of law enforcement agencies had no choice but to assume that gag devices had been systematically planted all over town as a distraction for “real” ones that had also been placed.

In other words, the police weren’t quite as punk’d as all those “Aqua Teen Hunger Force” hipsters out there in the blogosphere would lead you to believe. It wasn’t those LEDs tacked onto all those circuit boards that police worried about, as much that guy with no light on upstairs, running away from what looked a helluva lot like a pipe bomb.

“Had we simply found these cartoon characters stuck here and there,” Davis said yesterday, “I can assure you this thing would have been tamped down in pretty short order.”

“But what troubled us was the discovery of those other two devices that looked very real indeed. And it wasn’t until the people from Turner took responsibility for what they had done, that we could think about the coincidence of what had taken place.”

Is Davis putting two and two together after the fact in order to make himself look good? Maybe. But his comments strike me as sensible and credible.

Over at the Globe, Steve Bailey has some very smart things to say, and Brian McGrory, well, doesn’t. And Seth Gitell makes a few good points in defense of Mayor Tom Menino, his former employer.

Head cases

Here’s a little context for Jackie MacMullan’s story in today’s Boston Globe on Ted Johnson, the former Patriots linebacker who’s suffering from depression and other ailments that he blames on repeated concussions during his career.

In August 2004, the Globe’s Gordon Edes checked in with Johnny Damon, who, you might recall, had suffered a concussion in an outfield collision with Damian Jackson and missed two games in the 2003 post-season. Edes wrote:

He is dealing, he said, with some physical aftereffects from that Jackson collision, most notably its impact on his vision. He is sufficiently concerned, he said, that he has an eye exam scheduled and plans to have doctors check out a few other things, too, though he refused to be more specific (“I’d rather not talk about it,” he said).

“I definitely can’t see like I used to,” he said. “When I cover up an eye and try to get a clear vision, it’s not there. At night, at dusk, I definitely have a tough time. It’s something I have to battle with.”

Then there’s this, from Damon’s book, “Idiot”:

While I was on a stretcher being put into an ambulance, I gave a thumbs-up. When they carted me off the field, everyone thought I was okay, but I wasn’t. I’d suffered a bad concussion. My mind was scrambled. I actually thought I was wearing an Oakland uniform and that I was walking off the field waving to the Oakland fans, saying, “Thank you for supporting us this year….”

When we got back to Boston, I went to the team doctor, and he said everything was checking out fine, that I was regaining some of my faculties. But the truth was I wasn’t close to normal — it took me four or five months before I had a clear, vivid picture of what was going on.

Remember, this was after one concussion, and Damon, by all appearances, made a full recovery. By contrast, here’s what Johnson told MacMullan: “Officially, I’ve probably only been listed as having three or four concussions in my career. But the real number is closer to 30, maybe even more. I’ve been dinged so many times I’ve lost count.”

Based on MacMullan’s story, it would seem that Patriots coach Bill Belichick is slated for a mighty uncomfortable off-season. Still, Belichick, by pushing Johnson to play before he was ready, wasn’t doing anything unusual by football standards.

The larger question is what is the NFL going to do about it. The players need to be protected from themselves.

Media Nation bombs out

Yesterday’s bomb scare is the worst kind of story for a media critic to take on, because it’s hard not to sit, slack-jawed and vacant, and agree with what everyone else has already said. I don’t have much to say, but I’ll try to venture a few observations. (Globe coverage here; Herald coverage here.)

First, I basically agree with those who say the perpetrators and their corporate masters at Time Warner were stupid to do this, and city officials were stupid not to pick up immediately on the fact that this was a guerrilla marketing campaign. I think when both sides are stupid, the tie goes to the good guys.

Perhaps we’ll all change our minds when we cool off, but right now the idea of throwing a few people in prison for a couple of months sounds pretty reasonable. As long as the buck doesn’t stop with local suspects Peter Berdovsky and Sean Stevens. As my man Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. once said, the First Amendment does not protect anyone from “falsely shouting fire in a theatre and causing a panic.” That’s exactly what happened yesterday.

Second, is this Herald sidebar, by Michele McPhee and Laura Crimaldi, not a significant scoop? According to the report, police have confirmed that two devices that looked like pipe bombs were found yesterday at Tufts-New England Medical Center and stuck onto the Longfellow Bridge were not part of the marketing campaign. Good grief. By tomorrow, this could prove to be the bigger story.

Third, the Herald editorialist who calls for Ted Turner to be thrown into the hoosegow apparently doesn’t realize that Turner’s had nothing to do with Turner Broadcasting for years, and that he left the Time Warner board entirely, under less than happy circumstances, in May 2006. (Sorry to rely on Wikipedia for such an important point, but the article matches my memory.)

On second thought: I don’t need a few days. I’m cooling off already. Although I’m sympathetic to the police and other public-safety officials who took this seriously, I can easily see how the perpetrators thought this was absolutely no different from gluing posters to news boxes promoting an upcoming concert. So no, I don’t think anyone should go to jail over this.

Molly Ivins, 1944-2007

The great Molly Ivins has died at the age of 62. The Austin American-Statesman runs a fine obit, but its registration scheme is truly odious. The Texas Observer, where she first came to fame, has put together a terrific tribute.

My first exposure to Ivins was in listening to her hilarious commentaries for NPR in the 1980s, a gig I don’t think she had for very long. After that, I read her first book, “Molly Ivins Can’t Say That, Can She?”, and was delighted, although I’ll admit I had not read her regularly in recent years.

Even so, I always considered her, along with Nat Hentoff, to be perhaps the finest columnist never to win a Pulitzer — and far better than many of those who did. I recall listening to the audio version of Ivins and Lou Dubose’s Bush bio, “Shrub,” just before the 2000 Republican National Convention. Among its best features was the fact that Ivins narrated it — she was as much a master of the spoken word as the written word. “Shrub” was tough but also fairly gentle in some ways, but that changed: She later called for Bush’s impeachment.

One memorable Ivins-ism that I haven’t seen brought up tonight is her description of then-governor George W. Bush’s ability to speak Spanish as well as English: “bi-ignorant.”

She was one of the greats.

Update: Here’s a link to Ivins’ last column, headlined “Stand Up Against the Surge.” “We are the people who run this country,” she wrote. “We are the deciders.” If only that were true.

More bad news for the Globe

The financial situation continues to deteriorate at the Boston Globe and the Worcester Telegram & Gazette. Romenesko has the roundup: “The New York Times Co. posted a $648 million loss for the fourth quarter as it absorbed an $814.4 million charge to write down the value of its struggling New England properties, the Boston Globe and the Worcester Telegram & Gazette.”

It looks like the Times Co. now agrees with retired General Electric chief executive Jack Welch, who’d like to buy the Globe and who recently valued the paper at between $500 million and $600 million — half what the Times Co. paid for it, and in 1993 dollars at that.

Question: Do the Sulzbergers believe the newspaper market is going to bounce back? Or is it look out below? The answer to that question will determine whether and when the Globe gets sold.

Not wild about Harry

I might have stumbled across the blog Squaring the Globe once or twice in the past. This morning, though, I paid a visit on Universal Hub‘s recommendation. What I found was — well, odd.

Today’s complaint by our blogger, Harry, is that a Globe story by Charles Radin about the closing of an Episcopal church in Attleboro is biased against the priest and the congregation, who are being forced to leave by the diocese after affiliating with a Rwandan branch that opposes the American church’s liberal views on homosexuality. As Radin points out, this is becoming increasingly common as liberal and conservative Episcopalians split apart.

Harry lodges a couple of weird complaints in this post. First, he writes:

Monday’s Boston Globe front page carries this picture of the last service of an Episcopal congregation in their Attleboro church. The photo’s label “Schism brings a church closing” as well as the story’s headline “Worshipers vacate Episcopal church” are both inaccurate half-truths. This congregation is being evicted on 2 weeks notice by the US Episcopal church hierarchy.

Really? How are either the caption or the headline even remotely incompatible with the word “eviction”? In any case, here is Radin’s lede, from which Harry does not quote:

In a service overflowing with tears, hugs, and evocations of historic persecution of Christians, members of All Saints Anglican Church of Attleboro held their last service yesterday in their North Main Street building and bowed to orders from the Episcopal Diocese of Massachusetts that they vacate the premises.

An eviction, in other words.

The other part of Harry’s post that I’m scratching my head over is his conclusion, in which he approvingly cites a story in the Sun Chronicle of Attleboro for quoting the Rev. Lance Giuffrida. Writes Harry: “The story about the church closing in the local Attleboro Sun Chronicle quotes the priest’s dilemma more poignantly: ‘I didn’t change. … I preached the same thing for 30 years. I didn’t move. I just stood.'”

The clear implication is that Radin’s Globe story fell short by not offering up a similar quote from Giuffrida. Yet here is the second paragraph of Radin’s story:

“I never meant us to be at this time and place,” said the Rev. Lance Giuffrida, his voice cracking as he addressed about 160 worshipers who filled the sanctuary nearly to capacity. “I didn’t do anything differently than when you called me” to the church’s pulpit in 2001.

Different words, but precisely the same sentiment.

I love the idea of citizen journalists like Harry holding the mainstream media to account. Squaring the Globe may not have a huge following, but it’s important because it’s part of the blogging ecosystem. (After all, with a very few exceptions no single blog is so important that it stands on its own.)

Unfortunately, based on this post, it seems that Harry is so caught up in his belief that the Globe is biased that he can’t see a straightforward news story when it smacks him in the face.