A phone call with Bobbie Jo Buel at the Star

by David Safier

My wife Joan called the Star's Executive Editor, Bobbie Jo Buel, a few minutes ago. It wasn't my idea. It was hers. What I posted on BfA regarding the Star's misleading headline in this morning's paper (here and here), along with similar posts I've written in the past, angered Joan enough that she wanted to express her concerns to Ms. Buel.

After Joan talked about the headlines for awhile, I had a conversation with Ms. Buel.

I reminded her I had written an email addressed to her, Publisher John Humenik and Reader Advocate Debbie Kornmiller about a week ago. In the email, I referred to a caustic post I wrote about what I consider 3 misleading headlines on health care stories in one issue of the paper. I did not receive a reply from anyone.

Ms. Buel told me she didn't reply to my email because I had already made up my mind. She felt, if I understood her correctly, that I should have called and discussed the issue with the paper first, before I posted my opinion. To me, that indicates a confusion about the difference between someone whose job is to report the news and someone who is writing commentary. When a columnist writes about what he/she reads in a newspaper or magazine or sees on television, is it standard procedure to call the media outlet first? Based on what I read in editorials and columns, my answer would be, no.

Ms. Buel stated she does not believe the headlines created by the Star are slanted. She said she has "no goal but for the staff to write accurate headlines every day." She defended today's headline, Why seniors say Obamacare is bad medicine for them, saying it gives an accurate portrayal of the AP story. When I told her I thought the headline and others in past issues are slanted, she said, we disagree.

Boy, do we disagree! And if the Star continues to write headlines slanted to make Obama, Democrats and health care reform look bad, I will continue to write about them.

A VERY INTERESTING SIDE ISSUE: I wasn't listening when Joan talked with Ms. Buel, so what I'm writing now is what Joan told me about their conversation. She told Ms. Buel the Star was wrong not to publish a stand alone article about the vandalism at Giffords' office in the print edition of the paper. Ms. Buel replied (according to Joan) that the Star did indeed publish a stand alone story in the print edition.

I've written a number of posts about the poor coverage the print edition gave to the vandalism story, as opposed to a good piece in the online edition which included the shattered glass photo which has been used in news and television stories nationwide. I can say with reasonable certainty, the print edition did not carry a stand alone story on the vandalism. If Ms. Buel or anyone else can show me I'm wrong, I will gladly write a retraction. And if Ms. Buel discovers Joan is right, she should at the very least get in touch with her and admit the error.