|
||||
Birmingham Mayor Scrutinized Posted by Danny, on February 15th, 2008, at 9:21 amBirmingham Weekly has very interesting reading in its cover story regarding a transcript of Birmingham Mayor Larry Langford’s appearance before the SEC (an earlier appearance than the one mentioned here). The transcript itself is available from this page at the Birmingham Weekly. Related Articles: 8 comments to Birmingham Mayor Scrutinized |
ChangeI wish my friend Hinton Mitchem godspeed and good luck after his retirement from public service. Hinton, on Monday, announced what many had suspected — he will not seek re-election. I remember meeting Hinton for the first time while I was a student at Auburn University. He served the people of his [...] Ten Minutes in the House, Senate Moves On Here is a quick preview of the upcoming week in Montgomery. This week will be a standard legislative schedule for the House. We will be in session on Tuesday and Thursday with committee meetings scheduled for Wednesday. Back in the Day... Tent City at Camp Sheridan near Montgomery, ca 1918 |
The Alabama Line is being updated and will return perhaps as soon as the first week of February. The Alabama Line and its contents are the creation of Doc’s Political Parlor, reflect consensus from insiders and well-connected folks on both sides of the aisle, and will be updated as conditions change. These odds are meant to inform, entertain, and provoke, not to serve as actual means for losing money. Permission granted to use this material if PoliticalParlor.net is cited as the source. |
||
|
Copyright © 2010 Doc's Political Parlor - All Rights Reserved |
||||
Legislative Dispatch
Purple Dot Connection
2010 Big List
2010 Senate Elections
2010 House Elections
Press Releases
Would you bother to mention that The Birmingham News reported just about everything included in the transcript already over the past several months. But more importantly, The News had the transcript posted on its website nearly a full day before it appeared in The Weekly. Let’s give credit where it’s due, since without The News’ copy on your site you wouldn’t have much to read anyway.
I’m calling BS on the comment above. The Bham News did post the PDF first, but only nine hours earlier. Nine hours does not “nearly a full day” make.
However, the Weekly began posting material from the SEC transcript on Wednesday afternoon, before the News posted anything. Also, the first issues of the Weekly were hitting the streets Wednesday night before the News posted anything.
What’s more, the Weekly’s cover story was far more comprehensive than what the News ran on Thursday. In comparison, the News’ coverage looked like a homework assignment finished out on the bus ride to school.
BhamNews,
1) I had no intention of assigning or denying credit for having the transcript up first. I posted a link to the first place I saw it. Glad to hear that your outfit was up first with it.
2) You are mistaken to suggest that I post lots of Birmingham News copy on this site. If I find an interesting story elsewhere, I may post a small excerpt with the goal of creating new readers for the original story, not taking them away. (I would post fewer direct quotes if the Birmingham News stories would stay online. But when enough time goes by, I am left with a broken link. The quote helps provide a context for the original post even with the broken link.)
3) I am glad for the site to link to interesting articles found elsewhere, some of which are at the Birmingham News, but you are mistaken to say there isn’t much else to read on the site.
As I type this, the front page of the blog has six posts with original information (news, quotes, etc.) that cannot be found elsewhere. Either you haven’t been reading long or you haven’t been reading carefully as there are plenty of items here that are original or first out.
Whichever one describes you, glad to have you as a reader!
Well, first, it should be pointed out that The Weekly’s story contained a number of errors. And I can leave that to the readers to view the transcript themselves and compare it to The Weekly’s cover story. Second, The Weekly’s story, and defensive post here, seems to be a bit late, as if they somehow have discovered an issue that has never been reported before. I just scanned google and found more than a dozen articles over the past months written by The News that detailed LL’s loans with the lobbyist, arrangements with the Montgomery firm, questions from the SEC and details about LL’s personal financial situation. And The Weekly is going to attempt to argue it offered the material first. Indeed, The Weekly’s presentation appeared more like a plagiarized homework assignment, stealing the smarter kids work in hopes the teacher won’t find out.
So, I ask again, who’s tossing BS here really?
Danny, as a fellow “plagiarist,” I appreciate the work that you do. Your site is a valuable daily read with original material and a news digest that saves readers time and directs traffic to our dead-tree websites. I meant to write that earlier, but I was too busy writing my defensive post. Thanks for your hard work.
I just got an email about this and read these posts. Let me say, you boys ought to take it outside. I’m not sure who’s writing what, but does it matter? (And for the record, I saw the weekly’s version before the news.) As more than a casual reader of both publications, I don’t know if it matters where people read it. Just write, and shut up.
Fair ‘nough, Reader.
BhamWeekly, thank you for your kind words in comment #5. I appreciate them, and I am sorry that I have been distracted enough that I am just now responding to them. Thank you very much.