Less Than Six Hours And We're Down To Five Sides Of The Argument: Banned By The N&R's John Robinson

Well, it finally happened. Within days of discovering that I had been "de-linked" from JR's local "blogs of interest" (I asked him why in an e-mail, and he never responded), I have been "banned" from commenting at the News & Record's Editor's blog . . . nearly three years after being lured into the GSO blogosphere with a lot of hot air and empty promises.

The post that prompted the comment that did it is here.

Stop the (broken) presses! We can now comment on N&R Editorials. Big whup.

Here's my response that announcement:

I hardly see the point.

From corrupt "non-profits" to annexation wars, I am blogging my butt off about what is going on down in Randolph County (an area the N&R supposedly covers), but you've deleted me from your local "links of interest" (thanks for responding to that e-mail). And God knows the Courier Tribune doesn't want the general populace to know this stuff.

So tell me JR, what's the point of commenting on your editorials?

Voices schmoices. Citizen journalism? Please. I cannot wait for FOX news to take over the N&R and show you the door (not that I really expect them to care either).

I herein offer the argument that my comment was actually "well-reasoned". People I know in the know . . . who know a whole lot more about the way the business of journalism operates these days . . . have voiced the opinion that (no matter who ultimately buys the N&R), a pink slip for this Editor is exactly what is going to happen. Whoever buys this newspaper is not going to care how things were done in the past . . . or who the previous Editorial Board sucked up to. They're going to be in it for profit. And they're going to be in it to keep readers happy enough to keep buying papers.

Readers are not happy these days.

Giving a megaphone to stuff like this only plays to JR's ultimate bad hand.

It's not just in Greensboro. The local lines defining "separation of church and state" are blurring in a very disturbing fashion.

But there are bright spots on what has been a fairly dark horizon: People everywhere are fed up with the status quo.

I attempted to respond to "Holden's" comment (I believe Cone calls them "ad hominems") with the following: If JR were reporting on some of the stories right under his nose you would not have to answer that question.

THE TRUTH HURTS.

When I hit "post", I was informed I was not allowed to comment.

It is fitting that (1) an anonymous wonder gets the last word, (2) JR didn't drop an e-mail to notify me that I've been banned, and (3) the Editor of the N&R cannot fight his own battle (as some of the people/stories that his newspaper has ignored have had to do) . . . i.e. based on JR's job performance, tell me why shouldn't the door him in the rump on the way out?

And I have a new bright shiny badge of honor to wear.

11:45 pm Update: My thanks to Connie Mack Berry, Jr. for defending my honor by posting a response to "Holden" . . . as well as the full text of this post (albeit without the links) at JR's. No doubt it will be deleted by morning.

And he'll be banned too.

2/27/08 Update: Thanks to everyone who has sent messages of support.

Connie cracks me up. JR deleted his response to "Holden", "She sure is and damned good one. In the name of free speech, JR just banned her a## from the N&R blogs." JR also deleted the Housecalls text that Connie posted.

So Connie, being Connie, put up the text again. And JR deleted it again.

Then Bubba entered the fray . . . and placing a link to my post and challenging JR to comment. So did Connie. JR finally confirmed the ban.

A mere one day after the ban, this post at the Editor's blog (referencing yet another press-happy shovel-load from GSO's infamous "Pulpit Forum") . . . was accompanied by this comment: "It isn't part of a journalist's wiring to think "let's ignore this news because we don't like the messengers or because it's upsetting."

That line prompted another Mountain Dew sinus wash. Ignoring facts that are uncomfortable or inconvenient is EXACTLY in John Robinson's wiring. I've been pleading for just thirty minutes of a N&R reporter's time for over three years.

John Robinson does not want to look at what I've got on Randolph Hospital because he does not want to know. Given all of his flowery verbiage on the "transparency" of public institutions and the rights of citizens to public documents, he might then be obligated to report.

He does not like me (because I cannot just "move on" or "get over" the nasty things that were done to me in my own hometown by so-called public servants). Moreover, he does not like my message . . . which is upsetting because it casts a very ugly light on the way the business of journalism is currently conducted in Asheboro and Greensboro, North Carolina (and speaks to his future if he continues down his current path).

In fact, "free speech" only applies with JR if Cone/Roch/Sue/Hoggard/etc. are flinging the monkey-poo in the form of gems like "batshit crazy", "whack-job", "malignant narcissist", "terminally self-absorbed", "liar", "moutbreather", etc. (I know I've left some terms-of-blogging-endearment out).

Five voices. The only noise JR wants to hear are the voices that chime in "yes" to his own.

The sixth is now silenced on his blog.

And that, Ladies and Gentlemen, is what speaks for itself.