So it would appear that former Hartford Courant consumer watchdog George Gombossy has struck out on his own and published the column The Courant declined to publish — apparently because it was about a valued advertiser.
George explains that this was the first time in his 40-year career that his paper refused to publish a story about an attorney general’s investigation. Hence their parting of ways.
The Watchdog had the foresight, apparently, to buy the ctwatchdog.com domain name, and has hit the ground running. I understand former Courant.com editor Jeanne Leblanc and former copy editor Tom Twitchell helped George get his blog up and running. It’s pretty spiffy, too.
That the management would suppress a column for this reason is, if true, abominable. There is no other term for it. It is a blot on the paper’s reputation — or perhaps the end of its reputation as a fair, fearless and objective purveyor of the news.
Loading ...
“That the management would suppress a column for this reason is, if true, abominable.”
“If true” Paul? It seems pretty clear, unless you think this may not be the version the editors killed. What journalistic reason could there be? It’s a solid story, with quotes from all sides. Try to think of another reason besides advertiser protection that could cause the story to be killed.
I couldn’t think of one, but in light of the fact that I had not heard the company’s side, didn’t want to state it for an absolute certainty. Knowing the players and their backgrounds, I believe George’s account. Plus, I guess, I don’t want to believe that a newspaper company of the Courant’s caliber (or former caliber) would suppress a column like this unless there were some other factors that are not revealed in the column itself.