Wednesday, November 23, 2011

Des Moines | Report: real reason debate canceled

Last week, The Des Moines Register said it had canceled its Dec. 19 debate for GOP presidential candidates, a rare move for a paper that's sponsored debates since 1980 -- events that made it a player in national politics.

The cancellation, the Register said in a story, "streamlines what had become a crowded debate calendar in Iowa."

But now Des Moines' City View says it's not that simple. "It was cancelled because the candidates — or at least most of them — decided not to show up," the weekly says in new story.

"Part of the reason," the story says, "is because some of those very conservative people, and their handlers and supporters, don’t particularly care for the Register, we’re told. Part is in fact because there are other debates scheduled. And part is because the Register and then-editor Carolyn Washburn made a mess out of the Republican debate four years ago."

21 comments:

  1. I imagine the game plan was to get her out of Des Moines and to Cincy in an effort to placate the Republicans this time around. Didn't work.

    Long gone are the days when politicians came to Des Moines to kiss the Register's ring. The Register's influence is eroding.......and we're better off for it.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Jim: go find a transcript of the debate the last time around. The questions were spot on, maybe better than any other debate. The Register team did a great job putting them together. The Republicans didn't get to say whatever they wanted, and the talking heads on tv didn't like someone other than one of them handling a debate. So they shot the messenger.

    ReplyDelete
  3. 6:54 Absent a transcript at hand, I considered linking to online videos of that debate.

    But I chose not to because some of the criticism last time was unnecessarily mean: It focused on Washburn's looks, and I didn't want to get back into that all over again.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Lots of Laughs.....reading the transcripts actually give you more in the way of emotion and energy than Carolyn gave in person while moderating the event.

    Monotone, lack of passion, facial expressions. It's TV.....folks.

    She also took some of the biggest topics off the table for discussion. Just because we're in Iowa doesn't mean Iowan's didn't care about immigration and Iraq. We've lost many in Iraq and Iowa had plants raided by ICE.

    Just like the Register....they know better than the rest of us

    ReplyDelete
  5. Washburn and the Register's rotten debates from that year are so 2007. Does it really matter? And anyone who thinks politics still isn't important in Iowa hasn't been on the Register's Web site or paying attention to Sunday morning talk shows. They're quoted all the time it seems. But hasn't CW been in Cincy for almost a year now? How is she doing? And what's the story about her successor in Des Moines, Rick Green from Palm Springs. I don't hear a lot about either of them. Is either staff happy with the moves?

    ReplyDelete
  6. Agree that the Register's once statewide presence and commanding political coverage are long, long gone. Sad.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Please understand this isn't just bashing. I worked for Gannett for a dozen years. At a pretty high level (at corporate). I saw some very talented people there. I also crossed paths very closely with Washburn. She was among the biggest embarrassments in the company. She still is. If there was any sense left, she would be out to pasture. A true, true embarrassment to the company.

    ReplyDelete
  8. CW is doing a great job now wrecking the Cincinnati Enquirer.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Well what do you expect? You don't get to be a Gannett editor by being competent. You get it by kissing hiney and doing corporate's bidding, NQA.

    Seen it a thousand times.

    Get on board, and get a ringy-dingy!

    ReplyDelete
  10. Speaking of Duh Moines, perhaps they could hold the 2015 debates in the Duhsign Center, since Gannett won't be killing trees and printing ink on them at that time.

    ReplyDelete
  11. And Corporate wonders why circulation is down, morale is down and revenue is down. Gannett is becoming more irrelevant as each day passes. Good job GMC. Now you get a bonus.

    ReplyDelete
  12. So 11;25 former high level corporate employee, what is your name? You disparage CE but hide your name? Nah you never worked in a position of responsibility. Nice cheap shot though. For some reason Jim thinks that is ok. She was probably rude to him in Boise

    ReplyDelete
  13. 6:36 The comment posted by 11:25 fell into the gray area of what I allow and don't allow.

    However, Gannett officers -- and Washburn has been one for many years -- are public figures. Editors such as Washburn direct news coverage of, for example, public officials. And that coverage often includes sharp criticism directed at those officials by citizens -- criticism very much like the comment posted by 11:25.

    I am a public figure as a result of this blog. As a result, I've learned to expect a lot of flak from readers, and I'm seldom disappointed. It comes with the territory.

    Also, Washburn was never rude to me in Boise. As I recall, our exchanges were never unpleasant.

    ReplyDelete
  14. I'm 11:25. I wasn't at the top, but outranked Washburn. That she is/was an embarrassment to the company is, in my opinion, factual. The media reports after that debate are just one case of her status as an embarrassment being very well documented.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Jim, just to try to continue to educate you:

    6:36 has a solid point. Criticism as pointed as what's at 11:25 is meaningless without a name behind it.

    You may claim not to understand why, or you and others here might make up excuses for why that's not a problem, but that changes nothing.

    ReplyDelete
  16. As public figures with tremendous power, executive editors of newspapers are always going to be subject to anonymous criticism. I notice that the majority of EEs in Gannett aren't singled out on this blog, only those that appear to merit criticism or, in some cases, praise. That said, CW is truly in over her head. She's a case study in what happens when someone who should have topped out as a department editor is promoted to the top.

    ReplyDelete
  17. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  18. There was nothing wrong with the 12:36 comment, Jim, other than it disagreed with your beliefs.

    You get worse as time goes on.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Washburn has been a disaster in Cincinnati. She's alienated most of the newsroom, doesn't know her community as well as she thinks she does and doesn't let her staff go after the tough stories like the state rep in the car with Viagra pumping through his system, a much-younger adult entertainer in the front seat with him and the hour approaching midnight. That was a story that needed to be told and the Enquirer's efforts were deplorable.
    Another poster is correct, there are a lot of EE's out there, but only the same few appear to be criticized. Seems to me that criticism is deserved.

    ReplyDelete

Jim says: "Proceed with caution; this is a free-for-all comment zone. I try to correct or clarify incorrect information. But I can't catch everything. Please keep your posts focused on Gannett and media-related subjects. Note that I occasionally review comments in advance, to reject inappropriate ones. And I ignore hostile posters, and recommend you do, too."

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.