Suppose a public official in Idaho receives a communication that says, “If you don’t resign, we’ll reveal embarrassing information about you.”  If you were that official, what would you do?

According to the occasionally accurate Idaho Statesman newspaper, that is exactly what happened to  Star councilman Tom Erlebach.  The circumstances are reported in a story headlined Star threat targeted City Councilman Tom Erlebach.

Suppose the councilman is an incumbent candidate for re-election and his detractors want to replace him.  Further, suppose the “embarrassing information” involves the councilman’s family members?  Would (or should) that influence your opinion of the councilman?  And even if the “threat” is legal in Idaho, what would your opinion be of the people who tried to use it?

Blackmail?   Or business as usual in Idaho?

[

You’re being visually misled by the Coeur d’Alene Press online poll. (more…)

[

My post titled Yes, Shame on You! was very critical of the owner, publisher, and editor of The Coeur d’Alene Press.  In response, commenter Justinian said, “… there are still some true newspapermen in the local papers and now and then they do what newspapers have done since Poor Richard’s day. At the end of the day, most inkstained reporters hate being lied to, manipulated or played the fool.”  I then asked Justinian, “Whom do you consider the good reporters to be at each of our two newspapers? What distinguishes them?”  You can read Justinian’s response here, but let me pose almost the same questions to other readers:

Whom do you consider the good reporters to be at the Coeur d’Alene Press and The Spokesman Review?  What distinguishes them?

On April 29, 2011, the Associated Press (AP) carried a story headlined Rammell trial delayed pending new investigation.  According to the story, the defendant scheduled to go on trial for a misdemeanor fish and game violation was handing out leaflets on the courthouse steps prior to the commencement of his trial.  Defendant Rammell allegedly gave prospective jurors in his trial a leaflet containing “…information pulled from a website operated by the Fully Informed Jury Association.”  The exact contents of the leaflet were not reported in the AP story.   The story also states, ” ‘Handing out (fliers to jurors) is potentially a crime, but we will treat that like any other case,’ Pickett told the Post-Register. ”  (The story does not further identify who “Pickett” is, but Bruce Pickett is the name of the Bonneville County Prosecuting Attorney.)

What do you think?  Was the defendant exercising a free speech right or trying to corruptly influence his jury?

What, if anything, is missing from the news story that would have helped you form a better informed opinion?

What, if anything, was included in the story that could be considered biased reporting?