Over 100 Seattle Times Newsroom Employees Sign a Letter Saying Their Paper's Political Ad Buy "Undermines" Their Journalism


don't like it? go inherit your own newspaper.
I wish there was a way to support the generally excellent news, sports, and weather staff without putting money in Blethen's pocket.
Will Blethen respond with one of those "If Obama wins, you're all fired" letters that Team Mittsy has prescribed?
I don't mean for this to come across as snarky, but I'm shocked that the Seattle Times still has over 100 newsroom employees.
@3: You could hang out at 13-Coins and buy them drinks.
Where are the names?
At the Times, they have a union, so they won't get "let go" for speaking out. What would happen at the Stranger if the same thing happened? We all know.
I'm less interested in the contents of the letter than I am in who signed it.
I agree with melville. Making the names of those who signed public would exponentially increase the letter's effectiveness. Come on, somebody, leak the who dang letter, signers and all.
I wonder if Nicole Brodeur had the balls to stand up to Frank this time.
Ditto. Show me the names. That's the point, right?
Those reporters that depend on sources? They might find some doors shut on them because of this.
@13 interesting point, but isn't that essentially the same argument as those who don't want their initiative donations revealed, that it could have professional repercussions?
I want to see the names, too. While I believe that most of the ST journalists are ethical and adhere to best practices, I know of one who screwed the pooch big time to sensationalize a story.

We all work with weak colleagues, but this one did some serious, serious damage.
@8 those that walked the guild strike line against the Seattle Times back in 2000 almost universally were slowly re-assigned to lowlier positions and/or had those that crossed the line become their very unsympathetic bosses. Their guild was a very weak safety net indeed.
Okay, it's a letter. But what are they going to do about it? Where's the "or else"?
The ads undermine the work we do and threaten to get us journalists confused with the ludicrous editorial team by the readers and whatever subscribers we might still have.

@17, the only "there else" there could be would be a mass resignation. They can't even organize a strike, because that kind of action isn't allowed under our country's meager labor protections.
@8, I heard from two former staffers at "Seattle's Only Newspaper" you get your ass canned.

But I am sure those two were just making it up
Ummm, kidz, if you click on the link in Eli's post, you'll see the letter, signatures and all.

Many of them don't write legibly, but with the aid of their Newsroom staff page I could figure out these:

Kenneth Rosenthal, Lynn Thompson, Steve Miletich, Emily Heffter, Kristen Jackson, Kathy Long, Alan Berner, Danny Westneat, Holly Henke, Brian Cantwell, Nicole Brodeur, Keith Ervin, Sara Jean Green, Rick Lund, Mike Lindblom, Sanjay Bhatt.

And that's only from the first (of three) page of signatures.
The link simply shows the letter, not the names.
Oops, now I see the names. More than 110 of them. Blethen surely can't fire all of them -- not all at once, at least.
I hope these employees are dusting off their resumes, because print media is 90% dead already, and this stupid stunt is sure to finish off the Times.
Holy smokes, the names are there. Wow. I wish there was a way to support those brave souls and/or some effective way to protest the paper's stupidity.
I think that it is great that the employees don't like the Time's boneheaded decision to sponsor a political ad. However the Times has officially become irrelevant on any issue that any one on its staff would report.

I'll never read it again. I'll never buy it again. Hopefully many people, regardless of which candidate they support will follow the same.
Wow, the Stranger -- known recently for publishing a series of phony e-mails under McKenna's name -- takes a brave stand for objectivity. At a different publication, natch. I'd call them a pack of whining "progressive" hypocrites, but we already knew that.
#26, if it's possible for any Seattle "progressive" to be any more truthful than Sarah Palin, how about you tell us when you last subscribed to the Seattle Times?
I think the Inslee campaign should shut the Times out of their press conferences and calls. McKenna set the standard for what is considered a journalistic outlet, I think turn about is fair.
#29, ever heard the old saying, "Never pick a fight with a guy who buys his ink by the barrel?"
Mister G, you're on a tear this evening. In some of these posts you bring up some points (I agree, Washington Dems have gotten lazy) but then I remember you're the nut job who insisted that the city of Seattle was gonna create a flora Gestapo and take all our Japanese maples away! You're still that dofus. You're sadly not a troll but rather whatever WiS or SRotU are. Which, frankly is even sadder.
#31, the city of Seattle wants to require 75% of all plantings to be "native" and "non-invasive," and to require land owners to remove invasives. Which, I might add, include the ivy on someone's chimney, most bamboo, and blackberries. And before replanting a garden, the city wants to require land owners to hire a landscape architect, and to have their plans approved by the city.

The city has not bothered to define "non-native" plants, which include almost all flowers and vegetables. This is in the city's new "green" code. You don't want to believe it, but that doesn't mean they haven't proposed it. McGinn's "green" code will make criminals out of untold thousands of homeowners in Seattle.

Of course, you probably live in an apartment or under a bridge, so I'm sure it doesn't matter to you. If you think the city is somehow incapable of doing outrageously stupid things, consider that McGinn also wants to cut all speed limits on side streets to 20 miles an hour, and is threatening to cut them on arterials as well. The city has also banned plastic grocery bags, even though they are the most environmentally friendly means of bagging your stuff.

The "progressive" fakers who run Seattle are capable of all kinds of mischief, especially when people like you sleepwalk through the whole thing.

You don't have to like policies like those, but what's fake about them?
#33, what's fake? They claim to be "progressive," when in fact they're on their knees for every fat-cat developer. They claim to be "environmentalist," but they banned the most environmentally-friendly means of carrying groceries. The typical Seattle "progressive" is entirely about the appearances. A mile wide and a millimeter deep, and every last bit as stupid and self-righteous as Sarah Palin ever was or will be.