Wednesday, February 15

A Lovers' Guide to Tonight's Blazers/Wizards Game: An Almost Live Special Report

News I will not be live-blogging tonight's Blazers/Wizards Valentine's Day matchup (too busy being romant... More

Feb 14, 2012 05:05 pm by CASEY JARMAN  | Comments 0
 

Valentine's Day in the Naked City: Couple Arrested After Sex Role-Playing in Grocery Parking Lot

News A Northeast Portland couple took sex-in-a-car to new places in celebration of Valentine’s Day, muc... More

Feb 14, 2012 03:55 pm by HANNAH HOFFMAN  | Comments 0
 

Washington State Senate Approves CRC Tolls

News A big step to raising money for the $3.5 billion Columbia River Crossing cleared its first vote Tues... More

Feb 14, 2012 01:03 pm by WW Staff  | Comments 0
 

Sam Adams is on Yelp

News The other day I noticed a curious tweet from our venerable mayor's Twitter account:Yes, Sam is tweet... More

Feb 13, 2012 01:20 pm by RUTH BROWN  | Comments 4
 
 
 
Home · Articles · News · Ask the Editor · What Were We Thinking?
February 4th, 2009 MARK ZUSMAN | Ask the Editor
 

What Were We Thinking?

WW Editor Mark Zusman answers your questions about our coverage.

43 Comments
     
Tags:

Got a question about the future of journalism or how Willamette Week covered something, or didn’t cover it? Ask away. WW Editor Mark Zusman—that's his friendly mug in the picture—will respond to as many reader questions as he can, right here!

 
  • Currently 3.5/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
 
 
 

 

 
02.04.2009 at 08:13 Reply
It appears to me that Willamette Week is so aggressive about the Sam Adams story because it attracts readers and therefore is good for your advertisers.

Is that cynical? Do you think there is something about this story that makes it more than just muckraking?

 

02.04.2009 at 08:24 Reply
Jeff,

Yes, I do think that this story has real value. It's a story about a cover up, about the use of public funds to finance the cover up(the job given to a reporter) and about 16 months of lying on the part of a public official who presides over a huge budget and has wide authority. For your information, these kinds of stories, because of the time involved in reporting them and because of the controversy it creates, are rarely good for business.

 

02.04.2009 at 12:39 Reply
Wait a minute: I think that its a bit over-the-top into consiracy theory land to claim that Amy Ruiz was hired as part of a cover up. She was not the only person in town investigating this story (cleary, as a WW reported broke the story. What point is there is buying off only some of the people, but not others--that makes no sense. It seems borderline slanderous to continue implying that she was hired as part of a cover-up. Thanks.

 

02.04.2009 at 01:11 Reply
I'm concerned WW will underreport other, more excessive abuses of power by Adams. If he's not yet corrupt, he's corruptable. The backroom deals he can make right now - to ensure he retains power - are what worry me and should concern Portlanders.

 

02.04.2009 at 09:21 Reply
I'd like to point out that there are 3,700 members in the Facebook group "Support Sam Adams". Not a single one is anonymous, and almost all are Portland professionals. They pay local and state taxes and contribute to political campaigns. The other, anti-Mayor side of the debate is represented by a bunch of reporters, serializing sleaze, and a dozen of out-of-town right-wingers led by the grotesque Lars. Are you surprised that not a single elected official in Portland has called for Sam's resignation? All this silliness is just white noise but I guess it helps this paper sell advertising, not a small feat in this economy. Too bad that along the way, the story has harmed many people other than the mayor. I understand that sinking tabloids don't care about such little things.

 

 
 

Web Design for magazines

Close
Close
Close