Sunday January 20, 2019
Jan-12-2008 14:57TweetFollow @OregonNews
Bill Church Lies AgainCommentary by Neal Feldman Salem-News.com
(Is it any surprise to any who know him?)
(SALEM, Ore.) - In his recent little blog Bill Church, high muckeymuck of the Salem Statesman-Journal, decided to evidence his dishonesty and dishonor once again.
In response to his prideful posts of censoring users of the SJ Forums, (using extremely inconsistent moderation as I have pointed out before), I sent him an email. He chose to print it (no problem there, I appreciate his printing it) in his blog. What I did not appreciate is his lies he posted with it.
He accused me of attacking his intelligence. Where in the email he printed did I attack his intelligence? Nowhere.
In no way did he answer, much less disprove, any of the claims I made in the email. Big surprise.
All he did was perpetuate the myths and lies. All he did was participate in factless character assassination. My how shocking! Well, maybe not so shocking considering the clearly sagging standards at the SJ. It is no wonder why the old guard newspapers are going the way of the dinosaurs.
Self-serving seems to be his hallmark, even if extremely shortsighted and narrow minded.
For all his claims about my being 'infamous' it is strange how so many of the regular posters still are far more offensive and in violation of the posted rules than I ever was yet they are not censored... while Bill Church goes around crowing how he censors others (who likely got on the bad side of the 'protected class'. His big claim against my posts were they were (to use his word) 'vitriolic'. I would disagree. The definition of vitriolic includes the term scathing. I will cop to my posts being at times scathing. Thing is there is nothing wrong with that if justified as mine were. But the term vitriolic means a lot more that, in fact, did not apply to my posts. More dishonesty on the part of Bill Church.
Bill Church refuses to answer about that or the 'protected class'. One has to wonder why that is, Is it possible that he is one of those protected violator posters on SJ Forums? The evidence does seem to suggest it, as does the apparent immaturity and lack of professionalism he displayed in his blog comments cited above.
There was once a day and age where newspaper editors had class, had professional ethics, valued honesty, facts and reason.
Clearly, at least in regards to the Salem statesman-Journal, if not all of Gannett, those days have passed away.
Articles for January 11, 2008 | Articles for January 12, 2008 | Articles for January 13, 2008