quote:
Originally posted by cannon_fodder
Again Gold, a retraction and apology or settlement of any kind is not a ruling on the merits of the claim.
Bates is an independent local journalist. His car has over 200,000 miles on it. How much do you think the retainer would be to properly defend this action? $10,000 at a bare minimum. I'll let you do the math on that one.
As much as it sucks, most people would apologize instead of breaking open their IRA to defend a suit. To protect my wife and child from total financial ruin I'd probably suck it up and retract any statement I made too - even if I thought what I said was accurate. As you well know, even if Bates' version was correct he could still very well lose at trial.
I'm NOT saying that Bates version was correct as I have not spoken to him about this since he has had any real contact with the World (nor have I spoken with anyone of knowledge with the World). It could very well be that they showed him data, told him was his data was wrong, or that he realized he was careless with his words. I'm merely pointing out that a settlement of any kind is not an adjudication on the merits.
Devils advocate I suppose.
Those are fair points, though I disagree to some extent; that's likely the only text we'll ever have on this matter and it's a doozie. I'm also enjoying the irony of the idealogue throwing in the towel. And I kind of think he had it coming.
Like our criticism of Mr. Tay on here, I think there is a time and a place for being a gadfly for local politics. Bates is a talented man, but I think he lets his personal peculiararities get in the way of encouraging useful, valuable change. Bates has gone after some good, hard-working people over the years -- who do have the best intentions for our community -- without fully researching or contemplating the result of the change he proposed. He often doesn't know what he's talking about. Then again, that's what happens when you are handed a weekly column without much (or any) journalism training.
If you really want to create change on a local level, you've got to choose your battles wisely. Bates was handed a small pulpit in small weekly paper. Too often his writing seems mean-spirited and actually an attempt to cut down good people who only had the misfortune of being in a position of authority and made a decision that Bates didn't take the time to understand. Tulsa has too many significant problems for us to get caught up in discussions of whether pro-choice politicians should serve in local level political office or for us to hear the regurgitated attack on Judge Wiseman that mostly arose because Bates appears to not understand how local court procedure works.
There is a time and place to take an adversarial position. You can't take an adversarial position on everything, all the while ignoring the significant local issues (JOBS!!!), and hope to accomplish anything, much less garner respect from people with a clue. I think he had it coming and if it wasn't this deal, someone else was going to catch him. Hopefully Bates turns over a new leaf and uses his talents more wisely; or perhaps he just rides off into the night on his blog.
And, face it, this is about as much enjoyment as we'll get out of the popcorn and beer mentioned earlier in the thread.
