More

Behind The Philadelphia Inquirer's Split Decision On Endorsement


First Posted: 10-22-08 03:29 PM   |   Updated: 11-22-08 05:12 AM

I Like ItI Don’t Like It
Tierney At Inky

In making their endorsement for President, the Philadelphia Inquirer said:

These times demand steady, focused leadership. Leadership that takes America far from the policies that have created so much fear. Leadership that says it's OK to hope, because hope properly directed yields results. Barack Obama is ready to provide that leadership.

Huh! Because they also said, on the same day:

America needs an honest president with experience, common sense, sound temperament and good judgment in the Oval Office. Those qualities will make it easy for many to vote for McCain.

That's right, the editorial page ran both an "official" endorsement (of Obama) and a "dissenting" endorsement (of McCain), which kind of takes the wind out of doing an endorsement in the first place, and only helps to diminish their importance. So why's everything so hinky at the Inky? In all probability, the answer is probably owner/published Brian Tierney, whose fingerprints -- if not his actual signature -- are all over the dissenting editorial.

To be fair, it's hardly surprising that the Inquirer's "official" endorsement was of Obama. The Inquirer's subscriber base is deep, azure-blue Obama turf, poised to make their preference for the Illinois Senator by a wide margin -- wide enough that there's no harm done in making a lockstep, economic decision to endorse. Their endorsement reads as standard Democratic party boilerplate, touching on a slew of policy preferences, a paean to Obama's eloquence and diverse background, a typical potshot at Palin, and the usual "Bush third term" thrown in for good measure.

But Tierney, who ended up with the Inquirer in 2006 after years of sparring with the paper, runs with a different sort of crowd -- a predominantly Republican one. While Tierney isn't the axe-wielding, partisan whack-job that his fellow Pennsylvania media magnate Richard Mellon Scaife is known for being, his career in the GOP trenches is long and not without distinction. Tierney joined up with the Republican National Committee right at the start of the Reagan era, and was appointed by President Reagan to a post at the Small Business Administration in Philadelphia. In the 2000 election, Tierney was in charge of running George W. Bush's outreach operation to Catholic voters. Tierney's political leanings have had a discernible impact on the Inky as well: at a time when voter interest in Republican Congressman Rick Santorum was at a low ebb, the Inquirer stepped up to give the defeated Representative a column, ensuring that readers would continue to be subjected to his opinion.

Tom Ferrick, a former columnist and reporter for the Inquirer, sees the split endorsement as Tierney's handiwork as well, and says that "insiders at the paper" confirm this. From Ferrick's perspective, the decision was a bit unprecedented. He notes that there was dissension at the paper back in 2007 over whether the paper should endorse Michael Nutter as Mayor of Philadelphia, but that ultimately, "the majority rule[d]." Ferrick goes on to offer the following insight:

As to the Obama endorsement and the McCain dissent, I can see why it may have tortured Tierney. He runs in Republican circles. Probably most of his partners in ownership of the papers are Republicans. So, the temptation would be to please them and go for McCain.


On the other hand, Tierney is also a marketing and public relations guy. He knows that southeastern Pennsylvania is a deep-blue area that Obama is going to win by 500,000-votes plus. A McCain endorsement would royally tick off thousands of readers -- and represent a 180-degree turn for the editorial board, which has been generally supportive of Obama's candidacy.

So, what do you do?

Cut the baby in two, as King Solomon suggested. Do an Obama endorsement and a McCain dissent -- and probably tick off both sides.

Of course, none of this confirms whether or not Tierney actually authored, or personally ordered up the dissenting endorsement. But there's one clue from Tierney's past that seems to point that way. In 2003, Tierney headed up Sam Katz's second, and last, failed attempt to unseat Democrat John Street as Mayor of Philadelphia. Katz's chances more or less blew up in the wake if the discovery that the FBI had placed a wiretap in Street's office. Street worked this news to his favor:

From the November 5, 2003 New York Times:

Mr. Street may owe his victory, at least in part, to a scandal that many Philadelphians believed, just four weeks ago, would end his 25-year political career. A listening device was discovered in the mayor's City Hall office early last month, and investigators from the F.B.I. then disclosed that Mr. Street was a subject in a corruption investigation.


The mayor and his allies deftly turned the incident to their advantage by suggesting that the investigation was engineered by the Republican Party in an effort to discredit a black Democrat. The accusations, which fueled widespread racial and partisan rancor, energized voters in this heavily Democratic city, whose black population is roughly equal to that of whites.

...

Mr. Street narrowly trailed Mr. Katz in some polls in September, but heading into the election, he held a double-digit lead, having gained support from blacks, who believed the investigation was racially motivated, as well as from white Democrats determined to take an early stand against Republicans before next fall's presidential election.

The acrimony that has built over the past few weeks boiled over on on Tuesday. On the streets near City Hall throngs of people wearing Sam Katz T-shirts chanted campaign slogans at passing drivers while waving posters that read ''Honk for Sam Katz.'' Nearby a group of young men, who had parked their black pickup truck on a median in the road, held up a sign that read, ''Katz=Bush=Ashcroft.''

It's Tierney's involvement in the Katz-Street election that surfaces in my mind as I read the "dissenting" endorsement for McCain, which, like the Obama endorsement, reads as standard GOP boilerplate, save for the penultimate paragraph, which seems inserted as an afterthought:

And McCain didn't hire as a strategist David Axelrod, who helped lead Mayor John Street's race-baiting reelection campaign.

Sort of reads like someone's harboring an old grudge, no?

In making their endorsement for President, the Philadelphia Inquirer said: These times demand steady, focused leadership. Leadership that takes America far from the policies that have created so much...
In making their endorsement for President, the Philadelphia Inquirer said: These times demand steady, focused leadership. Leadership that takes America far from the policies that have created so much...
Report Corrections
 
 
  • Comments
  • 67
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4  Next ›  Last »  (4 total)
photo
24hourrifle
A time comes when silence is betrayal
09:02 AM on 10/23/2008
as a lifelong resident of philadelphia ican tell you that since brian tierney took over the inquirer the paper has gone from a well respected intellectually stimulating newspaper to,well...something less trhan that.the fact is,despite repeated claims that it would not be the case when he took over,his fingerprints ARE all over it.from moving the more liberal columnists off of the front page to giving rick santorum a voice.i mean,seriously,RICK SANTORUM???!!!???
THIS WHOLE STORY IS A microcosm of what conservatism is all about.conservatives dont want an equal voice an equal representation for all sides.they simply want to shout others down while insisting that anyone who holds different ideological views is somehow "anti-american" or a "radical".they will say or do absolutely anything to advance their agenda regardless of how completely and utterly foolish it appears to rational,reasonable people.
08:59 AM on 10/23/2008
McCain is concentrating an advertsing blitz in Philly especially the NE and South Philly areas--known white bigot areas of the city---I know this I am a born and raised Philly white girl. People won't tell me directly why they are not voting for Obama because they find it difficult to utter the bigoted words but it is easy to read their facial expressions. I find it impossible to understand why people will vote against their own self interest because of race.

Go Obama/Biden "08

Pat the nurse (and PASNAP union member)
photo
24hourrifle
A time comes when silence is betrayal
09:31 AM on 10/24/2008
couldnt agree more...i live in the heart of NE philly(oxford circle).it is a perfect example of how republicans succeed.a mostly porr/lower income area,yet they buy all this s*** about coddling murderers and perverts,being sympathetic to terrorists,etc...despite the fact that democrats tax plans and obamas specifically,would benefit them greatly they simply cant bring themselves to vote for a black dude.i know its inappropriate to say,and just plain stupid if youre an elected official,but the fact is some places ARE more racist than others.
05:42 AM on 10/23/2008
Who cares what a checkout line tabloid endorses?
08:51 AM on 10/23/2008
Correction: this not the National Enquirer it is the Philadelphia Inquirer.
09:27 AM on 10/23/2008
And the difference between this is . . . . . .??

The Philly Inquirer today under Tierney is pretty much like the National Enquirer. All BS and no facts.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
munki
Global to Local now Local to Global
04:47 AM on 10/23/2008
try to be politically correct, but the result is wrong...
Americans will always remember...
city of brotherhoold...
but may not be... inquiries...
03:44 AM on 10/23/2008
Maybe they did it to appeal to the racist rednecks that everyone keeps apologizing for.
03:10 AM on 10/23/2008
"He runs in Republican circles. Probably most of his partners in ownership of the papers are Republicans. So, the temptation would be to please them and go for McCain.
On the other hand, Tierney is also a marketing and public relations guy. He knows that southeastern Pennsylvania is a deep-blue area that Obama is going to win by 500,000-votes plus. A McCain endorsement would royally tick off thousands of readers -- and represent a 180-degree turn for the editorial board, which has been generally supportive of Obama's candidacy."

Or say it with one word: coward

Or say it with one equation: McCain supporter + coward = 2-faced
02:02 AM on 10/23/2008
I don't see it that way, actually. It's not a split-endorsement. It's an Obama endorsement...with a nod to why people might vote for mccain.

Yeah, probably tirney's just another republican cretin who runs a newspaper...as most of our papers are controlled in this country, if you have taken a look....and he seems like a creep...but nevertheless....

"split endorsement" this isn't....
12:45 AM on 10/23/2008
The Kansas City Star did both as well... the facing page to the Obama endorsement was an endorsement by dissenting editorial staff for McCain... they felt that since the endorsement is not a unanimous decision, that they should let the others voice their opinions, too...

I don't necessarily agree with it as I do think it diminishes the endorsement of the chosen candidate...
07:37 AM on 10/23/2008
I like the bifurcated style. It more accurately reflects the readers. Obama isn't liked by about 43-45% of the american people as a president.

McCain is not liked by the other 43-45%

Then there are the undecideds who apparently need some sort of an act of God to make up their mind.
07:47 AM on 10/23/2008
The "undecideds" are the same people you stand in line behind at McD's while they try to decide whether to get a regular hamburger...or a cheeseburger.
These are the same people who break out into a cold sweat when you ask them if they want soup or salad.
They're SO unable to make up their mind, they can't decide whether to have a beautiful dinner with food lovingly prepared by Emril LaGasse (Obama/Biden)...or a steaming pile of crap with shards of glass in it (McCain/Palin).
12:44 AM on 10/23/2008
That's because they knew the RIGHT thing would be to endorse McCain. But with a large black readership, they made the economic decision to do it this way.

How sad that the dollar is so powerfull.

Of course, Dems already know that. Ask Frank and Dodd. They made millions off OUR economic odwnturn, and they don't care or take responsibility.

The liberals have seen this crisis coming, and did NOTHING to stop it. Bush tried to stop it a couple years ago, and they said all is fine.....while taking in big bucks. And this includes big donation to Mr. BO.
02:06 AM on 10/23/2008
WOW,,,thanks for EXPLAINING IT ALL to us, TRW !

I didn't understand it before...now it's all so very clear.

I'm just curious, though....

what the heck are all you right-wing wacko cranks gonna do come 11/5 and beyond ?......
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
SurferKit
12:00 AM on 10/23/2008
Endorsing both candidates makes no sense.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
amoment
11:17 PM on 10/22/2008
Maybe this is the reason Philadelphia has so much crime...we can't make up our minds, or we stand divided. But what blows my mind is that Philadelphia is overwhelmingly democrat.
11:14 PM on 10/22/2008
McCain is honest with good judgement, a sound temperment, and common sense?! Huh?! That's the most ridiculous thing I have heard throughout this entire campaign. Whoever penned that opinion for the Inquirer should be fired for incompetence.
02:31 AM on 10/23/2008
My thought, too; I think it's a hoax.
10:54 PM on 10/22/2008
Being originally from the East coast after moving finally to California.
The Inquirer is a rag, do not trust it.
gintheb
Liberal. Reclaim the word.
10:31 PM on 10/22/2008
Easy. 3 sylables each.
For Obama: com-pet-ence.
For McCain: bar-be-que.
10:13 PM on 10/22/2008
And then the two halves of the baby began to flail
02:32 AM on 10/23/2008
This comment is a beauty!