Where I Stand: Brian Greenspun: JOA is here to stay

Saturday, Nov. 11, 2000 | 3:47 a.m.

Brian Greenspun is editor of the Las Vegas Sun.

WHY ASK Tom Mitchell anything?

I don't think I am any different from the hundred or so other people in town who pay attention to the other newspaper's editorial page when I question the motivation of the Review-Journal's editor.

I am trying not to make this personal, but I am having trouble discerning what the owners and publisher of the little paper down the street are thinking when they give this Mitchell fellow the space in their paper to let loose his venom and pent-up instability on their own readers. It defies logic but, I suppose, in that one word I have answered my own question.

For as long as I can remember, logic has had absolutely nothing to do with the editorial policy of the R-J. And, in their latest incarnation of an editor, they have gone so much farther than even I thought possible in exposing their readers to the worst of what newspapers have to offer.

For the thousands of you who don't read the Review-Journal's editorial page -- and who can blame you?-- let me explain.

Mitchell, who has never understood nor accepted the idea of a Joint Operating Agreement, tried to explain it in last Sunday's newspaper. In the process, which was weak at best, he took the opportunity to characterize the political endorsements of his newspaper and those of the Sun.

At the risk of spreading his inanity, I will quote just a bit of what he said: "... the Review-Journal editorially endorsed the presidential candidacy of Gov. George W. Bush and the Sun supported Vice President Al Gore -- in the same edition. Ours was based on a rational philosophy of self-determination and principled quest for fundamental fairness, theirs on scaremongering and cronyism. (You know, blah blah nuke waste, blah blah Republicans are evil, blah blah nuke waste)."

I shouldn't have to say any more, for any intelligent citizen of Nevada knows that the single most significant issue Nevadans will have to face is the potential of the nation's high-level radioactive waste being buried just a few miles from Las Vegas. Why does Mitchell dismiss this and all of us as just more blah, blah?

Perhaps the answer is found in his self-important description of the R-J's endorsements as rational and principled and the Sun's as something less. I normally wouldn't question in public the basis for their endorsements -- partly because I know it comes from a long history of disdain for anything with the words government, union or poor attached to it, and partly because there is always hope that they might change -- so who are they to question ours?

By doing so, Mitchell impugns the integrity of Mike O'Callaghan; my mother, Barbara Greenspun; Ruthe Deskin; and everyone else who devotes countless hours interviewing candidates and digging up information that can better help us make informed recommendations. If there is any character to be impugned it is what little that egomaniac down the street can squeeze into what appears to be just another overstuffed shirt.

As for his discussion of the Joint Operating Agreement and how it came to pass he, as usual, is wrong.

Sure, we lost the economic battle to the R-J -- 37 years ago. That's when a fire destroyed our newspaper plant and my parents had to airlift the paper in from Los Angeles every day -- at least every day that the fog would allow the planes to take off. The circulation gap between the two papers grew and the rest is just more of the history of two-newspaper towns.

But because my father loved his newspaper and cared deeply about this city and the way it grew up, he stayed in longer than everyone thought financially feasible. For the next 25 years Hank Greenspun suffered uncountable losses to make sure Las Vegas had a strong voice to counteract the Neanderthal down the street. He knew that if the R-J held sway, Las Vegas would grow up in its image, which was one of a money-hungry, unconcerned institution that cared only about itself.

When my father got sick in 1989, the choice was clear. Congress created JOAs to allow for communities to keep more than one editorial voice alive even when the marketplace had other ideas. In 1900 there were close to 2,000 cities with two or more newspapers. Today there are less than two dozen and most of them are JOAs.

Did it cost money to join the JOA? Of course. My family -- willingly, proudly and without one bit of remorse -- gave up over $100 million in value to keep the Las Vegas Sun alive for what was, then, 50 more years.

We also had to cede the responsibility of selling ads and printing and distributing the Sun to the Review-Journal, which has gone out of its way to make sure the Sun maintains a much smaller-circulated paper than its morning rival. OK. That was the risk we took.

It is bad enough that we are constantly having to listen to the hypocrites, who are responsible for our lower circulation, crowing about the differences in the numbers. But that's business, and if they choose to be bad at it, so be it.

But to be subjected to little minds like Mitchell's questioning the integrity of some of Nevada's most outstanding citizens, people who give their life's blood to make this newspaper meaningful for the citizens of Las Vegas, well that is almost more than we should have to take. But take it we will, Tom, because we know nobody but us cares what you have to say.

The more you rant, though, the more Las Vegas raves about its very fortunate position of having a sane and sensible newspaper to tell the truth and counter the drivel that you print every day.

And here's the good news, Tom. There's at least 40 more years of the Las Vegas Sun. Get used to it.

archive