Las Vegas Sun

March 28, 2024

Brian Greenspun answers a critic and suggests the R-J should look at its own contributions

Sherm Frederick is a very jealous man. There is just no other explanation.

I have tried to understand what it is about the president of Stephens Media - that's the media arm of the Stephens family, which, arguably, is among the top two or three wealthiest families in Arkansas, a state that includes the Waltons of Wal-Mart fame - that makes him so obnoxious and so wrong. But, alas, I just don't get it.

I thought is was the fact that he may drink a little too much - he likes to write from his lounge chair on sunny Saturday afternoons after a beer or three, or more - but that can't be it. Lots of good writers and good people have been known to drink.

I thought it was the fact that he could be living proof of the Peter Principle, the knowledge of which has led him to distraction. But that, too, cannot be the explanation because I know many people who have been promoted well past their level of competence, but they remain humble and kind as they bumble their way through their business lives.

I thought about many reasons that could explain Sherm's aberrant behavior in front of hundreds of thousands of Las Vegas newspaper readers, the kind of behavior that causes people to talk, to wonder and to question the honesty, the integrity and, yes, even the sanity of the man who is entrusted with publishing the other "largest newspaper" in the state of Nevada.

But, alas and alack, the only explanation is that he has been overcome with jealousy and, as we all know, when that green-eyed monster is loosed on the public, you must protect yourself at all costs because all bets are off.

Sherm usually saves his inanities for me. His last broadside was a violation of the most basic lesson in Libel Law 101. He committed libel per se against me, which is legalese for "I could own your entire company if I chose to sue you," but nice guy that I am I just chalked it up to a Sherm peculiarity and figured I would get my turn sometime in the future. This is not that time, though. Because this time what Sherm did was a serious breach of the trust that is supposed to develop between a publisher and his subscribers. It deserves a serious response.

For those of you who missed his "me, too, I can write a column" effort on Friday, the publisher of the Review-Journal deigned to give a lesson in ethics to the reporters and editors of the Las Vegas Sun. He also tried to "stick it" to Jon Ralston, who is the premier political reporter and columnist in this state and who Sherm claims, not without some factual basis, is a "franchise player" at the Sun. We have lots of them. His arrows missed the mark and proved only that Sherm is still miffed that Jon decided to leave a dead-end at the Review-Journal in favor of a good newspaper, a move that has proved to be good not only for Jon but for anyone interested in understanding the ins and outs of Nevada politics.

Sherm tried mightily to convince his readers that the Sun was holding out on the public because we did not "disclose" the fact that my family had helped fund the opposition to the "Tax and Spending Control" (TASC) initiative. Actually, Sherm implied that we are paying for the whole thing, which is just one more of his outright, knowing lies, but who is quibbling?

Most major gaming companies and other businesses and some, but not enough, political leaders who understand how crippling TASC would be are doing what they can to try to educate the people before we make a grievous mistake. That means speeches, money and more whenever possible to help the voters understand how TASC-like initiatives have sunk other growing cities and states.

Sherm claimed that by not telling the readers that we had helped give money to try to defeat this most ill-conceived and detrimental ballot initiative, the Sun's reporters and editors had committed some heinous ethical breach.

What he is really trying to do is give people a reason not to read and learn what TASC is all about, to question the Sun as a source of responsible information and, by doing so, a reason to disregard the truth. That way, the Review-Journal will have its way, once again, with an unknowledgeable electorate, a move that would mean millions and millions more to the Arkansas family. As if they need it!

If it weren't so pathetic, it would be laughable.

First the facts. Our editors and reporters did not know that my family had given some money to the cause. In the first place, the TASC initiative was not on the primary ballot, so any effort to find out who was giving to what was more properly a matter for the general election stories

Secondly, the stories the Sun ran about TASC were neutral - as they should be - and the few editorials or columns that did take a position were quite clear. The Sun has never been shy about telling the public where we stand on any issue. If someone in my family put his or her money where our very public mouth is, that is an attribute, not a reason for derision.

Sherm is confused. When a newspaper promotes a business interest - like a Triple-A baseball team, for example - the public should be told about any financial interest that the newspaper or its owners may have so the people can determine what is real and what is pecuniary promotion.

But when a newspaper, or by extension an editor or publisher who represents ownership, takes a public position on a matter of public and not financial concern, then it is almost superfluous to say, "and, oh by the way, I contributed money to that particular cause."

Would it be nice to err on the side of full disclosure in all circumstances? Sure. But, in my case, that assumes too much because it assumes that I remember from one week to the next who and what issue either I or some other family member is supporting, and it assumes I will remember long enough to tell someone about it. Call it just one more of my human failings.

It also assumes the worst in people, which we at the Sun refuse to do. Not without good reason. We now have that reason when it comes to the Review-Journal. To believe Sherm, that our editors and reporters chase my family's money with our editorial and reportorial policy, is not only dead wrong but completely nuts! That kind of thinking could only come from the kind of mind that is used to doing that very same thing. And that, my friends, is closer to the truth than anything Sherm Frederick has ever written about the Sun.

But, since I am a kettle trying to talk back to the blackest pot on the stove, perhaps Sherm should explain his newspaper's knowing cover up of the truth about his newspaper's political activities.

It is no secret that the Stephens family is "anti" practically anything that our government and its institutions have stood for since the beginning of the republic. They don't believe in the public school system, for example, but they don't tell you that. Instead, they rail against teachers and administrators for trying to teach our children, and they scream against any and all taxes because they know that without the revenue to pay teachers and buy books, the public schools cannot operate. For goodness sake, even the most miserly of citizens has to admit that there is some good use to which our tax monies can be applied.

If you don't believe me, just take a look at every one of their editorials on taxes. To them, there has rarely, if ever, been a good and worthy public cause for which taxpayers should be required to foot the bill. Unless, of course, it is for a tax break for the ultra-wealthy in our society. In that case, putting the burden on the backs of the people is fine.

It is part of a noblesse oblige that assumes that rich white men know best for everyone else. That may have been true once a long time ago, if ever, but the United States is rich today because of its diversity of people and ideas; so we don't need the good old boys getting richer at our expense while they profess to do what's in our best interest.

All that is to say that Sherm and the gang at the R-J have been trying their best over all these years to poison the public mind when it comes to the kind of progressive and responsible government policy that will benefit this entire community.

We have a special place here; so to help it grow toward the kind of future that embraces all of our citizens, not just the wealthy few, it requires a willingness to step up to the plate with our resources, our money and our time. The R-J refuses to contemplate that kind of society in which everybody gets a shot at a piece of the brass ring. And the truth is that they have had their way for almost two decades.

Well, all that stopped last October when the Stephens family of Arkansas found a way to take more money from Nevada - and to the best of my knowledge give none of it back to this community - by delivering the Sun in the morning with the Review-Journal.

That means that all newspaper readers have access to the Sun and the R-J so that the public can determine who is ethical, who is accurate, who is responsible - and who is not. And that rankles Sherm to his core.

Jon Ralston reported in his e-mail Flash on Friday that the Stephens family is the largest contributor to the anti-tax, anti-almost everything Club for Growth. That's the misleadingly named group that almost single-handedly funded Sharron Angle's campaign against the winner, Dean Heller, in last week's Republican primary for Congress. It is probably funding her lawsuit to overturn that election. Talk about misnomers. The only growth fostered by that club is the financial growth of its members.

Sherm got excited about my family's $100,000 contribution to the anti-TASC effort, which is supported by most progressive businesses in this state.

I wonder why he didn't think it important to tell the R-J's readers that his bosses contributed $2 million to the Club for Growth, which tried to buy the 2nd Congressional District election in Nevada. That would have been one more U.S. House vote to take hard-earned taxpayer dollars from working men and women and to stuff into the already over stuffed pockets of the Club for Growth. Slip your mind Sherm? Can you even spell E-T-H-I-C-S?

The next time, Sherm, that you want to talk to me and my family - our reporters, editors, columnists and anyone else who works at this newspaper - about ethics, first make sure your own house is in order. The Las Vegas Sun is not unethical. In fact, we are ethical almost to a fault. It is you, Sherm, and that jealousy that consumes you that makes you blind to the facts.

Please, my friend, get some help.

archive