Miami Herald: An era closes, new one begins (Freeper to the Rescue?)

OUR OPINION: AN OCCASION TO REAFFIRM COMMITMENT TO THE COMMUNITY The Miami Herald enters a new era today. The McClatchy Co. will assume ownership and corporate stewardship of this newspaper and its century-old tradition of quality journalism and dedication to the prosperity and well-being of the communities it serves. The sale of this newspaper is an occasion to reaffirm our commitment to those principles and to welcome a corporate parent with its own history of success and devotion to those same ideas.

James McClatchy, the progenitor of McClatchy Co., was an Irish immigrant who would well have understood the robust strength and optimistic spirit of South Florida. He founded The Sacramento Bee in 1857 and made that newspaper an enduring force for progress. With the purchase of Knight Ridder, McClatchy Co. will eventually own 32 newspapers, making it the second largest chain in the country.

Corporations, it is said, have no soul. The best of them, however, have character. That can be measured in contributions to the community, in the values they represent and in the influence they wield in pursuit of the common good.

Knight Newspapers, and later Knight Ridder, embraced these ideals in ways that will outlast the transfer of corporate identity. This newspaper, during the Knight and Knight Ridder eras, championed a number of causes, from the charter change that brought better representation and diversity to the Miami-Dade County Commission to environmental protections for the Everglades and Florida's coral reefs.

In little more than half a century, beginning in 1951, The Miami Herald received 19 Pulitzer Prizes for outstanding journalism. Some awards, such as in 1993 for coverage of Hurricane Andrew and its aftermath, recognized as a public service to the community. Knight Ridder also provided leadership that led to the creation of the Community Partnership for the Homeless, We Will Rebuild, the Miami Heat Arena and countless other landmark community efforts.

Over the years, the company has employed tens of thousands of Miamians and allowed us to contribute to the civic and business life of the city and the region. One of the legacies is the Knight Foundation, a continuing source of philantrophy and good works for this community and others.

These are stormy times in the newspaper industry, as McClatchy CEO Gary Pruitt has acknowledged. Mr. Pruitt formerly lived and practiced law in Miami and knows both the challenge and promise that this community offers for newspapers. The confidence he has expressed in the future of South Florida and his support for the independence of the company's newspapers are reassuring signs that The Miami Herald has found safe harbor.

FIEDLER IN THE PEN

By Hugo J. Byrne

?Whence come the fanatics? Mostly from the ranks of the non creative men of words?.

Eric Hoffer (?The True Believer?)

The Editor of the Miami Herald is an odd-looking fellow with a high pitched, nagging voice by the name of Thomas Fiedler, and he dislikes most Cuban-American journalists. Fiedler abhors Cubans who entertain the ?radical, right- wing notion? that Castro is a tyrant and not a President. Tom hates their noisy daily condemnation of the Cuban regime through their Miami-based Spanish radio. So much does Mr. Fiedler dislike those irritating Cubans, that he recently equated them with dogs.

No, dear reader, this is not a figure of speech. In a recent interview Mr. Fiedler literally compared Miami?s ?Radio Mambí? commentators to little dogs ?nipping at his heels?. ?Little Chihuahuas?, he called the object of his derision. Later on, ?smoothing? this racist slur, Fiedler promised next time to compare Cuban journalists to ?Boston Terriers?.

Not that Mr. Fiedler, his Miami Herald and El Nuevo Herald publishers object to all Cuban ?journalists?. No sir! There is a certain kind they definitely love, like some servile pencil pushers who recently arrived from Castroland with a good record of praise for the Castro regime and of hatred toward the U.S. Take for example Janet Comellas and Alejandro Armengol, paid contributors to ?El Nuevo Herald?, Spanish language sister publication to the Miami Herald. Comellas worked for the Castro-Communist daily ?Granma? until September of last year.

In her work for Granma, Comellas regularly expounded the superior moral standing of the Castro regime and derided the U.S. government and the American way of life. Comellas' last known piece for Granma was dated Sept.17 2005. In that article, she gave a detailed account -based upon science fiction- of how Eastern Europe's former Soviet Union satellites were in much better shape under totalitarian communism than with their present democratic system.

Alejandro Armengol is El Nuevo Herald's official basher of anti-Castro Cubans. Almost one out of every three articles written by this revolting individual is a blistering biased attack against the Cuban exile community as a whole- as well as the U.S. government- not unlike those printed daily in Granma. Armengol does not bother with facts. His essays are plagued with inaccuracies and outright lies.

Getting caught red handed in a lie is not a big deal for the Cuban-basher; Alejandro simply ignores any objective information proving his blatant dishonesty. Example: In a recent article, Armengol stated that Luis Posada Carriles is presently free in the U. S.

When he wrote his diatribe, Armengol must have known that Posada remained detained in a Texas prison. He still is. But, to my knowledge, despite many reminding him of that fact, Armengol never bothered to set the record straight. Keen on trying to demonstrate the inner malady of his former Cuban nationality, which he is obviously not very proud of, Armengol recently wrote an essay painting nineteenth-century Cuban revolutionary José Martí -Cuba?s counterpart of George Washington- with the darkest colors.

Presiding over this nauseating pen is Mr. Fiedler, who was interviewed about the -likely forced- resignation of the previous Editor of El Nuevo Herald, Jesús Díaz. It was during the interview that Fiedler likened the Commentators at Radio Mambï to ?little chihuahuas nipping at my heels?. Díaz' resignation followed a protracted scandal involving that paper late last month, and he was replaced as Editor of E N H by David Landsberg.

The sequence of events resulting in Fiedler?s insult to Cuban journalists deserves a brief summary. It all began with the bitter exchange between Castro and the Cuban-American journalist, Juan Manuel Cao, in Buenos Aires a couple of months ago. The Tyrant accused Cao of ?being paid? to ask tricky questions that Castro refused to answer. Then the parrot-like Havana ?Round Table? TV show, continued carping on the theme. They announced that some ?Miami mafia? journalists were ?receiving payments from the U. S. government, but that ?they soon would be punished for their infamy?.

Within hours, two veteran columnists and regular contributors who covered Cuban issues for El Nuevo Herald with a semblance of objectivity were banned from work and promptly removed from the paper?s payroll. Their names are Wilfredo Cancio Isla and Pablo Alfonso. In addition, Olga Connor, a contributing freelance writer, was sacked as well. In an incredible Editorial echoing Castro?s propaganda, El Nuevo Herald accused the dismissed journalists -together with others who did not even work for the paper- of a breach of the Herald?s ethical code, which prohibited receiving payments from any governmental agency.

The Cuban community's universal outcry, coupled with substantial loss of revenue (the paper admits to not less than 1800 cancelled subscriptions, and the number of cancelled of advertisements is anybody?s guess) forced El Nuevo Herald to do a shameful about-face. Díaz' resignation was immediately followed by an official offer of reinstatement for Alfonso, Cancio and Connor.

Yet this action did not convey an honest reassessment of the enormity of the paper?s blunder. El Nuevo Herald stated that the Cuban journalists were just victims of administrative mistakes. Despite the fact that all three accepted the offer of returning to their jobs, the wound is still open and bleeding profusely. Alfonso said as much in his first essay upon his return. His legitimate hurt has ominous legal implications for his employer. The obvious double standard applied by the Herald to the writers would eventually lead to a multi-million-dollar litigation, an event predicted in this column two weeks ago. Another prediction: El Nuevo Herald will either loose that civil case, or settle for a similarly large amount.

It is against this background that Mr. Fiedler, when asked if Cuban community pressures had any impact on the recall of the three journalists, answered with his infamous remark. Does Fiedler have a professional death wish?

It only took 24 hours to defame ten or more journalists, fire three from El Nuevo Herald and one from Univision-WLTV Channel 23.

Fire Tom Fiedler
Fire Humberto Castelló
Fire Oscar Corral
Fire Andrés Reynaldo
Fire Alejandro Armengol
Fire Janet Comellas
Fire los Castro-Comunistas

The Miami Herald's Meltdown Over Cuba
by Paul Crespo Posted Oct 12, 2006

While the Miami Herald's recent front-page attempt to smear 10 decent Miami journalists (including me) who worked on U.S.-government TV Marti broadcasts to Cuba, blew up in its face, the paper's scandal has unmasked more serious concerns. Clearly visible now are the Herald’s arrogance, latent anti-Cuban American bias, and lack of professionalism.

When the original Herald story broke September 8, many asked, "With Fidel Castro dying, and his brother Raul struggling to succeed him, why is the Herald doing this now?" That question was even more pressing since in prior weeks, Fidel Castro and his mouthpieces publicly had prodded the Herald to investigate the Cuban American journalists in Miami who Castro accuses of being "agents of imperialism."

As local Cuban American radio commentators (including me) increased their questioning of the Herald's unprofessional reporting and began demanding better explanations about the paper’s motivations and practices, the pressure grew. Thanks to this effort, similar to the pressure on disgraced former CBS anchorman Dan Rather during his forged memo-gate scandal, we discovered that, among other journalistic lapses, the Herald hadn't done its homework.

On October 3, Miami Herald Publisher Jesus Diaz implicitly admitted the Herald had screwed up, announcing that the three Nuevo Herald (the Herald’s Spanish-language paper) journalists unjustly dismissed for "conflict of interest" had been offered their jobs back. The three fired Herald journalists, in fact, had permission to appear on paid TV Marti broadcasts. Diaz then resigned, saying he had lost control of his newsrooms.

The Herald’s new owner, the McClatchy Co., tried to spin things differently. Using as a diversionary smokescreen the charge that Diaz had tried to censor (as too provocative) two stridently anti-Cuban American columns; McClatchy’s News Vice President Howard Weaver proudly proclaimed that this had been unacceptable and that McClatchy believed in “strong columnists,” and “strong voices.”

Of course, at the Herald, these strong voices are almost exclusively “strong liberal voices” such as Leonard Pitts Jr., Robert Steinback and Carl Hiassen, often with a tinge of anti-Cuban American attitude thrown in. But it was useful subterfuge. Not surprisingly, the New York Times misreported the issue completely as its incorrect October 4 headline read: "Miami Publisher Steps Down Over Payments to Reporters." A more accurate headline would have read: "Miami Publisher resigns because he admits the Herald published an unprofessional smear job."

The mounting pressure seems to be too much for Tom Fiedler, the Herald's executive editor and vice president. On October 5, he snapped when he dismissed the notion that the paper had caved to its critics, derisively saying the ''22 people who listen to Cuban radio'' were being stirred up by ''little Chihuahuas nipping at our heels.'' Fiedler later apologized for his choice of words, probably because Chihuahuas are generally associated with Mexicans not Cubans.

As one of those “Chihuahuas” on Miami Cuban radio though, I was a bit offended. Fiedler seriously undercounted the large Hispanic listening audience of “Cuban” radio, which the Arbitron ratings list in the tens of thousands. Maybe Mr. Fiedler is upset that the Herald, unable to arrest the decline in its steadily dwindling readership, has had roughly 2,000 subscriptions canceled these past two weeks in protest against the paper over its smear piece.

But the confused ethnic slur simply was the most egregious example of the Herald's arrogant defensiveness: "Who are those little Miami Cubans to question us?" Though the paper had essentially, and falsely, implied that all who ever had collaborated with TV Marti were tools of the U.S. government, Fiedler blew a gasket at the mere suggestion that the Herald may be doing the same for the Cuban government, calling the accusations that the Herald was a "tool of Castro"—"ludicrous." Can we say “double standard?”

This brings us back to the original question. Why did the Herald choose this critical time to write such a poorly researched, poorly sourced, hit piece about Cuban American journalists?

Most of us who have worked with TV and Radio Marti are proud to provide the Cuban people uncensored information and perspectives that their totalitarian Communist masters deny them. Some, especially the Castro brothers in Havana, want to silence these voices. Most agree that the Herald's story helped Castro.

Previously I noted that Castro and his goons seemed to be forewarned about the Herald story. How did they know? And, was the paper doing Cuba’s bidding, intentionally or unintentionally?

There are many unanswered questions and much speculation. Why smear several opinion commentators not employed by the Herald like me for the alleged transgression of three of its own reporters? Was involving us a cover to fire them, or were they fired as a way to help smear us all?

The McClatchy Co., America’s second largest newspaper company, recently took over the Miami Herald when it acquired Knight Ridder. But the Herald doesn’t have an office in Cuba, and Cuba bans most of its reporters from the island for not being hard enough on the Miami Cuban exiles and for being too hard on Castro.

Was McClatchy’s trying to show Cuba that under their new management, The Herald will be much harsher with Castro’s opponents? Could they be negotiating with Cuba to open a Havana bureau before Fidel Castro dies? The Herald publicly has denied this, but many observers remain skeptical. At minimum, the paper could be doing this unilaterally, hoping for better treatment from Castro later. Perhaps they hope to secure visas so their intrepid investigative reporters may travel to Cuba.

Then there's the 800-pound alligator in the room: Cuban government influence over, or penetration of, the Herald. Humberto Castello, the Nuevo Herald Editor, publicly has defended his oft-criticized policy of hiring recently arrived Cuban “journalists” who worked at all levels of Castro's propaganda organs. Janet Comellas, a copy editor at the Nuevo Herald, who until November 2005 was a senior propaganda writer for Castro's state-controlled paper, "Granma," is just one example.

Has Cuba used this misguided policy to infiltrate the Miami paper with its intelligence operatives?

Tom Fielder and Humberto Castello may think that is “ludicrous,” but intelligence experts believe it's not only possible but likely. The Herald is a prime target for a Fidel Castro obsessed with his Miami opponents. The Herald should police itself as aggressively as it pursues false stories about Cuban American journalists working for TV Marti.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.