Skip to main content

Malloy Gets Huffy And Puffy With Connecticut’s Media – Because He Can


Governor Dannel Malloy – former New York State prosecutor, former Mayor of Stamford, Connecticut, a progressive, chief of the gayest administration in Connecticut history, architect of both the largest and second largest tax increases in state history, “Porcupine” (a self-description popularized by political humorist Colin McEnroe) – recently turned off the light during press conference on the budget, the most expensive in state history.

Mr. Malloy had been taking questions on the budget, each reporter being given one. A short follow-up session occurred. The interrogatory took about thirty minutes, at which point Mr. Malloy and communications director Mark Berman proposed that the remained of the briefing should be conducted “off the record.” Reporters were asked whether they were comfortable with such an arrangement. When Waterbury Republican American reporter Paul Hughes expressed his discomfort, Mr. Malloy said he could leave. There was no point in continuing to object, since Mr. Malloy and his communication director had settled upon an “off the record” communication. Mr. Hughes quietly departed.

It is ludicrous for a governor to refuse to answer questions publicly on a matter that affects every man, woman, transgender and child in the state. And closing down an “on the record” discussion thirty minutes after the subject had been openly discussed is highly unorthodox, a first in an administration that regrettably is nearly first in high taxes, unbalanced budgets, multi-billion dollar programs stretching out over thirty years, excessive borrowing, political insularity and obfuscation. “Off the record” discussions prohibit reporters from mentioning any details concerning the discussion; the matter under discussion is “not for publication, broadcast or attribution.”

Politicians “go of the record” for a variety of reasons. They might want to speak candidly for once, a refreshing change from the usual scripted palaver. Or they might want to inject political anti-bodies into the information stream. In “off the record” remarks, however, no politician ever expects statements made to a muzzled media to be without effect. The question therefore arises: Who benefits from such invisible, inaudible, non-public and un-recordable transactions? Friendly “off the record” chats between journalists and politicians changes shared data from hard fact to unattributed rumor.

Questions may be honestly put -- or not. But the "off the record" agreement between a reporter and a politician permits both the politician and the reporter to evade their essential responsibilities. Reporters especially are at a severe disadvantage in such Faustian exchanges. The business of a reporter is to report, and the report must be objectively true; that is to say, the report must objectively and disinterestedly mirror reality. Friendship and private unorthodox relations between the two makes it impossible for the reporter "to see the thing right under his nose," which is, George Orwell said, the most difficult thing for a writer to do.  

Mr. Hughes was not alone in objecting to an “off the record” account of matters of public moment. What, after all, is the point of attending a media availability at which none of the information imparted may find its way into news reports when the subject under discussion is a budget? Several journalists -- Susan Haigh, the Capitol reporter for The Associated Press, Daniela Altimari of the Hartford Courant and Steve Kotckho of Connecticut Radio Network – also bolted the propaganda session. Whenever a journalist discovers his spine, the angels in Heaven sing Hallelujah.

John Milton, the author of “Areopagitica; A speech of Mr. John Milton for the Liberty of Unlicenc’d Printing, to the Parliament of England,” perhaps the most passionate defense of the often assaulted principle of the right to freedom of speech and expression, were he present at Mr. Malloy's gagfest, would have followed Mr. Hughes out the door.

The Areopagitica itself opens with a quote from Euripides:

This is true liberty, when free-born men,
Having to advise the public, may speak free,
Which he who can, and will, deserves high praise;
Who neither can, nor will, may hold his peace:
What can be juster in a state than this?

If the Milton quote is too remote for modern politicians, they might give some thought to a quote from Chris Dodd – former U.S. Senator from Connecticut, the co-author with then U.S. Representative  Barney Frank of the little read 2,319 page Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act,  lobbyist for the Motion Picture Association of America, and, it is rumored, a possible ambassador to Cuba.  “When the public's right to know is threatened,” said Mr. Dodd, “and when the rights of free speech and free press are at risk, all of the other liberties we hold dear are endangered.”


If Mr. Dodd is appointed Cuban Ambassador, following President Barack Obama’s presidential order reversing more than a half century of U.S. policy towards the Castro brothers' Communist state, he may be able to put to good use his own sentiments regarding all the liberties we here in the United States commonly practice – when they are not under assault by Governor Porcupine.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Blumenthal Burisma Connection

Steve Hilton , a Fox News commentator who over the weekend had connected some Burisma corruption dots, had this to say about Connecticut U.S. Senator Dick Blumenthal’s association with the tangled knot of corruption in Ukraine: “We cross-referenced the Senate co-sponsors of Ed Markey's Ukraine gas bill with the list of Democrats whom Burisma lobbyist, David Leiter, routinely gave money to and found another one -- one of the most sanctimonious of them all, actually -- Sen. Richard Blumenthal."

Powell, the JI, And Economic literacy

Powell, Pesci Substack The Journal Inquirer (JI), one of the last independent newspapers in Connecticut, is now a part of the Hearst Media chain. Hearst has been growing by leaps and bounds in the state during the last decade. At the same time, many newspapers in Connecticut have shrunk in size, the result, some people seem to think, of ad revenue smaller newspapers have lost to internet sites and a declining newspaper reading public. Surviving papers are now seeking to recover the lost revenue by erecting “pay walls.” Like most besieged businesses, newspapers also are attempting to recoup lost revenue through staff reductions, reductions in the size of the product – both candy bars and newspapers are much smaller than they had been in the past – and sell-offs to larger chains that operate according to the social Darwinian principles of monopolistic “red in tooth and claw” giant corporations. The first principle of the successful mega-firm is: Buy out your predator before he swallows

Down The Rabbit Hole, A Book Review

Down the Rabbit Hole How the Culture of Corrections Encourages Crime by Brent McCall & Michael Liebowitz Available at Amazon Price: $12.95/softcover, 337 pages   “ Down the Rabbit Hole: How the Culture of Corrections Encourages Crime ,” a penological eye-opener, is written by two Connecticut prisoners, Brent McCall and Michael Liebowitz. Their book is an analytical work, not merely a page-turner prison drama, and it provides serious answers to the question: Why is reoffending a more likely outcome than rehabilitation in the wake of a prison sentence? The multiple answers to this central question are not at all obvious. Before picking up the book, the reader would be well advised to shed his preconceptions and also slough off the highly misleading claims of prison officials concerning the efficacy of programs developed by dusty old experts who have never had an honest discussion with a real convict. Some of the experts are more convincing cons than the cons, p