Did you censor your PG&E story? Did your editors censor you? Did Hearst corporate censor you? Why is the Chronicle/Hearst so scared of PG&E?
By Bruce B. Brugmann
Memo to: Andy Ross of the Matier and Ross of the Chronicle’s local political column
From: B3
Re: Andy’s naming of the Guardian and me as the big losers in the last election
I see that Andy named the Guardian and me the big losers on the City Desk television show (6/11/08) in the Nov. 4 election because of the loss of the Clean Energy Act (Prop H) to PG&E. We were, he said in his election recap, “tilting at windmills” to go up against PG&E and seemingly ready to continue on “tilting at windmills?”
We appreciate the plug. And we’re sorry that we can’t live up to the standards of PG&E and Hearst. We’ll work on it. (Perhaps my recent blogs on how Hearst has for decades worked in lockstep with PG&E to black out or marginalize the PG&E/Raker Act scandal will explain our problem.)
In the meantime, I do have some questions for you and Phil. Why, if the H citizens forced PG&E to spend more than $l0 million on its Big Lie campaign, the largest in San Francisco history, and the campaign got more than 40 per cent of the vote with very little money, and the Guardian and I are such big losers, isn’t the H story a big story? And if it is a big story, why did you not run anything in your column about the campaign or the underlying PG&E/Raker Act scandal? Did you censor your own copy? Did your editors censor you? Did Hearst corporate censor you?
Who over there at the Chronicle/Hearst is so scared of PG&E? Why?
More: can you tell me specifically why you didn’t bother to correct any of the PG&E lies? And, specifically, just what it is that you find so frightening about clean energy and public power?
Let me add a critical point: even the smarter PG&E officials and campaign people admit privately that the H campaign had good arguments and that it is now just a matter of time before PG&E starts losing, sooner or later. And I think sooner rather than later.
I emailed a version of the above memo to Matier and Ross the day after the City Desk show. They did not respond by blog time late Monday afternoon. I will try again with this blog. B3
Click here to read previous blog, Extra! Hearst tries to bury the clean energy act