News-Record.com

Since I cover education myself, I can't help but wade in on this.

Gauvreau may have a personal stake in funneling stories to the Rhino. But his basic point is right: the public shouldn't be excluded from this conversation and he has every right to talk.

North Carolina's public records law says there are certain things that may be discussed in closed session. However, it doesn't say that anything must be discussed in closed session. These closed-door gatherings are really just excuses to keep the taxpayers from knowing how their money is spent and that's wrong.

Before I came to the News & Record, I covered education in my hometown of Shelby, N.C. The Cleveland County school board needed to hire a superintendent to run the newly-merged school system. Rather than retreat behind closed doors, the board chose to hold the candidate interviews in public. People were still sore about the merger and it was amazing how much good will and trust the new school board earned simply by opening up the superintendent search to public scrutiny.

As an education reporter, as well as someone who strongly believes in the public's right to know, I'd love it if our had elected officials defied peer pressure and lifted the veil off of these secret sessions.

But I wouldn't like it so much if they gave that information to the competition first, though!

Oh it's fun alright. And it brings up some interesting points. As reporters we should all be able to get behind the idea of transparency
when it comes to government meetings and the free flow of information. And those on the board had to know that Gavreau did not intend to keep
any secrets from the media once he became one of us -- he said as much to Jordan Green (our reporter) in a story we ran back in March when he
took over as publisher. But most importantly: Is there a conflict of interest here? Is it possible to stop being a newspaper man during these meetings or take off the board member hat when he's putting the paper together? Should he have to? Lots of issues here.

I agree with you, Bruce. The more of the public's business that is conducted in front of the public the better.

Brian, I don't think any newspaper person should serve in a capacity to do the public's business. There's too much opportunity for conflict of interest OR the perception of a conflict of interest. Van King, our former publisher, held some high profile positions -- none connected with government that I can remember -- that got him into the news. He did a very good job of keeping the two hats he wore separate. But why even go there if you don't have to.

On the other hand, I'm not a publisher and have never been one, so I'm not driven by the same instincts.

Tip: Michelle Malkin highlights a fascinating case of a father arrested for refusing to leave his daughter's school until School officials would agree in writing to his request. He and his wife asked to be notified in advance when certain contraversial materials and subjects were used or brought up. see http://michellemalkin.com

The Rhino's coverage of local politics is colored- and honestly so- by the opinion of its reporters and their editors. Hence their mantra: "All the Rumors Fit To Print." However, MSM reporters and professionals have been humiliated by the depth of the Rhino's coverage. The News and Record and Observer have been constantly scooped, out worked, outmanned by a small family outfit.

Your owners restrict your coverage. They feel it is too expensive for a daily paper to cover the local politics in such depth. But somehow a small family weekly actually is giving a lot of readers what they want.

"The "renegade" school board member? The new publisher of The Rhinoceros Times in Charlotte."

John, did he agree beforehand NOT to disclose what happened in the meeting? Is he in any violation of an agreement or rule? (Curious; not accusing.)

Sue, he's not in violation of any law that I'm aware of. I think he had said that he would not be silenced simply because the board decided to meet behind closed doors, but I'm not positive.

Chip, "constantly scooped"? Help remind me of, say, three or four stories in the last month that the Rhino has scooped us on. Sorry, I don't buy your conclusion that we've been humiliated. I do, agree with you that a lot of people like what they get there.

I do get a kick out of the Rhino's wit and scrutiny. The "scooped" and "humiliated" charges come purely from the past- particularly in the beginning. Many times your reporters would make brief, half hearted attempts to cover- say counsel meetings,only to miss the fireworks after they left.

John Hammer out worked everyone. He stayed to the end of every meeting. Got himeself kicked out of meetings when he had a right to be there and told us when it happened. (He even reported when your guys left early). Many times when either majority refused to follow rules, he blistered the culprits every time with in-depth reporting. Barely a word of contraversy was ever reported by your paper, only the most outlandish behavior that could not be ignored.

The News and Record made itself the enemy of the Rhino. (I don't know John). I think John would have respected an honest effort by your staff. It may be there now, I am not sure. But if your staff is covering local politics accurately and in depth, it is because of the standard set by John Hammer.

Finally, the Rhino prints facts colored by opinion. You try not to do that. But they bill their work as "all the rumors fit to print." You have different standards that are almost impossible to follow. (What reporter doesn't have an opinion- sometimes it does creep in to their writing).If your paper (and industry) would just be forthcoming when you miss the mark, I think you be seen in a better light.