Interesting exchange about LA Daily News

Sent to me via the Pipeline. I can't imagine how ugly things may get out there:

Dave:
My statement that you are the worst newsman I've known is fact in
that it is limited to the ones I have worked with. There maybe
someone worse out there, God help us, but I haven't come across him
or her yet. And my statement is supported by the factual points that
follow it.
As for not knowing who controls hiring and firing of editors, are
you suggesting you actually fought to keep Ron in the position? Or
that you are totally powerless because your move to the Mercury News
was a demotion? You used to be over DN editorial.
If you had nothing to do with it, why were you the messenger to
Ron? Because he would take it better from you? Or because the
publisher who ordered the mass slaughter in February didn't have the
nerve but you did? And with your personal ties to the DN, why didn't
you see to it that the newsroom was informed?
I stand by everything I wrote.
vk

>Val:
>
>Thanks for your insulting and unprofessional note. Think want you
want
>of me I do believe you have forgotten that I recommended Ron to be
the
>editor of the paper and supported his many efforts to do something
>different, because the paper has and continues to suffer financially.
>But get this straight: I do not control the fate of editors. The
>publisher of each newspaper does. You are making the worst mistake
that
>a reporter can make -- though that's not surprising to me -- in
assuming
>what my role may or may not have been in terms of Ron. You don't have
>the facts, mam.
>
>-Dave
>
>
>Dave:
> When you took over the San Jose Mercury News, I bemoaned the loss
of
>a great paper to the hands of the worst newsman I've ever known. The
one
>who ran Bush's 2000 convention nomination acceptance speech on page 1
>with a Bush byline. The one who thought "Big Brother" was worth
>round-the-clock coverage just because it was being shot in the
Valley.
>The one who paid for the most pandering and least probing interview
with
>the president ever published anywhere, with cleaned-up quotes to
boot.
>The one who was giddy as a schoolgirl over the fact that the Daily
News
>scored a photo op with the president and vice president. Woohoo.
> This week I can say with certainty that you are also the worst
boss I
>ever have worked for, and with my long and varied career that puts
you
>at the top of a very long list.
> I had my differences with Ron, but I appreciated that he was
trying
>to make the paper different and more accessible to an ever-changing
>audience, unlike his predecessor who held an endless number of
brown-bag
>meetings in the zebra lounge that amounted to absolutely nothing. "We
>need to do something different" was about the most concrete guidance
you
>ever offered.
> Making him let go 22 employees, which clearly took an emotional
toll,
>so you could return just four weeks later and do the same to him (I
>suspect without batting an eye) is very low indeed. I have learned
since
>that the newsroom was informed of the change by laobserved.com
because
>you apparently lack the cojones to face the staff in person and
inform
>them of what you did.
> There is some cathartic pleasure for me in being able to be so
blunt
>with you, and I feel certain at least some of my former colleagues
share
>my views. I have nothing to lose by expressing them because I can say
>with great conviction that I will never again, under any
circumstances,
>work for someone as incompetent, arrogant, self-serving and
heartless as
>you. Life is too short.
>
>Very sincerely,
>Valerie Kuklenski

 

They got nothing on The Pipeline, I'm telling you, nothing.
Though they may be ahead of me in St. Louis. Talking about a Pipeline drying up.

 

But my guess is she at least felt better after sending it.