AFS Cinema
Actually 'The Worthy News Aspect' Is Exactly What's Up for Debate
RECEIVED Mon., March 6, 2006
Louis,
I took a fair swipe at Andy Langer's failure to ask Kris about a newsworthy and local-angle subject of obvious import to the Chronicle's cover story [“Lone Star,” Music, Feb. 24]: Mark McKinnon's Kristofferson/Bush connections and Kris' obvious liberal bent.
You replied – on Andy Langer's behalf – and said that you knew personally from prior experience that Kris wouldn't touch the subject.
Does this mean that A) Andy was correct in not broaching it with Kris, or does it mean B) that you told Andy in advance not to broach it with Kris?
Your published reply strongly suggests it was one of the two, or both.
Shouldn't Andy have asked, and shouldn't Kris have been afforded the opportunity to say "I ain't going there"?
I stand by my last sentence in my letter: "Perhaps someone with a real nose for news should have tagged along."
I can't stand "obvious unmentionables" in supposedly legitimate journalistic enterprises, Louis (which the Chronicle is), and you shouldn't defend the practice. We've gotten too much of that the past five years on a national level.
It needn't have been antagonistic on Andy's part, and Kris could have gently demurred. That's how it should have been.
That's how journalism works, right? The reporter asks, the subject replies. Right?
The worthy news aspect of McKinnon and Kristofferson's shared past, in an Austin-based publication, is surely not up for debate here.
I took a fair swipe at Andy Langer's failure to ask Kris about a newsworthy and local-angle subject of obvious import to the Chronicle's cover story [“Lone Star,” Music, Feb. 24]: Mark McKinnon's Kristofferson/Bush connections and Kris' obvious liberal bent.
You replied – on Andy Langer's behalf – and said that you knew personally from prior experience that Kris wouldn't touch the subject.
Does this mean that A) Andy was correct in not broaching it with Kris, or does it mean B) that you told Andy in advance not to broach it with Kris?
Your published reply strongly suggests it was one of the two, or both.
Shouldn't Andy have asked, and shouldn't Kris have been afforded the opportunity to say "I ain't going there"?
I stand by my last sentence in my letter: "Perhaps someone with a real nose for news should have tagged along."
I can't stand "obvious unmentionables" in supposedly legitimate journalistic enterprises, Louis (which the Chronicle is), and you shouldn't defend the practice. We've gotten too much of that the past five years on a national level.
It needn't have been antagonistic on Andy's part, and Kris could have gently demurred. That's how it should have been.
That's how journalism works, right? The reporter asks, the subject replies. Right?
The worthy news aspect of McKinnon and Kristofferson's shared past, in an Austin-based publication, is surely not up for debate here.
Jackson Williams