Search: Web        
powered by
Le Templar: What I Know ~

Archive for the 'Steve Berman' Tag

Linking in with Steve Berman

June 22nd, 2009, 5:10 pm by Le Templar
Former Gilbert Mayor Steve Berman

Former Gilbert Mayor Steve Berman

I’m in something of a quandary. I received an email this morning reminding me that former Gilbert Mayor Steve Berman wants me to joined his LinkedIn network. This social media site is designed for working professionals who want to build a collection of contacts as they look ahead to the next step in their careers (whether they want to take one or not). The site allows people to post complete resumes and formal recommendations from former bosses, co-workers and others — with the idea of making contact with prospective employers faster than ever. I do use the unpaid side of LinkedIn, and have added mostly media professionals to my own network.

But Berman’s inquiry points to a question I struggle with — how far should I extend my network? Journalism ethical standards strongly urge independence from government officials and others of public influence so we can be proper watchdogs. While Berman is no longer mayor, he intends to continue to be a prominent presence in Gilbert and to run for the Town Council in the next election. Would accepting Berman’s invitation cause a large number of people to doubt my independence from him? I suspect the answer is “yes.”

How about current and former colleagues now working in public relations for government, nonprofits or private businesses. Am I compromised because they make up some of my current LinkedIn contacts?

The upheavals to the newspaper industry and to journalism in general has forced many peers to seek other forms of work. I might very well find myself in such a position sometime in the future. Does refusing to join the network of Berman or a former colleague (and a list of local contacts potentially far more extensive than mine) automatically reduce my chances of future employment if I have to switch careers some day?

Rapidly evolving social media is prompting many people in many fields to ask this kind of question. I also have a personal Facebook page, in which I have generally excluded news sources but have included current and past work colleagues, personal friends, family and former classmates. Still, I’m aware that anything I post on Facebook could become a subject of public reporting, regardless of my intentions. Take a look at what happened with Barrett Marson, a former Tribune reporter and a spokesman for the state Department of Corrections. After a reporter from a competing newspaper lifted a thread of comments supposedly from prominent local officials on Facebook and reprinted them, several local journalists told me they were immediately “de-friended” (is that really a word now?) by Marson to keep them from reading what he might say on Facebook in the future.

I’m not sure where those of us who want to stay in journalism should draw the line. Do you?

Berman’s wife retracts claim on campaign signs

February 27th, 2009, 11:38 am by Le Templar

We’re not supposed to enjoy saying “I told so.” So I promise there’s no smile on my face as I write to alert readers to the fact that Gilbert Mayor Steve Berman’s wife now says she never should have accused him of arranging to steal campaign signs.

I mentioned in this blog Tuesday that Berman critics have been trying to smear the mayor by spreading far and wide a January police report which quoted Michelle Berman as making this claim. There have been growing concerns about Michelle Berman’s reliability, and there’s no independent verification that Berman has any connection to disappearing campaign signs. But that hasn’t stopped some people from anonymously and repeatedly making reference to the January police report in the comments section of various Tribune stories.

So maybe this will stop them. Gilbert police filed a new report dated Wednesday from a follow-up interview with Michelle Berman that quotes her as saying:

“I know nothing about campaign signs. The truth is, I know nothing for sure about campaign signs. So, you can take that out of the report.”

As of this writing, the anti-Berman Web site that has been the focus of the rumor-mongering has not made any reference to this new police report or Michelle Berman’s recantation.

Berman’s critics need to focus on real issues

February 24th, 2009, 2:34 pm by Le Templar

Critics of Gilbert Mayor Steve Berman should stop trying to taint him with unsubstantiated tales. Their tactic is making them look petty and taking attention away from whatever real concerns might exist with Berman’s bid for re-election.

If you have read the comments section below the local news stories at eastvalleytribune.com in the past week, you’ve see someone post a claim that Berman’s wife, Michelle, has told police that the mayor arranged for some campaign signs to be stolen. In fact, Michelle Berman has gone to the police several times in the past year about her marriage. Steve Berman received a lot of negative publicity in the Tribune and elsewhere when her allegations first came to light, and he temporarily had to turn over his collection of firearms to authorities.

But Steve Berman has never been arrested or criminally charged with anything, even as Michelle Berman keeps coming up with new stories.

It’s election season, and Steve Berman’s opponents apparently believe even hints of a new scandal will push Gilbert voters to one of his five challengers. Someone has anonymously posted a copy of the police report online and one or more people keep referring to the alleged sign stealing in the Tribune comments section.

What these critics are doing is protected by the First Amendment. But it’s rumor-mongering, plain and simple. Furthermore, it gives the impression that Berman’s opponents have few legitimate reasons to object to his re-election, so they have to use salacious attacks instead.

It’s a tactic that easily could (and perhaps should) backfire as voters typically weigh the actual merits of the various candidates for the mayor of Gilbert.

ADVERTISEMENT