From an anonymous email sent to a local blogger:
Sorry to email you anonymously but I can’t have my name attached to this. I am a journalism student at EWU and we had the editor of the Spokesman Review, Steve Smith, in our class with Professor Steve Blewett, former editor of the Spokesman. He spoke to us about the endorsement of Cathy McMorris and told us point blank that the editorial board had voted to endorse Peter Goldmark with with an almost unanimous vote (I believe he said 5-1). However, the decision of the editorial board was overturned by owner Stacey Cowles. Now the rest of what I say is purely speculation, but I had heard that the Cowles were staunchly Republican. If this is true (I don’t doubt the editor but rather my own speculation) would this not be completely improper and something that should be screamed from the heavens?
In the comment thread S-R Editor Steven Smith says the anonymous journalism student got it wrong — not only did the board vote to endorse McMorris, but the vote was not close. Fair enough.
But he leads off with an interesting statement:
Well, so much for the accuracy of the blogosphere and the anonymity it provides.
Um… I think Smith misses the point.
My post was entirely accurate. An EWU journalism student did indeed anonymously send that email. It was rumor, and I presented it as such, without comment.
And as a result, the editor of the S-R came into my comment thread and set the record straight, thus proving the accuracy of the blogosphere.
So thanks Steve, for participating in the discussion and helping to make the blogosphere a better, more informative place.