All hail the magnanimous restraint of a caring media

We wouldn't know Dianne Cornwall, a senior staffer to the governor of Nevada, if we hit her with the Gleanermobile. So needless to say, we have no idea what compelled her to drive to the offices of a Reno newspaper, hold a gun to a reporter's head and force the reporter to write a story about the maybe probably divorce of one James Arthur Gibbons from Dawn, his wife.

OK we're exaggerating. A little.

But according to assorted grown-ups, if not for the actions of a churlish Cornwall, the gentle Nevada press corps would have never, ever started down the tawdry, distasteful path of writing about the gubular marriage, at least not until Jim and/or Dawn either filed papers or helpfully issued a press release.

"Can anyone out there remember anything more lunkheaded than a top staffer to an elected official going on the record with a newspaper about an elected official’s marital problems?" wrote one Las Vegas columnist.

"This is essentially a private matter between the governor and his wife. Why in the hell would Gibbons No. 2 staffer go blabbing about it to people?" wrote another.

Both journalists, in something of a departure from their profession's custom, seem to wish that a high-ranking official in the governor's administration would have said "no comment."

Both also signaled their wholehearted agreement with a Gibbons-loving professional political activist in Reno, who wrote on his website that marital strife in the governor's mansion would not even be a story if not for the utterances of the Gibbons staffer.

Having formed a triumvirate of hyper-sensitivity, all three writers took time out from burying Cornwall in opprobrium to heap varying degrees of praise on the media and themselves for showing such magnanimous responsible restraint in these difficult times.

After all, the governor's marriage has nothing to do with how the state is governed. Well, except for the strain divorce could have on the governor's ability (such as it is) to do his job. And the impact it could have on his political effectiveness and prospects for reelection or even his capacity to last through the remainder of his term. And how divorce proceedings might intersect with various allegations of wrongdoing lodged against both Gibbonses. And how the situation has already resulted in an evildoer-obsessed governor no longer sleeping with the Al Qaeda warning phone next to his pillow. And the customary Republican hypocrisy. And the influence Dawn wields on selecting high-level staffers — this isn't exactly Janet Huckabee we're talking about here. But other than stuff like that, it's definitely not a story, so boo-hiss-boo to this Cornwall person and hooray for the press.

But was the media really being so heavenly and gracious by not reporting what, according to the media, virtually everyone in the media already knew? (The media, by the way, doesn't report rumors; but if the public somehow finds out about something, then the media feels it is crucial that the public knows the media knew about it all along.) Does the press deserve all the wonderful praise for showing such dashing and honorable restraint?

"Media outlets ... have been trying to confirm persistent rumors over the past week that the Gibbons' 23-year marriage is over and that the governor has moved out of the Governor's Mansion in Carson City and is living in the couple's home in southwest Reno," reported one Las Vegas newspaper Friday.

"Members of Gibbons’ staff had been reticent this week when asked about the rumors," reported another. 

And of course the governor's staffer did not, in point of fact, force a Reno reporter to write about the Gibbonses at gunpoint; the reporter called the staffer, in an effort to confirm rumors after they had been published by a Nevada blogger who must not be named.

The staffer talked. The reporter got the confirmation. But not because others weren't scrambling to get it first.

Whatever. Happy Leap Year Day from Lord Voldemort.

Comments

[Pedro]

My time in Azkaban has led to me to question journalists true intentions. I have a feeling Ralston and Sebelius are less concerned with what news was broken and rather, who broke it (i.e not them).

But thats just me fearless dark leader.

[Michael Green]

Has anyone stopped to ask why, if Nevada's first couple (of what?) have been separated, the governor is living in his house and his wife is living in the Governor's Mansion. Shouldn't the governor be living there? Or is the real governor's mansion Sig Rogich's or Sheldon Adelson's residence?

[KICKBOXERMOMMA]

I like the little commentary that if there is a divoce the Rep Party would ask Gibbons to step down. Wow a divorce that's all we needed to get rid Gibbons. Thanks DAWN!The citizens of Nevada owe you big time.

[Nevada Ned]

TRUE FACT: In Maryland in 1974, governor Marvin Mandel got divorced, but his wife refused to move out of the Governor's mansion. A long standoff ensued, because the governor shrank from calling in the SWAT team on his wife, or his ex-wife. Eventually she was persuaded to move out, but since she had possession of the mansion, she was able to negotiate from a position of strength. Think that'll happen in Nevada?

Possibly plausible theory: the Gibbonses were able to stay married this long because he was in Washington for a decade and she was in Nevada. Separation worked. But once they had each other underfoot on a daily basis, they were headed for divorce court.

Fun Theory: Jim Gibbons wants to divorce his wife in order to marry someone like Lindsay Lohan, whom he met when they were both in rehab. Jim and his new wife can appear as headliners at Caesar's, in a show entitled "A New Dawn!" (HA HA HA HA HA)

[Just wondering]

The Gleaner makes it into the L.A. Times:

http://tinyurl.com/2b5ykw

Well, sorta anyway.

[Not Bob]

Thanks Just wondering; that link is terrific for several reasons.

1. It refers to Chuck Muth as a "political consultant" and to Jon Ralston as "blogger," which is likely to send both of them over the edge.

2. It notes the comment by that Gibbons flunky as "inexplicable," when in fact its perfectly explicable -- the spokestress and the comm dir have both quit, so there's only one or two people left in the building to field phone calls from the press.

3. It snarkily notes that Groper is 10 years older than Dawn and slyly implies that maybe never married because "neither of their official biographies supplies a marriage date."

4. ITs written by Laura Bush's former flack. When even Republican flunkies are openly disdaining Gibbons, its getting close to time to pack it in.

[Dude]

The divorce is absolutely a story, and so a Doctor of Journalism opined on Ralston today. So fuck those guys.
Also, don't you think that the fact that the divorce was pending has a lot to do with Giblet's senior staff, including press mavens, jumping out of windows? It was either that or the lumbering attack of the vicious Pat Mulranysaurus, provoked by Giblet's pointing out that the water grab was a fucking stupid idea from the get go.

[Not Bob]

Gleaner snarked by Anjeannette who implies that he was wrong to print the truth, whereas she was right to print the Guhvnah's flunkee's confirmation of the truth.

Then an anonymous commenter provides a pithy version of the often-invoked Gleaner mission statement : "a quasi-journalist practicing ...rumor mongering..."

Unless I've missed something, he's still never credited the true originator of that sort of quasi-journalism, MSNBC.

[Michael Green]

A few things about this are troubling, journalistically:

1. The internet does leave space for rumormongering. The Gleaner doesn't deny doing that, but I think the Gleaner only does it when he has something solid to work from. He heard the stories were being worked on or he heard a rumor that seemed solid. To call him a "quasi-journalist" is ridiculous because he has journalistic experience and therefore knows the difference--or is presumed to know the difference.

2. Thus to point #2, which is the contempt with which some in the mainstream media still view the internet and blogs. For example, the R-J's Tom Mitchell, who no doubt will comment on this as well and include shots at blogs, despite local blogs such as The Gleaner often having more real news and intelligent commentary than he allows in his own "newspaper."

3. Thus to point #3, which is that we in Las Vegas actually are blessed. To the Gazette-Journal, local news is something that fills a page or two. The R-J and Sun do a far better job of covering this area than the G-J does up north, sad to say. And the executive editor there who took the time to write a well-reasoned column on why the G-J printed the story (unusual for us in the south to see a reasoned column from an editor) would be well-advised to proofread his column to eliminate the grammatical errors, since newspapers are supposed to be better than those of us who comment on blogs.

4. Finally, whether the governor does or does not divorce is news because it may relate to his conduct of policy. Think of it this way. He is not living in the governor's mansion, but his wife is. He claims to be a Mormon and is a Republican who believes in his right to dictate family values to others, thereby making his own hypocrisy a story. Because, after all, he was accused of trying to assault a woman in 2006. He may want that story to go away, but it can't unhappen.

[Not Bob]

making his own hypocrisy a story. Because, after all, he was accused of trying to assault a woman in 2006.

Exactly.

Now, on the serious stuff. What if he doesn't run for re-election? With Krolicki still under state investigation, does Beers give up his senate re-election to jump in? Unlikely. Does Heller give up his congressional re-election? Equally unlikely. That leaves only one person who would clearly have the statewide name recognition and the years of experience to be ready on day one ...

Dawn Gibbons for Governor!

[OldScratch]

Well, she would have "experience" like HRC.

I have heard that Heller is gearing up for a Gub race in 2010. A solid victory in 08 would propel him to a legit Gub candidate status. Gives me shivers really.

The question is what if he is forced to step down prior to the end of his term. Then what?

[texexnv@gmail.com]

Agreed with MG that: 1) the state of the state is of paramount concern, 2) can the Dems step in and 'close the deal' when the gubber is finally buried politically.

From Derby's investigation to the fiasco in Clark County it seems like Dems are in as much disarray as the repugs. Dems are going to have to coalesce while the vacuum exists or the moment will be lost.

Sure could use a Dem Moses here....

[Just wondering]

"does Beers give up his senate re-election to jump in? Unlikely"

Beers, if he is re-elected in 2008, has a free ride in 2010. Yes, I'm sure he'd take another shot if Gibbons bails. If not, don't be surprised if he goes after Reid's seat.

Just wondering, yes you're right. I realized it after I wrote it -- it would be 2010 and Beers would certainly run again if its an open seat.