The story of a Bulletin reporter who was fired after complaining about how the paper was spinning its real estate coverage went statewide this afternoon when Oregon Public Broadcasting picked it up.
OPB reporter Ethan Lindsey described how ex-Bulletin reporter David Fisher was skeptical of appraiser Dana Bratton’s public prediction on Feb. 25 that the sagging local real estate market would perk up within two months and got comments from experts who questioned it.
But when Fisher picked up his copy of the paper at breakfast next morning, Lindsey said, he “almost spit out his coffee” because the skeptical quotes had been edited out.
After staying home a couple of days to cool off, Fisher confronted his boss, Business Editor John Stearns, and told him he was unhappy about the way his story had been cut and, more generally, about how he was being pressured to spin real estate stories in a positive direction.
“To me, that [Bratton story] was a harbinger of worse things to come and I really didn’t want to put my name on it anymore,” Fisher told Lindsey. The following day, Fisher was fired.
Bratton’s remarks were made at a meeting to kick off the Central Oregon Builders Association and Central Oregon Association of Realtors “Best Buyers Market in 20 Years” campaign – a campaign that, among other things, aims to turn the market around by using the builders’ and realtors’ “economic influence” to get the local media to report more “good news.”
“We want to make sure that the media knows that if things are going bad for the entire industry, it’s going to affect them as well,” COBA Executive Director Tim Knopp told Lindsey. “And it has. We just need balance. We’d have discussions with any media outlet about that and I think they want to do that.”
Lindsey reported that “other local outlets, including the Sisters Nugget newspaper and Bend Living magazine, also say they have heard criticism from advertisers that negative media is hurting the housing market.”
Bulletin Editor John Costa declined to discuss the details of Fisher’s departure, but denied the paper is caving in to the real estate and development lobby and dismissed the Bratton story as minor.
“Frankly, in the grand scheme of real estate stories, it ranks, I don’t even think it achieves the middle,” Costa said. “It’s basically one of those stories that we all do, you do them too, in which an editor says go to the luncheon, cover what is said at the luncheon, and that’s what came back.”
Costa also said he’s chummy with realtors and other advertisers, but denied that affects how the paper covers stories.
“A lot of the people who are our advertisers, I know them,” he said. “We all know them. I’ve been around here, myself, my family, my kids, my boss. We play golf. We go to charity events, we raise money together for causes. So I know them. If they want to talk to me, I am perfectly happy to take calls from them.”
You can read a full transcript of the OPB report here.
Meanwhile, The EYE can’t wait to see how Bratton’s prediction pans out. April 25 is the magic date – mark your calendars.
This article appears in Mar 20-26, 2008.
MAKE LOCAL JOURNALISM HAPPEN
Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.
Costa’s comment about how palsy-walsy he is with the advertisers is illuminating. That is an ethically questionable relationship, IMO. It’s tough to meet a guy on the golf course in the afternoon if your paper ran an unfavorable story about his business that morning. When I was managing editor of The Bulletin I didn’t schmooze with the advertisers — I left that sort of thing to the publisher. He was great at it.
Just another day in the editor’s chair, eh John? “…an editor says go to the luncheon, cover what is said at the luncheon, and that’s what came back.”
Only problem is, what was published wasn’t what came back – it was filtered by you to get those pesky critical points of view out. Just something to chortle over with Tim Knopp and your real estate buddies over a glass of wine at Broken Top after a round, I guess.
I doubt that Tim Knopp drinks wine — he’s an evangelical Christian.
If you look at the Deschutes County DIAL Page- property ownership information- you will see the bulletin was given the land for their new building, from brooks resource, for free. The estimated value was $2,000,000- I think that may explain a thing or two.
Costa’s incredible arrogance in his response is, quite frankly, disgusting. Time to put the good ol boy out to pasture….Now
I hope that you continue to watch the market specifically in reference to the April 25th prediction. I really cannot wait when, say, by May 25th none of what Bratton said has come true. Not that I don’t want the market to turn around, cause I do. But the manipulative tactics of the developers and realtors in this town cross the line, and when all the bull shit turns out to be just that, I hope they’re reminded of the confidence with which they lobbed out their baseless predictions. I still cannot believe that this industry believes that its own will can trump the basics of supply and demand.
Thank you Source, for being out in front on this.
Are you trying to say that evangelical Christians don’t drink? Are you for real?
None of the evangelicals I know drinks but maybe some do. That’s why I said I doubted Knopp does. He might, but I doubt it.
I hope this paper continues to investigate Costa’s associations and drive-by edits. Go back and find some of the former Bulletin reporters who left–they can tell you that Costa is one of the most unethical editors in journalism who lacks respect from his own peers. He is shameless, arrogant and an outright liar. Maybe he will finally be exposed for what he is–an embarrassment to journalism.
guest says: “Maybe (Costa) will finally be exposed for what he is–an embarrassment to journalism.”
This is awfully well-known and has been for many years. How can he be “exposed”? Costa has done exactly what he’s been paid to do for nearly 11 years at The Bulletin. This is news? Coulda fooled me.
a guest: “you will see the bulletin was given the land for their new building, from brooks resource, for free.”
If you had bothered to read the deeds, you would see that this wasn’t a giveaway, but a property exchange. To whose advantage? Read ’em and THEN pass judgment.