I read that article and thought exactly the same thing. This article taught me one thing. Nigel Jaquiss, Meeker, and Zusman are real pieces of shit. They hint that he might have beat his wife, is back on the sauce, and perhaps he may be divorcing because he abuses his wives and drinks.

Cause the best way to lose 35lbs is to start drinking again and abused ex wives are always willing to take in your dog when you can't care for it anymore.

Jaquiss - Meeker - Zusman are idiots.

the reason for running the article -- and i was shocked at the People magaziney-ness of it -- was they have been waiting FOREVER to use that headline.

God help us if the future of journalism looks anything like this 3,000 word mess.

tl;dr

I would have thought that our city's impressive sex industry would qualify us for the headline Randy-Land.

Kind of repeating a comment I put on the WW website, but still:

I've never been enamored with Randy Leonard. His tactics, and sometimes his principles and priorities, mark him out as probably the second person I'd want kicked off city council if only there was a decent opponent (I'd maybe get rid of Amanda "I don't like this so I'll just hold it up by crying about process instead of proposing an alternative" Fritz first).

But that article in the WW was disgusting. Bringing up his family life is only excusable if it exposes hypocrisy and/or corruption, and this didn't. It was just an exercise in flinging enough shit against the wall in the hope something stuck. The kind of valueless, immoral, vile bullying that even Randy would never dream of stooping to. I ended the article actually liking Randy Leonard more than when I started reading it; to follow the old adage, if he's made an enemy of someone like Jackass, he must be doing something right.

It's overdue time for someone to investigate precisely why Nigel Jackass is on this crusade against Adams and Leonard. Time for a bit of his own medicine. Start with the "conflict of interest" angle, and go from there...

The "non-profit news" thing makes a good sound bite, but it feels like a really stupid thing to sink millions of dollars into.

Being a 501(c)3 organization means voluntarily submitting yourself to government censorship. Not being able to endorse a candidate would only be one of the restrictions they would be under.

If an organizations mandate is service with some political message attached, they can usually navigate a middle ground (hello, religion). But the service the press is all message, so it seems like voluntarily accepting restrictions on content defeats the point.

Hey Matt - Love your piece. I love Portland, too. And so I'm doubly dismayed to see that, at times, it shows itself to be a small town -- in every sense of the word.

Thanks for calling out WW on its yellow journalism, Matt. I believe Nigel is an upstanding, talented writer who seems to have been saddled with a muckraking, directionless editor. As for Randy, I'm glad to hear I'm not the only one who came away from this article with *more* respect for his work ethic, not less.

I, for one, would like to know who Randy has his sights on next. Newly divorced, fit and healty -- looks like somebody's on the prowl! Can WW get somebody on that already? The people want to know!

I am going to be attending the "We Make the Media" conference on the 21st and I hope to see people from the Mercury and the WW there.

Top 5 Portland journalists/columnists I read regularly:

Matt Davis
Jeff Mapes
Sarah Mirk
Harry Esteve
Steve Duin

Many of the others out there seem to have forgotten what's important in journalism, or maybe what I value in journalism is suddenly yesterday's news.

Everyone's just too high-minded around here. My only reaction to reading the article was, gosh, they must have some real dirt waiting in the wings. But for now, they just need to INTRODUCE the ignorant populace to Randy Leonard, and make it sizzle as much as possible so the lambs will read it, poor dears.

I was sitting in the Pearl Bakery enjoying a tuna sandwhich with my kid when I saw and read the article. To confirm my musings, I asked the girl at the next table-

hey, what do you think of this guy? pointing to the cover picture.

who?

randy leonard, city commissioner

oh, kind of renegade, right?

right.

I have finally pinpointed my relationship to Portland, and how I see her.
Marilyn Monroe, circa 1959.
Intelligent, charismatic, beautiful, blinded, and doomed.

hey matt

someone posted this on willy week's website
Wendy writes on Nov 12th,


Matt Davis's take on this earlier, over at Blogtown: "Lord knows the Mercury isn't perfect. But we do strive to be fair. . .(and) we do try to move on, instead of sublimating those feelings and turning them into vendettas."

Was Matt in rehab when the not so distant rumors were hitting the streets all last long cold winter turned into spring and early summer, that a good deal of serious Troll work on WW stories, was fueled by interns from the Merc's own staff?

Surely Matt got wind of that. He couldn't have been the only one in town out to lunch.

So, Matt's quotes at the end of what looks like an envious account of dining with those who win Pulitzers, and unleashing his dangerously denied sublimated feelings, over the RandyLand story; at least got something right, "Lord knows the Mercury isn't perfect".


is this correct? you folks post anonymous tripe at WW?

Umm… can someone please translate what yonyo just said?

Christ, Matt. Are you dating Adams or just lining up for the next cushy city-hall job opening ala Amy Ruiz? Your love of all things Adams is beginning to sicken people. Now you've got your nose up Leonards rump.

I guess RANZ doesn't remember Matt nailing Randy to the cross with the Secret List.

@RANZ

If Adams was so sickening how come the recall failed so miserably?

A few weeks ago Beth Slovic thought it was relevant to run a blog entry about beau breedlove's halloween costume. That's all I can say about the Willamette Week.