Some things just aren’t as significant as they used to be.
I’m sure there was a nice story and photo in the paper back around the turn of the century when Review-Journal Publisher Sherman Frederick was inducted in the Nevada Newspaper Hall of Fame. That was before electronic archives.
When longtime R-J investigative reporter A.D. Hopkins was inducted into the Hall in 2010 there was a nice writeup in the paper and I penned a column on the topic.
When R-J capital bureau chief Ed Vogel was inducted in 2012 there was a glowing account of his storied career. I mentioned Vogel’s Hall of Fame status in a blog once.
In 2014, the induction of Dave Sanford, whose family ran the Mason Valley News in Yerington for decades, and Brian Greenspun, editor and publisher of the Las Vegas Sun, warranted a sidebar in the paper.
But in 2015 when the late R-J political reporter Laura Myers was inducted the news was fully contained in the third paragraph of a story about the paper’s Nevada Newspaper Association awards. AP carried a short story. I defended Myers’ reputation in a blog earlier this year and remarked on her passing at the time.
On Sunday the paper reported the induction of former, 30-plus-years columnist John L. Smith. The news was contained in the third from last paragraph of an awards story: “John L. Smith, a longtime columnist for the Review-Journal, was inducted to the Nevada Newspaper Hall of Fame.”
Talk about deflation in value. I wonder why that is.
John L. Smith doing commentary at KNPR
According to my dictionary of etymology, the term “two-faced” has been in use since 1619.
So it has taken nearly 400 years for the term to reach its pinnacle, to be reduced to its essence.
From the newspaper that brought you an editorial promising more content and more reporters while laying off experienced staff members comes another editorial in the same vein today.
I did not say anything when the Las Vegas Review-Journal penned a glowing send-off for its capital bureau chief Ed Vogel after 37 years with the paper, because Ed liked to keep personal things to himself.
Today the editorial about his “retirement” concludes:
“His institutional knowledge, his enthusiasm for his profession and his passion for the public’s right to know are irreplaceable. The pages of this newspaper will not be the same without his name. Readers will miss him as much as his colleagues. We wish him well.”
All true. All bullshit.
You see, Ed would have liked to have stayed on for a while, but he was forced to retire. The paper could’ve said nothing, but instead it chose to rub it in our faces and Ed’s.
Two-faced defined, again.
Ironically, this was the Michael Ramirez editorial cartoon on the same page: