Every so often I see Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee listed as a
possible GOP presidential contender for 2008, and I don't know
whether to chuckle or to scream out a warning. I worked at the
Arkansas Democrat-Gazette for 14 months; when I first went
there, I thought Huckabee was a white knight. Just 14 months later,
I had concluded he was pretty much a jack...er, well, not a
jack-rabbit, put it that way. He is incredibly thin-skinned; he
has a blind eye for ethical problems because, you see, he's a
Baptist minister, and that makes it outrageous even to question his
ethics OR even the ethics of those who work for him. Or at least
that's his attitude. Of course, what that meant was a whole series
of stupid, almost petty, ethics-related imbroglios while I was
there, and at one point the governor actually threatened to sue the
state's very highly regarded Ethics Commission. It led me, on a TV
appearance, to question just how dumb Huck must be: "Imagine the
headlines," I said: "Governor versus Ethics, in big bold
letters."
What brings these reflections on is the following story,
forwarded to me via e-mail:
The Coalition of Journalists for Open Government
(CJOG)... is sending a letter to the governor of Arkansas regarding
a crackdown on access.
Following is a letter... to send to Arkansas Governor Mike
Huckabee who is the latest public official to use an
information-access sanction in retaliation for coverage he doesn't
like. In this case, the sanction is aimed not merely at an
individual reporter but at an entire newspaper. The Arkansas Times
is a weekly newspaper with free distribution. It has the fourth
largest circulation of any paper in the state. Its editor, Max
Brantley, has some 30 years experience, including 18 at the
Arkansas Gazette before joining the Times. The sanction is a modest
one -- not sending timely notice of the governor's press
conferences and public appearances -- but it is nonetheless a
totally inappropriate step toward restrictions on access to
information in retaliation for unfavorable coverage, and if it
stands may be only a first step that will encourage Gov. Huckabee
and perhaps other elected officials to implement other sanctions on
information.
The letter said it is "poor public policy for any governor or
any public official to inhibit access to public information,
directly or indirectly, simply because he or she dislikes a
particular messenger. It is ultimately the citizen who is less
informed and penalized as a result."
The letter also complained that the governor's website said the
Arkansas Times was not a "legitimate" newspaper, despite
it having the fourth highest circulation of any paper in the state.
The letter also expressed First Amendment concerns.
Okay, back to my own (Quin's) comments: First, the sheer
counterproductiveness of Huck's actions are astonishing. There are
ways to pick fights with problematic media outlets, but trying to
shut them out should be low on the list. This is especially true
when the publication is popular and respected; shut out the paper,
and you insult its readers. Not smart. The Arkansas Times
definitely leans left, but it does so openly, with no subterfuge,
and Max Brantley, its editor, is a sharp-witted, fair-minded
liberal who is a really good guy. His paper is a weekly, not a
daily, but he was still in some sense our competition at the
Dem-Gazette, and he was good competition. For Huckabee to
try to shut out Brantley and the Times is for him to
demonstrate not how unfair the Times is, but how
thin-skinned he is. With such an attitude, Huckabee will be made
mincemeat by the national media, and his peevishness is not likely
to play well, long-term, with the American public.