The latest in a series of salvos aimed at Patch in general and Lamorinda Patch specifically debuted Thursday in a story published under copyright in the Contra Costa Times.
It makes for interesting reading on several fronts. In it, our model, our approach to news-gathering, our ethics, and personal hygiene (not really, but for all intents and purposes, it might well have been) are subject to criticism by the Times.
Certain critical elements and facts are conveniently overlooked, including the Times' attempt to "lift" or "borrow" the very story for which it so sharply rebuked us and the fact that most news organizations we know aren't in the business of redacting public records. We leave that to police and prosecutors. Also, the reporters and editors criticized as inexperienced worked — and won awards — for the Times before they moved on to bigger and better things.
In any event, a case is being made — again by the Times — that Lamorinda Patch is to blame for tightened control of public records by public officials. We would argue that, of course, and with many of our readers and followers, at least one of whom left a pretty compelling counter argument under the Times story, we would ask one question: Why?
Why is Lamorinda Patch and Patch in general of such continued and compelling interest to the Contra Costa Times? We were perfectly happy to have it share our space, believing that the public benefits from the work of a free and unbiased press. The more, the merrier.
Now, we're not so sure.