Corporate Censorship at the Enquirer?
Greg Flannery's column alleges that the Enquirer held a Maggie Downs column discussing the Convergys deal that "apparently clashed with the paper's endorsement of the Convergys deal." Greg mentioned the dozen or so people interviewed. I can speak as one of those interviewed. I don't know if my comments were used in the column, but I can confirm there was supposed to be one on that subject. My comments were not really opposing the Convergys deal; they instead were on ideas that could improve the downtown area for younger professionals, using the level of money in the Convergys deal.

So what's the real problem? Why would a newspaper want to manipulate the public? (Please stop laughing) Why can they publish a pro-deal editorial, but no alternative views? Is it a for a business reason? Is the business side of the paper intruding in on the editorial side? I can't think of another logical reason. The paper does, on occasion, have varied viewpoints, so why not now?

Update: Greg's column also confirms my contention that the Enquirer will be starting a weekly "tabloid" as he calls it, referring more to the physical size than the content. Greg reports that the publication will be starting this fall. I will have more to report on this new publication Thursday night.