An ill-fitting suit
BatesLine’s Michael Bates has been a thorn in the side of the Tulsa World for many years now, both on his blog and in his Urban Tulsa Weekly column.
The wrath of the World is now descending, in the form of a lawsuit against UTW, its publisher Keith Skrzypczak, and Bates. A copy of the complaint is not yet available, and Bates said he hadn’t even heard of it until a World staffer called him for a response.
Bates’ most recent UTW column isn’t exactly incendiary, but it does make one fairly serious charge:
[I]n late 1997 the World withdrew from the semi-annual circulation audits performed by the independent Audit Bureau of Circulations (ABC), only rejoining in time for the March 2006 audit.
During the interim, the daily hired its own consultants to conduct market surveys and circulation estimates. The steep drop between the paid consultant’s March 2005 count and the March 2006 ABC numbers suggest that the World was inflating its circulation by as much as 20 percent.
Were this true, the World would hardly be alone: several papers have admitted to padding their numbers, including The Dallas Morning News, Newsday and the Chicago Sun-Times.
Steve Rubel noted several years ago:
There are two sides to every story, so I can’t be sure who’s right or wrong here without seeing the evidence and hearing from both parties. However, what I can say is that suing bloggers should be an absolute questionable last resort tactic to resolving such an issue. It’s a lose-lose for everyone because of the PR fallout.
Not to mention that it just reeks of “Mommy, make him stop looking at me!”
Gold »
16 January 2009 · 5:06 pm
If I understand correctly, Bates is being sued as a writer for Urban Tulsa and not in his capacity as a blogger.
The petition (they call it a “petition” in state court instead of a “complaint” like in federal court) is available at the Tulsa County District Court civil desk, second floor. It will not be available online unless a blogger or newspaper of other private indicidual or person puts it up.
The World has a pretty serious financial interest in whether people believe its advertising numbers to be correct, I reckon.
CGHill »
17 January 2009 · 9:42 am
The World has now posted a PDF.
Meanwhile, Jack Shafer notes in Slate:
Charles Pergiel »
17 January 2009 · 3:20 pm
“It’s a lose-lose for everyone because of the PR fallout.”??? I don’t think so! Bloggers everywhere will rejoice in having more fodder for their flack cannons. Shoot, it might even provoke a flame war! Watch those web site hit meters rack up the points!
CGHill »
12 February 2009 · 3:36 pm
Bates has posted a retraction.