Over the past several years, I’ve been asked about working for the San Diego Reader, what it’s like, what’s publisher Jim Holman like, stuff like that. I’m a freelancer, so I don’t work in the offices, but I can say that I’m really proud to work for that paper (and I doubt anyone from the paper reads this blog, so I’m not just kissing up). I’m in a job where I am expected to stand for things, and as one anonymous person recently said in a comment elsewhere, “the Reader has consistently been [San Diego’s] one source of reporting on insider deals without evidencing any fear of retaliation.”

The origin of the questions often has to do with Holman’s personal politics, his involvement in anti-abortion campaigns and whatnot. I can honestly say I worked for the reader for at least 3 years, probably 4, before I had any idea whatsoever that he had any personal political causes, and I only found out because the Union-Tribune did a story on him. Never had any of his personal politics even remotely crept into the work I was doing — and I obviously do very political work.

Unfortunately, since there really is nothing to attack the guy for, his critics often seem to just assemble lists of facts, hoping that these facts will look like they expose some shady underbelly of the San Diego Reader, when instead, they do the exact opposite and reveal the integrity of the guy running the paper.

Take the latest hit piece from Voice of San Diego’s Seth Hettena: Little to Read in San Diego’s Reader. It’s basically an attack on the Reader that substitutes lists of advertisers and story headlines in place of actual critiques (Hey! The Reader runs ads from cosmetic surgeons! What a bunch of losers!).

Hettena is clever, creating a scenario in which the Reader can’t really defend itself. It sucks because the stories are crap and they’re phoned in. Um, excuse me Mr. Hettena, but the paper has won plenty of awards for its journalism. Oh … well nobody cares about awards! The Reader sucks! Continue reading →