The Observation Deck

How interesting that the April 17, 2012 edition of The Lakewood Observer ran a front page item with a QR code linking directly to Jim O'Bryan's forum post and only to his post. This is just another example of O'Bryan using his position as publisher of the Observer to promote his endless ego gratification. With an average of 2-3 posts per day EVERY DAY for the last 7 years, O'Bryan clearly feels that the Observer is his own personal media outlet. Is anyone else tired of listening to this self-proclaimed "people's mayor"?

Dennis Spirgen wrote:How interesting that the April 17, 2012 edition of The Lakewood Observer ran a front page item with a QR code linking directly to Jim O'Bryan's forum post and only to his post. This is just another example of O'Bryan using his position as publisher of the Observer to promote his endless ego gratification. With an average of 2-3 posts per day EVERY DAY for the last 7 years, O'Bryan clearly feels that the Observer is his own personal media outlet. Is anyone else tired of listening to this self-proclaimed "people's mayor"?

Dennis

Any relation to Kate?

This would be the 5th story I have written for the Lakewood Observer in 8 years. So calling
me out as "using my position as publisher" is ludicrous. But why let facts get in the way of
a good discussion.

What had actually happened is my story got bumped, for another story. As I had been
very hard on CVS and the city, I thought it only fair to give them proper coverage of
how well they actually did. You know, trying be fair and all to CVS and Zaremba.

However, many publishers including Sun, PD and others allow their editors and
publishers to rattle on about politics, funding, non-profits and on and on and on. The
Observer Board, myself included have always thought it was more important to get
other voices out there than our own. That is why Ken Warren has 15 stories that were
never published, and I have 10.

But again, why let facts get in the way of a full blown tirade, against the this very open
and very accountable community project.

The Deck however is a completely different animal. The paper is printed and delivered in
a quantity of 12,000 - 15,000. The Deck however is a mosh pit and free-for-all, for all,
myself included.

Thanks for the post, and the input, and for underlining that this project is far bigger than
the thoughts and opinions of any one person.

.

He's a "blogger" for the AOL "local" news patch. Likely considers you his competition.

Grace O'Malley wrote:He's a "blogger" for the AOL "local" news patch. Likely considers you his competition.

Grace

I know Kate Spirgen is a local editor, and some local editors of Patch use fictitious names on
stories and posts, set back time of posts to seem like they were there first, and even use
faux names on their boards.* But competition? Colin and I have a great rapport, and we have
had an understanding since before he started.

Wow this is troubling. I have to guess that the latest news from the WSJ of AOL closing its
Patch branches and losing $120 million last year is taking a toll on some. While Inside
Business and the WSJ have dubbed it The WalMart of Hyper Local Journalism, I have
found it to be just another website from outside the city trying to monetize local news.
Same problem Lakewood had with Sun and PD.

Not my worry, our product is locally owned managed and answers to the community, not
some out of town board looking to get rich on Lakewood's crime reports.

* As reported in The Wall Street Journal and Inside Business.

.

I think Jim, at the end of the day, has a good laugh at what he is able to instigate. Thanks for the entertainment, Jim!

"AGENT PROVOCATEUR"= JIM O'BRYAN

Scott Meeson wrote:I think Jim, at the end of day, has a good laugh at what he is able to instigate. Thanks for the entertainment, Jim!

"AGENT PROVOCATEUR"= JIM O'BRYAN

Scott

I do enjoy a good conversation, you know that.

The Observer Project was built to serve the community, while vetting ideas.

Matt Markling sent this to me a couple years ago. At moments like this I like to think of
Matt, myself and maybe you and Ken Warren sitting along the Rocky River, in The
Emerald Canyon, singing this song, word for word, in perfect harmony.



I am pretty sure, life is just too short.


.

Dennis Spirgen wrote:O'Bryan clearly feels that the Observer is his own personal media outlet.

I always thought it was. I think it's his money that keeps the project running. I'm just glad that Jimmy lets us call him a "jerk" on his dime!

Friends of Jim just call him a "jerk" to his face but to come on here with personal attacks with anger for a project that has always been community based, pages filled with articles on local businesses and people and most importantly achievements of our schools and students, this paper is still the best thing to happen for the community. The rest is sour grapes and we don't need that in the community. I have read amazing stories from ministers/pastors and non=profit groups as well.

This project is so much more than a self-promotion and anyone who loves Lakewood can see that.

Jim and his friends, in creating and maintaining the Lakewood Observer and this 'Deck, have done more for this community than any single project that I can think of in the last 50 years.

People do not always agree in life, but as long as they are willing to talk, good things can happen.

Keep up the good work, Jim.

Back to the banjo...

Jim: Since you posted several replies to my comments, I will try to break up my reply into a couple of posts, as well.

I am not surprised by your reaction, since you have a widespread reputation for trying to bully anyone who dares to disagree with you. As a trial lawyer, I am well acquainted with bullies, so let me share a few things that I have learned.

First, a bully will try to shout down his opponent. You logged your first response to my post within 35 minutes, and then felt the need to post two more extended responses within the next hour. You clearly intend to swamp my post with a wave of your own rhetoric. This merely proves my point about your need to dominate the discussion board.

Second, a bully can never resist acting like a bully for long. Your initial response to my post took a fairly restrained tone; you left it to your supporter Grace to post a snide comment questioning my motives. But you couldn’t help responding to Grace by posting a completely unrelated diatribe about Patch.com with several poorly veiled innuendos questioning the journalistic ethics of my daughter, who so far as I know has never published anything about you or The Observer.

This illustrates a third thing about a bully: If he’s afraid to fight you, a bully can always beat up your kid.

Finally, a bully always has an excuse. You say that your CVS story was intended to run in the Observer, but got bumped because you wanted to feature stories by “other voices.” Your story could have run in an expanded on-line edition of the Observer; many newspapers feature exclusive on-line content. Instead, you posted the story to the discussion board, proving that you really do treat the board as your personal media outlet.

The funny thing is, had it actually run in the Observer, I would have considered it one of the Observer’s better pieces.

You still have not answered the basic question posed by my post. If you really wanted The Observer to focus on views other than your own, why was your story touted on the front page with its own, separate QR code and a URL listing, both of which were devoted solely to your post? You did in fact use The Observer to push traffic to your personal post on this discussion board, which no real newspaper would do.

You claim that you have written very few stories for the Observer, but this completely ignores my point, which is that you have inundated the discussion board with over 5,730 posts. You continue to shout down every opinion but your own.

If the discussion board is really for everyone, as you claim, then all posts should be treated equally. That means that the Observer should not use its front page to promote the posts of its publisher. It also means that the publisher should not attempt to bully other commentators into silence.

[quote="Grace O'Malley"] He's a "blogger" for the AOL "local" news patch. Likely considers you his competition.

Grace: I do in fact have a law blog, which publishes every second Thursday. It is my blog and I own the copyright to all material appearing on it. Several Patch sites, including Lakewood, carry the blog, but so do several legal websites with no connection to Patch. I have no vested interest in the success of any one site.

I just don’t see the competition issue. My blog is carried on websites from Kent to Avon, and sometimes as far away as Cincinnati, so I hardly consider The Lakewood Observer to be geographic competition. More importantly, I can’t imagine how my blog would take readers away from The Observer, or vice versa.

By the way, I notice that you did not even try to address my complaint about The Observer using its front page to promote Jim’s personal discussion board posts. When you don’t have an answer to an argument, you can always question the motives of your opponent, so I guess your post makes sense at that level.

[quote="Jim O'Bryan"] I know Kate Spirgen is a local editor, and some local editors of Patch use fictitious names on stories and posts, set back time of posts to seem like they were there first, and even use faux names on their boards.


Jim: Kate Spirgen is in fact my daughter, and your unprovoked attack on her just proves how low you are willing to go. Actually, you can thank Kate for the fact that I have not previously criticized The Observer for its repeated violations of journalistic ethics.

So long as Kate was employed by another news source, I felt there would be a potential conflict of interest in my criticizing The Observer. However, Kate recently tendered her resignation to Patch and will be moving into the magazine side of publishing as an editor. Therefore, you can expect to hear from me regularly.

Please note, I do not dislike The Observer. It could provide a valuable source of news for Lakewood. But if you are going to do it, you have to do it right. This means that you cannot trash the ethical standards for a newspaper by, for example, allowing a candidate for public office to write a “news story” about himself.

I have seen what other versions of The Observer can do when the publisher cares more about the news and less about his ego. You have the talent to do that in Lakewood. The question is whether you have the will.

Dennis Spirgen wrote:

Jim O'Bryan wrote: I know Kate Spirgen is a local editor, and some local editors of Patch use fictitious names on stories and posts, set back time of posts to seem like they were there first, and even use faux names on their boards.


Jim: Kate Spirgen is in fact my daughter, and your unprovoked attack on her just proves how low you are willing to go. Actually, you can thank Kate for the fact that I have not previously criticized The Observer for its repeated violations of journalistic ethics.

Dennis

It was not an attack on Kate, I merely asked if you were related.

Unprovoked attack.

I have to admit I am not good at punctuation, I am merely responding to your "bullying"

Why are you feeling it has not been answered?

It is not the first story to appear on the Deck and in the paper? It is not even the first post
on the Deck by me to appear in the paper.

If the project is equal to all, why would I be excluded from being in the
paper or stop from being allowed to post on the deck?

.

I certainly hope you are not trying to insinuate that Dennis is a alias for Kate. That would not only be insulting but unnecessary if you did any sort of research in the first place. First of all the original Patch article he submitted says that he is a lawyer and has a picture of a 50 something man. If that isnt enough for you do a google search that would revile that he is indeed a lawyer, and one who's law office is in Lakewood if you would like to see him.

Now lets say you aren't trying to say that Kate is a unprofessional, lying impostor. The Patch will let pretty much any one write an article if they want, much like the Observer, so just because he wrote something for the Patch does not make him an employee and your "competitor." Also if he is related to Kate nothing he says or does should reflect in any way on Kate. They are two adults capable of their own opinions. Also, if you read what he actual said, I would say he reads, and appreciates the paper, and just did not appreciate you abusing your position to spread your opinions (my interpretation of his statement only).

I apologize, apparently I was looking at an un-refreshed page of this discussion and see many of my points were already covered by Dennis himself. My points still stand however. Try doing some research in the future so you can make educated statements before you start questioning people ethics, or your response to anything for that mater.