I may not need to bathe until Memorial Day 2007, because I
really took a bath this week. A glance at letters to the editor in
this edition reveals that a full-page attack advertisement in last
week’s Pinnacle touched a nerve.
I may not need to bathe until Memorial Day 2007, because I really took a bath this week. A glance at letters to the editor in this edition reveals that a full-page attack advertisement in last week’s Pinnacle touched a nerve.
And guess what? People don’t like negative campaigning either, especially when it targets their candidate of choice.
My phone started to ring not long after last week’s paper hit the streets, and it has not stopped. A handful of the most strident people decrying the ad failed to see the irony in objecting to negative campaigning even as they support engaging in the same practice directed at other candidates.
But most of the conversations that I have had have been from thoughtful people who honestly care about making the community a better place. The depth of their concern for this place, for the reputation of a candidate and the pain inflicted on his children was written on their faces, in their letters and in their comments. Most people do not want to see campaigns go that way.
The advertisement was a calculated blow aimed at Art Cantu, a candidate for district attorney.
I like Art. I like his energy and his knack for turning life’s experiences into spellbinding stories (there’s at least one book hiding inside Art Cantu, even if he never gets the time to write it). After Art participated in an interview with this paper’s editorial board, the first comment made came from one member who observed that, of the three running for D.A., Art would be the one he’d most like to have a beer with.
As a testament to Art’s character, he called me last Sunday and we talked for a long time. He was still stinging from that ad, and he would have been justified lashing out at me. But that’s not Art.
Midweek, between fielding calls from people taking me to task for running that ad, Art dropped by again. This time we sat down, and true to form, Art told some stories – good stories that reflect his passion for his family and for the practice of law.
I owe at least this much to Art – and to all the readers of The Pinnacle.
The legal document referred to in last week’s attack ad stemmed from divorce proceedings. It was a request for a restraining order that would have separated him from his family.
The request was denied.
Art remains close to his children, and is on speaking terms with his ex-wife.
The last week has been quite an education.
I have been taken to task in plain English for encouraging aboveboard, issues-based campaigns, and then allowing that ad to appear.
Fair enough.
It would be shameful to waste the education I received over the last few days. I am grateful for every single person who took the time and displayed the courage to call me or look me in the face and tell me I was wrong.
I heard that message, and we are discussing standards for political advertising. A good place to start might be rejecting ads that target people who are not candidates – like the children of a candidate.
The best approach may be to involve members of the community who have been political candidates in the process, because our discussion thus far reveals that clear standards are more complicated to arrive at than we had first assumed. Often the perception of negativity is influenced by one’s own partisanship.
The Pinnacle this week presents profiles of candidates in several local races and details several bond measures in the area. Next week, hands off – no letters about candidates and – short of something completely unanticipated – no articles about the race.
See you at the polls June 6.
