Still feel sorry about the folks caught in the middle, though.

Thank you for your thoughtful note. It raises several good points, and it is up to each reader to decide. I received these documents via a Freedom of Information Act request on Saturday and waited a full day before posting.

At the end of that time, I decided to push forward. Everything posted here is public record. While it appears that the radio execs involved may not have been aware of that fact, “ignorance is not an excuse.” if Citadel failed to keep Paul J. In the loop and be honest with him, am I to blame?

Mike Prater said yesterday on KTIK that they are trying to get these same documents in the wake of this post, so I’m sure they will write a similar tale.

Just to reiterate, everything in this story came from a Freedom of Information Act request. Also, KTVB did not get the document s– I did. But since this happens to be in a strange gray area for me – I “lent” the documents to myself for the KTVB report.

-Don

However, I still stand by my original observation. The story you posted and wrote on KTVB summarizing the bids is the story you should have written here as well. I think you crossed an ethical line with the additional level of detail you put in your story here.

I mean, I understand that it’s very interesting and insightful, but I feel terrible that Paul J. Schneider may be finding out from this website that his days were numbered at Citadel. Not that I’m a huge fan of Paul J, but put yourself in his shoes…how would you like to find out your professional worth this way?

I can understand you wanting to have the exclusive…but you could have demonstrated your ‘insider knowledge’ without the level of details that you did.

Call me a ‘goody two shoes’ if you want to, but I think you had an ethical responsibility to take the high road when you came upon information that was not available in the public forum. To just say that you ‘obtained a large packet of documents’ implies that this information was leaked to you and that it was not meant for public dissemination (as most bid processes are not). I’ve already mentioned the impact this might have on Paul J, but what about this Karcher guy? Any chance he hadn’t told his current employer of his plans? What about other deals BSU was negotiating for sponsorships? You not only released personnel details, but specific monetary details for components of the overall package…neither were necessary to tell the story, but may do damage to the parties involved.

Did you have the legal right to print it? Sure. First Amendment, absolutely no argument there. If you obtained ALL of this information through above-board public sources, just say that and I take back everything I’ve just said. In the meantime, I’m disappointed the higher ethical principle didn’t appear to impact what you chose to print. Just my opinion. RDS, I just took the bullseye off of you…you’re welcome! ;)

Before I get bashed, I know I’m probably beating a nearly dead horse, but really, what did the flip really accomplish?