Tuesday, January 3, 2012
Food Chain / Media / News Bites / Food & Drink Grownups in charge: the Sun-Times breaks the Charlie Trotter's story, and other media give it credit for the scoop
Posted by Michael Miner on 01.03.12 at 01:23 PM
The Sun-Times had the story in its pages early Sunday morning, and maybe I should be slamming WFMT for doing a lousy job of freshening its newscast. But actually I found the brief news item oddly satisfying. As a Sun-Times alum who wants the paper to survive and prosper, I was happy to see it getting so many props for an exclusive. When other media give credit where it's due, they act as grownups.
Charlie Trotter told his staff New Year's Eve that he's going to close his doors in August. But he told Janet Rausa Fuller three days earlier. Rausa became the Sun-Times's food editor in 2007, and, she says, "from the stories I've done about him, and using him as a source, there was a mutual respect. A little while ago he'd alluded that he might consider this big move. And he said, 'If anything comes of it, I'll call you.' And he did! He kept this word. That was nice."
Fuller had resigned from the Sun-Times a couple of weeks earlier, but she says she didn't consider going anywhere with her story but to her old paper. "The desk was pretty excited about it," she says. Her agreement with Trotter, which the paper honored, was that the story would remain embargoed until midnight New Year's Eve. Then Fuller immediately tweeted the news, and the Sun-Times ran the story in its two final editions. Fuller had herself a good old-fashioned scoop, and the Sun-Times did right by it. It gave Fuller's story a big EXCLUSIVE tag in a front-page wrapper, and spread it across most of pages two and three.
Chicago-based Monica Davey chased the story for the New York Times. Her account of Trotter's decision to close the restaurant that "helped transform American fine dining in the last quarter-century" ran in the Monday Times and credited the Sun-Times in its second sentence. The AP story the Tribune posted on its website Sunday morning also credited the Sun-Times in its second sentence. The staff-written Trib piece (by restaurant critic Phil Vettel) wasn't so gallant, but it didn't appear online until nearly nine o'clock Sunday night. And on Monday morning the Tribune may have paid the Sun-Times the biggest compliment of all: it conceded the importance of Fuller's scoop by running Vettel's story on its own front page a full day after the Sun-Times ran Fuller's.
Comments (9)
Showing 1-9 of 9
Giving "credit where it's due" to me would have to do with a media organization acknowledging when another media organization broke a story that otherwise wouldn't be known about. All the subsequent news reports would simply be expanding on this knowledge that otherwise would not have been known without the initial report. That's not even remotely the case here. You speak almost as if nobody would be aware that Charlie Trotter was closing if it weren't for the Sun-Times article. The only thing that happened was that Trotter agreed to tell the Sun-Times writer first and so it had the chance to report the story a few hours earlier than anyone else. There isn't even any indication that the other news organization wrote the story directly as a result of the Sun-Times article. Most likely they also were told about it directly from Trotter or others connected with the restaurant, just a little later than the Sun-Times. And even if that's not the case, the only effect is that maybe they ended up reporting the story a day or two earlier than otherwise. The restaurant's closing would have gotten out.
I don't think there is anything especially noteworthy about the Sun-Times reporting this story slightly before anyone else. It seems to me that people who get excited about something like that are focusing on the wrong things. I don't see how how the Tribune or anyone else had any obligation to mention the Sun-Times getting the story first. It would be very different if the Sun-Times actually broke something that otherwise wouldn't be known about. The other media organizations did decide to mention the Sun-Times story for whatever reason. But they certainly would still be grownups if they hadn't. It would be really awkward if every media organization always mentioned whenever a story was first reported by a competitor. It doesn't even generally make sense for a reporter to acknowledge when an article from another media organization inspired them to write about the subject. There was a blog post a couple of weeks ago here on the Reader's website that I think was probably inspired by an article in another publication. The writer did not mention that article and I don't think there was any reason to. There's no need to credit every factor that goes into the writing of an article.
like
dislikeI'd like to observe that how someone who spends as much time writing about how he or she thinks newspapers are and should be run as "The original IAC" does could not understand what an exclusive is or see that these other outlets *got* the story *from* Janet and the Sun-Times is beyond me, except that it's not. And Phil Vettel and his Trib editors weren't "so gallant"? Knock me over with a second feather. Kudos to Janet, the Sun-Times, and M. Miner.
I know perfectly well what an exclusive is. An exclusive is when someone gives an interview or any type of information exclusively to one media organization. In this case, the Sun-Times article was indeed an exclusive. But that doesn't strike me as a very big deal. One of two things happened. Either Trotter informed the Sun-Times about the closure slightly before he informed the Tribune and others or he only informed the Sun-Times. If it is the latter then yes, the other media organizations would have learned about the story from the Sun-Times article and then reported their own stories. But even if that were the case (and I'm not convinced it is) it's not as if the Sun-Times broke a story that wouldn't have been known rather quickly anyway. Trotter obviously wanted this information to come out. If he hadn't given an exclusive to the Sun-Times he would have given it to someone else, issued a press release (which nobody has demonstrated he didn't do after the exclusive), issued a tweet, or made sure it became known in some other way. Others at the restaurant or just within the industry would surely also make sure it became known if Trotter didn't. So I really don't consider this as the Sun-Times "breaking a story" so much as them getting information a little quicker than anyone else. It's not really something that I think their competitors need to give them a lot of credit even if we take your assumption that Trotter only contacted the Sun-Times.
For the sake of argument, let's assume that the Bears didn't issue a press release this morning (though I'm sure they did) about the firing of Jerry Angelo and instead gave the information exclusively to one news organization. So let's assume that the other news organizations after hearing this news then called up the Bears and received confirmation that Angelo was gone and then reported it. Should they have to mention that someone else reported it first? I don't think so. That's the exact same analogy as here.
I have absolutely no idea who you are or what it is that you attempt to "prove" here month in and month out other than that you know absolutely nothing about either journalism or logic. I am certainly not going to engage in any sort of argument with some blowhard who dismisses the work of those of us in the field and can't even give his or her name. It's a shame that you and the other pseudonyms are allowed to take up so much space here with your nonsense.
Fine, don't engage me then. You've stated several times to several people that you don't like having discussions with people who don't give their name. There is some logic to that view and I certainly respect it. As to your question of what I'm trying to "prove" by making comments the only thing I am attempting to do is to give my opinions. I tend to think that discussions are a good thing and helps us solve problems. I think I always treat others respect here. I'm not sure what you mean when you say I "dismiss the work" of journalists. I don't recall ever doing that. But I guess you are not going to explain what you mean because you don't engage with me. Fair enough (though I think you did engage with me in this thread).
Andrew's a legacy snob from Hyde Park with a rather thin skin.
---
This review is from: I.F. Stone: A Portrait (Paperback)
One of the reasons that I never rely on Amazon.com for research or opinions is because of the random nature of both the "Editorial Reviews" and "Customer Reviews" posted here. That a book published 20 years ago and republished in paperback in 1990 still carries just these three reviews gives an idea of the sad state of a world run by computers, polls, everyone's an expert mentality, and near-random searches.
Andrew Patner, author, I.F. Stone: A Portrait
And IAC is still a buffoon, of course, but this was a rather pointless article.
never really understood how charlie trotter lasted as long as he has…
many years ago, i covered a benefit dinner for the tribune that trotter prepared….i sent my main course back to the kitchen because the fish served was rather raw — trotter came flying out of the kitchen wanting to meet who in the world was not appreciative of his cutting edge culinary talents … after explaining to me it was intentionally served that way i got him to fully cook mine….he wasn’t happy.
Related Stories
-
Charlie Trotter's, 11 years ago
Martha Bayne's 2001 essay on a visit to Charlie Trotter's
- Jan 4, 2012
Related Locations
-
Charlie Trotter's
- 816 W. Armitage Ave., Chicago Lincoln Park IL 60614-4308
-
773-248-6228
- charlietrotters.com
- (based on 23 user reviews)
