Sex and Schadenfreude

As you are aware, from time to time, we ask select PR notables to weigh in on news and trends. Here’s a BIG one: How ‘bout a former Marine and Vietnam vet who got f-ed over by his own government and sold down the river by his former agency?

My kinda guy. I am pleased to introduce Doug Dowie, former head of Fleishman Hillard’s LA office. Dowie was wrongly convicted last fall of masterminding an overbilling scheme bilking the city of Los Angeles to the tune of $500K. Fleishman-Hillard took a powder and skated away virtually scot-free. Weasels. How depressing.

Well apparently, the guy can take a shot. Eying a 42-month jail term in a federal prison camp, his voice is stronger than ever. He’s already completed two screenplays. "Anonymous Sources," a political thriller, was optioned by Oscar winning producer Jonathon Sanger, who made "Elephant Man," "Vanilla Sky" and "The Producers." The second, "Conflict of Interest," is loosely based on his case. Here, we’ve got an exclusive of his inside perspective of the latest scandal to rock LA.

Without further ado…

GRAZERGATE
By Doug Dowie

As if it didn’t already have enough on its plate over the last few months with the highly publicized departures of its publisher and editor in what seems to be ongoing and very open warfare with its owners in Chicago, the Los Angeles Times faced a new crisis this week.

Thank God! At least this one involves sex and Hollywood.

In Saturday’s paper, LA Times columnist Tim Rutten (these folks at the Times love writing about themselves) called it a “turgid little soap opera” and summarized it like this:

“Editorial Page Editor Andres Martinez resigned in pique after The Times publisher, David D. Hiller, told him he couldn't go forward with a Current section that was being guest-edited by Hollywood producer Brian Grazer. Hiller intervened when it was learned that Martinez has been dating a Hollywood publicist whose firm represents the producer. In fact, the agency obtained Grazer's business after Martinez's girlfriend's boss facilitated the arrangement between the producer and The Times.”

Rutten’s been at the paper for 30 years. He’s not happy with Martinez, but I’m going to assume he’s got his facts right.

(Six Degrees of Separation Alert: The Hollywood publicist is Kelly Mullens, of the firm 42West. Earlier in her career, she worked for me at Fleishman Hillard in Los Angeles. Rutten is married to high-profile attorney Leslie Abramson. Her firm has represented Fred Muir, a long-time Times editor who I once hired at Fleishman Hillard.)

When I was a newspaper editor there was a so-called “Chinese Wall” between the news reporters their editors and the thumb-suckers who wrote opinion. At many papers, the wall has long since disappeared, along with the wall, also Chinese, I guess, that separated the newsroom from the advertising department. (“Hey, you want this paper to go out of business?”) But the wall at the Times between news and opinion was recently reinforced when it was decided that Martinez would report to the publisher, not the editor.

Anger and technology combined to exacerbate the situation at the Times. As you might expect, Martinez was one pissed off editor when the publisher decided to kill the Sunday section. No doubt about it, was a very big deal. He quit and began defending himself and hurling accusations that the news side was out to get him on the well-read local website LAObserved.com – and the Times own opinion blog. I’m often glad I was in the news business before Al Gore invented the Internet.

For obvious reasons, I’ll admit to a certain amount of schadenfreude as I’ve watched this “turgid little episode” unfold. Then I read in The New York Times yesterday that, according to one of the LA Times most senior reporters, that the LA Times has been "hypersensitive" regarding conflicts since the Staples Center debacle.

You could have fooled me.

In July 2004, the Times crucified Fleishman Hillard in a front page article based almost entirely on anonymous sources and triggered a federal investigation that ended my PR career and has me headed to federal prison. (I have maintained my innocence throughout the ordeal and I’m appealing the verdict.)

The story was seriously flawed and I believe would never have been published under the paper’s current ethics guidelines.

Six unidentified "former employees" told the paper that bills for the LA Department of Water and Power were “written up” for work that was never performed. Two of those anonymous sources said I was aware of it.

I argued those sources were seriously conflicted because of their professional positions as competitors, or their past employment and relationships at the LAT -- in some cases both -- and should have never been granted anonymity.

In fact, the only named source in the article was the daughter of a former senior editor at the LA Times, who worked at Fleishman Hillard in a very junior position for a brief period years earlier. She was hired by and reported directly to another former Times senior editor, who was never mentioned in the article.

If I had a dime for every journalist who has told me they agree the sourcing on that story was atrocious, I'd have enough money to pay my attorneys.

One of the anonymous sources was forced out of the shadows during my trial. Muir, a personal friend and former colleague of the reporters who wrote the story, testified under oath that he was indeed one of the unidentified former employees who helped destroy Fleishman Hillard's excellent reputation in LA.

Not only should Muir never been granted anonymity because of his past association with the LA Times, he had opened a business with clients he took from Fleishman Hillard when quit – shortly before the Times launched its investigation -- and was in direct competition with the agency. He’s now a senior executive at Burson-Marsteller.

The Times covered every day of the trial -- but decided not to report Muir's testimony regarding the LA Times. The Los Angeles Daily News also covered every day of the trial. They skipped Muir’s testimony about The Times, too.

(Six Degrees of Separation Alerts: Muir is married to Carol Schatz, president of the Central City Assoc., a powerful LA business group. I served on her board of directors for years and chaired the committee that made its political endorsements.

The Daily News reporter was Beth Barrett. I was her boss when I was managing editor of the Daily News. In fact, her current editor also worked for me.)

It might seem ironic, but I have sympathy for Martinez. Anyone in the PR business more than two weeks knows that “relationships” between flacks and reporters are common.

And it is not unusual for PR firms to hire people who are married to reporters or editors to take advantage of these “special relationships.” When I was at FH, job applicants married to reporter or editor would make note of it on their resume, or mention it during their interview.

(Six Degrees of Separation Alert: When I was the Los Angeles bureau manager for United Press International in the early 80s, my wife was an account executive at Bob Thomas & Assoc., a local boutique agency that handled Anheaser Busch assignments in L.A. for Fleishman Hillard before it opened its office here.)

In this era of hypersensitivy about the “appearance of a conflict,” Martinez didn’t have a prayer.

An edit or and former colleague recently reminded me, "Every story has to have a good guy and a bad guy." When the LA Times decides you're the bad guy, you're pretty much screwed.

But Martinez shouldn’t be discouraged. I’m told he’s an incredibly talented journalist and he’ll have a soft landing.

Since my trial, I wrote two scripts loosely based on my ordeal: the aptly titled "Anonymous Sources," which has been optioned, and "Conflict of Interest."

I wonder if Martinez could get “Conflict of Interest” to Grazer for me?