Jackson Free Press

Like so many Jacksonians, I have read Donna Ladd's interviews with Mayor Frank Melton with rapt interest. These interviews have provided an unprecedented portrait of Melton the man, and I must say that I am fascinated by his larger-than-life—dare I say swashbuckling?—personality. I am also proud, since no other media outlet in Jackson could conduct interviews of such depth and scope, as anyone who saw WLBT's recent interviews with the mayor can confirm, to say nothing of the coverage provided by The Clarion-Ledger.

Six months ago, the JFP was blacklisted by the administration, to the extent that our reporters were excluded from press conferences and Adam Lynch was escorted from City Hall by the mayor's bodyguards. Now, it is The Clarion-Ledger that has drawn the mayor's wrath, by reporting on his trip to the Bahamas, which led to his pledge that he would personally "cream" reporter Kathleen Baydala if she ran the story.

Now, Executive Editor Ronnie Agnew writes that Mr. Melton may be the "worst mayor ever," whose antics have turned—in a week—from "harmlessly charismatic to being just plain strange." Where, Mr. Agnew, were you and your paper a year ago, when you had the resources and institutional knowledge—along with the civic obligation—to offer real coverage of the election, rather than the slapdash propaganda you passed off as journalism? We're glad to welcome you to the party, but you've showed up unfashionably late.

The Clarion-Ledger is not the only media in the mayor's disfavor these days. WAPT fell out of favor because they ran the mayor's statement that he didn't "give a #### what the public thinks." I can understand why Mr. Melton might have been embarrassed by that flippant comment, but he is the one who said it. Blaming WAPT is simply passing the buck for Mr. Melton's own ill-considered behavior.

Last week, the mayor excluded both The Clarion-Ledger and WAPT from a press conference in his office, once again dispatching his bodyguards to escort reporters from City Hall. How times have changed.

Yet, despite the fact that I am tempted to take some satisfaction in The Clarion-Ledger's plight—their long history of substandard journalism makes it seem poetic justice—I cannot ultimately take any pleasure in how the tables have turned. For one, it is probably only a matter of time before the JFP "gets in trouble" with the mayor again, for offenses real or imagined. More importantly, this is not the way our democracy is supposed to work.

The media should not have to walk on eggshells, worrying that their next story might get them banned from public meetings or blackballed by public officials. It should not matter who is up and who is down, because a mayor simply does not have the right to pick sides in the media. Of course, he is free to provide interviews to the media he chooses, but he has no right to exclude media he doesn't like from press conferences. Certainly, he has no right to withhold public documents from anyone, whether they are members of the media or private citizens. Public information is not a popularity contest, and the public has both a legal and a moral right to public documents. We live in a democracy. Those documents are our own. Allow me to provide some examples. Under state law, public records must be released to anyone who asks for them, whether the mayor likes them or not. However, the JFP, (along with other media, I suspect), has hit an iron curtain of secrecy when we have requested documents from this administration.

For instance, on Nov. 4, 2005, Adam Lynch requested the salaries of a number of city employees, including former Mayor Dale Danks, who was a frequent litigator against the city until Mr. Melton hired him. The city withheld this information because Danks was hired through a contract rather than through regular employment. This is a distinction without a difference, since city contracts are also public information. In any case, on Jan. 5, 2006, I requested Danks' contract, to which the city made no response at all. To date, the JFP has made four formal requests for Dale Danks' salary to no avail. Yet, salaries are indisputably public information. It is, after all, our money.

Another example cuts right to the heart of this administration's strategy, both administrative and political. Mr. Melton rose to power through relentless attacks on Harvey Johnson's efforts to reduce crime. Never mind that crime dropped dramatically throughout Mr. Johnson's tenure, such that homicides in 2005 dropped 31 percent from January to the end of June over the same period in 2004, a year for which crime dropped to its lowest level in at least 15 years. Today, it is impossible to say whether Mr. Melton's hands-on tactics for reducing crime are working, because the city will not release either crime statistics or Comstat figures. On Dec. 14, 2005, I requested crime stats for 2004-2005. Four months later, the city has still not released this information. On Jan. 5, 2006, I requested Comstat figures, which the city said were "for internal use only." There is, as far as I know, no plausible legal justification for this refusal.

Now, Mr. Melton says he will only release crime statistics through SafeCity Watch, an organization he once chaired. Mr. Melton says this is because he wants "some integrity" in the numbers, but the public should not have to receive public records filtered through a political organization with long-standing ties to this administration. And God only knows how much longer we'll have to wait before this filter is up and running.

"The facts," John Adams wrote, "are stubborn things, and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence." It is time for Mr. Melton to yield to this wisdom and stop playing favorites with public information. Whether or not he likes what the facts reveal, whether or not he likes the person or institution requesting them, he must reveal public information to the public. That is, after all, the very essence of democracy.

Previous Comments

ID

72056

Comment

Brian, Great article. I think it outlines the very fact that the media's responsibility to report the facts and let the public decide from there. There does seem to be some love loss between certain political officials and the media, and there could be some good reasons for that. Sometimes it is believed that you will not get a fair shake by certain media outlets. We have definitely seen how some cover the President as well as the Governor and Mayor, and how others might choose not to address certain issues. At the end of the day, those in these offices serve at the pleasure of the people. The media outlets ultimately report for the people. To me, when it comes to those who are governing and representing, the people deserve to hear and see it all. Regardless of how it makes them look.

Author

c a webb

Date

2006-04-19T18:15:50-06:00

ID

72057

Comment

This article is a synopsis of Melton and what he stands for. The issues that are in question are the ones delagated by our mayor. Before he became mayor his platform was the most intense public disecting of all of past city administrators as I have ever seen. Now he is worst than all of the past mayors (at least the last two) combined. JFP did not single out Frank, they treated him as they have everyone else, fair with an equal chance to expound on his agenda. The mayor's antics are what keeps him in a negative light. Not the media. Outstanding article Brian.

Author

lance

Date

2006-04-19T22:46:22-06:00

ID

72058

Comment

Brian this is my favorite article of all those you've done. Very good writing with great insight and facts.

Author

Ray Carter

Date

2006-04-25T13:16:09-06:00