Email Correspondence Between EnviroKnow and Senator Murkowski Spokesman
EnviroKnow:
As you probably know, Senator Murkowski sent a press release last week touting an analysis of legislation that was never considered by Congress.
I was wondering if you have a statement on this or a response:
Please let me know.
Thank You
Robert Dillon:
Mr. Nelson:
You requested comment on Sen. Lisa Murkowski’s release on the potential cost of cap and trade legislation? Please call or provide a phone number and I will call you back.
Sincerely,
Robert Dillon
EnviroKnow:
I am not interested in speaking on the phone. I need something written so I can pass it along to my readers verbatim. I think they deserve an explanation. If you are able to provide a written statement justifying the Senator’s use of unquestionably false information, please do so as soon as possible. If you are unable to do so I will be forced to indicate as such in my piece. Legislation as complicated as cap and trade is difficult enough to get right when everyone participates in the debate in good faith. Intentionally misleading press releases from United States Senators — with the explicit purpose of confusing constituents — is not acceptable and will not stand.
I anticipate your prompt response.
Robert Dillon:
I’m not sure there’s benefit in talking to someone whose already made up his mind about a story without even talking to the other side. That’s not journalism. We can speak on the phone first to discuss your story and then I may provide you with something written. I have reservations about responding to anyone who repeatedly calls a sitting US senator a liar without even having the professional courtesy to call up and engage on an issue.
EnviroKnow:
I’m offering you the opportunity to dispute my accusation that the Senator’s press release was factually incorrect. You can take it or leave it. I understand if you are unable to provide a substantive response, given the fact that the press release was demonstrably false. It would behoove you to come up with some sort of explanation for the factually incorrect press release, or you may risk the appearance of a de facto admission of guilt by way of refusal to engage.
Again — it is up to you whether or not you provide me with a statement, but I think a refusal to even attempt to back up the clearly false claims made in the Senator’s press release will come across very poorly.
I’m looking forward to your response.
Robert Dillon:
I have no guarantee that if I provide you with a response that you won’t edit it or doctor it to prove your point, which is incorrect, by the way. Without such a guarantee I’m not going to consider you an accredited journalist. You can either make a phone call and have a civil conversation and get information for your story and thereby serve the interests of your readers – or you can choose to do otherwise. It’s your choice.
EnviroKnow:
Well, sir, I’ll gladly offer my personal guarantee that I won’t edit or doctor your statement. Frankly, as someone who has never edited a statement in such a manner and would never even consider doing so, I take offense at the implication. I just want a statement from someone on the Senator’s staff — since it is perfectly clear to the casual observer that the press release was factually incorrect.
If you are unable to dispute my claim, I will indicate as such. But as evidenced by my continuing to correspond with you on this, I would much rather have a statement I can publish.
How about this? I’ll publish a screenshot of the statement rather than copying/pasting the text. That is perfectly reasonable, no?
EnviroKnow:
Is this suitable for you? I truly just want to publish your statement — in full and unedited — so my readers can judge for themselves.
Please advise.
Robert Dillon:
If that’s true then we can have a conversation via phone ahead of time.
EnviroKnow:
I’ll call you shortly.
