August 29, 2003
You read it where first?

Notice anything similar about this Houston Press article from last week and this column in today's Chron by their new hotshot Rick Casey? Me too. I can think of three possible explanations: Casey didn't read Tim Fleck's story and found out about Rep. Nixon and his associated sleaziness on his own; Casey did read Fleck's story and didn't bother to credit him with printing it first; Casey wrote this story last week and had other columns in the pipeline before this one.

My guess some variation on the latter. Since both pieces are so similar, they're probably the result of each writer getting a call from lawyer Fred Hagans, who wanted to get the word out about how Nixon was affecting his court case. Since I'd assume that Hagans would call the guy at the paper with the bigger circulation first, Casey either sat on this or just took his time between writing it and printing it. Meanwhile, Hagans either called Fleck as he'd always planned to and Fleck was simply quicker off the draw, or he got impatient waiting on Casey and called Fleck out of frustration and/or spite.

Obviously, I'm just guessing. But I'll bet that if Casey hadn't read Fleck's column before his own ran, he now wishes he had. And I'll also bet that this is the subject of a future Hair Balls piece.

Posted by Charles Kuffner on August 29, 2003 to Scandalized! | TrackBack
Comments

Pretty amazing, since Casey is the hotshot brought in to cover local stuff better than Thom Potted Plant Marshall.

Just when you think it can't get worse, you remember -- that's our Comical!

Posted by: Kevin Whited on August 29, 2003 9:26 PM

You've never seen items in the Press subsequently picked up by the Comical? Some times, the same quotes from the same people, with absolutely no credit.

I used to call the news desk on this (just for the annoyance factor) but got tired of being hung up on.

Posted by: Charles M on August 30, 2003 1:12 PM

Yes, I've seen Press pieces picked up by the Chron before. This one just struck be as being more egregious than usual.

Posted by: Charles Kuffner on September 1, 2003 10:49 AM