Yesterday I sent the email below to Tom Fiedler (executive editor of The Miami Herald), Jesus Diaz Jr. (president and publisher of The Miami Herald and El Nuevo Herald) and Joe Oglesby (opinion page editor of The Miami Herald). Joe Oglesby responded and his reply is below as well.
In a column in today's El Nuevo Herald Armando Gonzalez (a 33-year veteran of MHPC) says the Herald communicated to Carlos Alberto Montaner that he was free of fault and that his columns would continue to run in the Herald. On September 17th El Nuevo Herald published a column by Montaner that would normally be published in The Miami Herald 2 days later. Again this is according to Gonzalez, but he alleges that Montaner was never even informed why his column was spiked.Mr. Oglesby's reply:
Does Mr. Gonzalez have it wrong? If Mr. Montaner was free of fault, shouldn't the Herald publish a public retraction? Why was Mr. Montaner's September 19th Column spiked?
Thank you in advance for your responses.
Carlos was never told he was free of fault. He was told his columns would continue to run. He was notified that his column of Sept. 17 wouldn't not be published because it went over the same points he made in a letter published days before in The Miami Herald.I guess we can say that there are two different accounts of the same events here. Who to believe? I assume that Mr. Gonzalez could only have learned the nature of The Herald's communication with Montaner from Montaner himself or from the person at the Herald who communicated with Montaner (presumably Oglesby himself). Either way one of these two MHPC employees is right and the other is wrong. If Carlos was not free of fault why would The Herald continue to run his columns. What is the distinction between Montaner and Olga Connor who was a freelancer (who by the way did not report on politics but rather culture)?
We're still not getting the whole story.