Herald makes contribution to Clinton campaign...

Ombudsman wrestles with consequences.

Herald Watch somehow missed the latest column by the Herald's ombudsman in his capacity as ombudsman.

Apparently the Herald found itself on the outside of an event for Hillary Clinton and had no way to get in except to buy its way in for $50. This is the subject much wrenching of hair and gnashing of teeth on the part of Schumacher-Matos, who consulted with an expert in journalistic ethics:

So, I called Robert M. Steele, a journalism professor and ethics expert at the Poynter Institute in St. Petersburg. ''I'm very uncomfortable with the thought of news organizations buying their way into campaign events,'' he said. ``Disclosing it doesn't make it go away. It's still a campaign contribution.''

He is right, and The Miami Herald's own written guidelines prohibit staffers from working or contributing to political campaigns. But guidelines are just that: guidelines. There comes a time for editorial judgment, and that is what was called for in this unusual situation.

The issue now is what to do going forward. Bill Richardson will come soon for a ''fundraiser.'' The reporters and editors I talked to are not totally clear on what the policy will be, which indicates a need for a written directive. For Gyllenhaal, it's simple. ''We'll be going to anything that looks like a rally,'' he said, and The Miami Herald will pay if it has to. He later qualified that by saying the paper would take into account the importance of the candidate and the event, and if the paper appeared to be paying inordinately for any one candidate.

I think this approach best serves the reader. We will all now monitor how the paper lives up to its word.

Again the ombudsman seems noncommittal. Why so wishy washy, doesn't this man have an opinion of his own?

Something else in the column was curious:

Benn [the reporter that paid his way in] was asked if he was comfortable with the assignment. ''I would have had a problem if I had been asked to sneak in, representing myself as a member of the catering staff,'' he said.

Why should a reporter be so uncomfortable with sneaking into a political event? I thought these were supposed to be truth seekers. Journalists around the world risk their lives daily to get stories out. What could have possibly happened to him had he been caught doing his job? I guess the thought of a uniformed security guard escorting him out was too stressful.

Another thing I don't get is why the Ombudsman is so concerned about the money paid to attend and therefore report on the event. Isn't the fact that the paper actually ENDORSES candidates a bigger conflict of interest?

It strikes me that these folks make up the rules as they go along.

Double Standard at the Heralds?

Although MSNBC published an investigative piece about journalists who donated to political campaigns and the investigation has turned up one Miami Herald copy editor who violated a company policy against such contributions, the Herald itself has remained silent on the matter. At least if you search their web site you will find no story about it.

This is in stark contrast to the actions of last September when the Herald found out that another newspaper was investigating El Nuevo Herald journalists that were also freelancing for Radio and TV Marti, also in violation of the company's policies. In that instance, the Herald rushed an Oscar Corral story to press that was shocking in its tone as well as its sloppiness. The aftermath of the scandal left the two newsrooms (ENH and TMH) as divided as ever and finished the career of the Herald's then publisher, Jesus Diaz Jr.

Now both of these policies (the one against political campaign contributions, and the one against freelancing for government-funded media) are intended to protect the integrity of the MHMC.

I'm wondering why then the Herald hasn't mentioned the most recent violation. I guess the difference is that the violation this time around was by a TMH employee and not an ENH employee.