October 31, 2007 1:59 pm : Comments 001
It’s ok to be a Yankee fan. I’m not talking to you fair-weather fans who are wearing day-old baseball caps, but the true diehards who rooted for the Yankees in the hot summer sun even when they were 14+ games out of first place; the true fans of baseball. Yes, the Yankees had yet another post-season collapse, but it’s not the team’s on-field exploits that caused me to question my faith as a fan, despite what Red Sox Nation will have you believe.
This post-season featured another episode in the annual Torre saga: a high payroll, superstar-laden team having a round one failure, George Steinbrenner issuing an ultimatum, and Yankee management still tendering another contract. The difference this year? Joe Torre turned down the Yankees. My entire world tilted.
While the Yankees have seen better days, the fault lines (such as starting pitching) were there well before Game One played out in Cleveland; remember they had to have one of the best regular season comebacks in baseball history just to make it to the playoffs. If they were going to fire Torre though, which I was against, I wanted to see it done quickly and with the respect he deserved. Sadly, this was just wishful thinking
Keeping the Yankees in the national news is a guaranteed money maker, and Yankee management knows that. Baseball is currently in a golden age (despite the steroids abuse scandal), and the Yankees are its fussy diva. They are the team you love to hate or hate to love, but either way, you pay attention. The Yankees have an entire sport divided on their every move; is it any wonder that the Yankees cable network is worth twice as much as the team itself?
It’s hard to admit, but Boston pitcher Curt Shilling touched a nerve when he stated the obvious that the Yankees were “making sure we were updated every 15 minutes about when they were actually going to name their manager.” This was after more than 2 weeks of constant coverage on Torre’s fate. Sure New York’s rabid media plays a large part in the firestorm, but someone has to feed the beast, and no one else in baseball has done that better than Steinbrenner & Co. Ray Ratto of CBS Sports sums it up perfectly:
New York, though, throws its drama at you whether you want it or not, and demands that you be interested far beyond your capabilities, which is why the Torre story has so run its natural course.
Who else but the Yankees could turn a managerial job change into such high-stakes drama? At least four other MLB managers have moved on this season, yet none of them have had the relentless coverage of the Torre saga. Watch the national news and be hard-pressed to find any team in any sport coming close to the Yankees for coverage. A Google Trends search of George Steinbrenner shows that its not just people in the New York metro area who are curious about him. Call me na�ve, but is the team that I’ve loved since my childhood become nothing more than a “brand?”
Since their last World Series win in 2000, I’ve watched the “House that Ruth Built” being torn down for a new ballpark, the team consistently overpaying for “superstars” who lose in the post-season, Yankee heroes insulted by team executives and now Torre treated like an interim manager. Any one of these alone is a staggering hit to the hallowed legacy of the Yankees; collectively, they are near fatal blows. But it is this same legacy that sustains me as a fan.
DiMaggio, Gehrig, Mantle, Jeter, Torre – they all have their faults as people off the diamond, but there was no mistaking that they truly believed in what the Yankees stood for and they showed it nearly every day on the field. It is the players and pride that make the team and ultimately derive its value, not the other way around. This is what being a Yankee fan stands for.
While other fans may chide me for supporting a team that “buys” its victories, and forces out one of the greatest managers in the history of baseball, I still wear my pinstripes without hesitation. No matter what obstacles are thrown in its way, know that the Yankees will always be a team of history and heritage, as it always has been.
I have no doubt that Joe Girardi, the new Yankee skipper; will guide the Yankees into the next chapter with great class and success. After next season though, he’ll be doing it across the street, in the “House that Torre Built.”
Share This Post
October 29, 2007 1:59 pm : Comments 000
Cable cars (and Rice-a-Roni) aside, two of the first things that come to mind when most people think about San Francisco are the stunning vistas and, of course, the Golden Gate Bridge. I was delighted to read yesterday that the board controlling the engineering landmark has unanimously rejected proposals to sell corporate sponsorships to help finance the bridge’s operating budget, which is pretty cash-starved these days. While corporate dollars may have brought some financial relief, the posting of sponsors’ ads and logos surely would have blighted the “International Orange” bridge, even if they were limited to the property adjacent to the span. I applaud the board for getting their priorities straight.
According to what I’ve read, a non-profit called “San Francisco Beautiful” was instrumental in getting the proposals defeated. While I commend them for their efforts to preserve the San Francisco landscape that I know and love, I cannot help but note the irony of San Francisco Beautiful having sold corporate sponsorships for its “2007 Beautification Awards Dinner” earlier in the month. Indeed, the logos of Citigroup and Parkmerced, a huge residential apartment complex that was once part of Leona Helmsley’s empire, grace San Francisco Beautiful’s home page.
While it is tempting to say something off-the-cuff and snarky about them pooh-poohing corporate sponsorships in one corner while gladly taking them in another, I’m more inclined to admire them for not kowtowing to the presumed preferences of their benefactors on the Bridge sponsorship issue. San Francisco Beautiful clearly put their constituents’ preferences first, and has earned my respect and admiration for it.
Share This Post
11:54 am : Comments 000
The biggest advantage for any company with a monopoly is the freedom to pretty much throw out the customer service manual. Sure, you may have to do a dog-and-pony show to appease regulators every now and then, but at the end of the day you pretty much have free rein to dictate the rules of pricing and service, consumer be damned. AT&T Corp. before its court-ordered breakup in 1984 serves as a textbook example of the hazards when a company is allowed absolute domination of a market. That company’s attitude was best captured in a bumper sticker bearing the Bell logo and the following caption: “We don’t care. We don’t have to. We’re the phone company.”
Cable companies until just recently enjoyed such monopolistic freedoms, though their industry is probably better defined as an oligopoly. Individual cable providers long-enjoyed exclusive contracts to provide service to entire communities and apartment buildings, which has allowed them to raise prices more than a whopping 90 percent over the past 10 years. The ensuing monopolistic mindset is best reflected by their rigid pricing approach and broadly bundled channels, uniformly bad customer service, and appalling practice of expecting their customers to put up with a three- or four-hour time estimate of when a technician will be on-site to provide installation or maintenance service. Imagine a restaurant or your local pizzeria delivery joint trying to get away with that approach…
The Federal Communications Commission appears poised to serve the cable industry its just desserts. The New York Times reports today that the agency is preparing to invalidate all contracts that give individual cable companies exclusive rights to provide service in apartment buildings. The decision will likely prove to be a big boon for consumers, as studies show that when an alternative cable service is made available, prices can drop as much as 30 percent.
Verizon Communications and the new AT&T (not to be confused with the old, “Ma Bell” monopolistic one) are still in the process of rolling out their fiber optic services, but they do seem inclined to make an aggressive play for marketshare. Unfortunately for consumers, these two companies are also notorious for bad customer service, so I doubt we’ll find much relief on that front. But hey, if the increased competition drives down service costs across the field, that will be a small victory enough.
The cable industry has signaled it will challenge the FCC’s rule in court. No doubt the hearings will be scheduled to start sometime between 1 p.m. and 4 p.m.
Share This Post
October 26, 2007 1:26 pm : Comments 003
The New York Observer, a quirky newspaper that is often first to take note of social and other trends, this week has a story that should be a must read for anyone who is concerned about the future of America’s national media. The story focused on how reporters are increasingly trying to brand themselves and that even The New York Times – a newspaper that didn’t routinely give bylines to all its reporter until the 1970s – is falling into step with the trend.
Julia Allison could be said to represent the new class of brand-conscious “reporters”. This “dating” columnist for Time Out magazine and “editor-at-large” for the gossip rag Star, is quoted in The Observer piece rationalizing her own “brand me, baby!” ways:
“I looked around, and I saw that the people who were getting assignments and getting paid really nicely for it were names. They were brands,” said Ms. Allison. “All journalists are journeymen. You might have a PR team you work with at your magazine that’s taking care of the magazine, but who’s taking care of YOU? Ultimately, you’re replaceable if you’re not a brand.”
Once upon a time journalists pursued their craft because of a passion for truth, justice, and the American Way (or was that Superman?). Back then, the only way to get ahead in the business was to deliver great copy about great stories. If you wanted to see your name in lights, you probably couldn’t make a worse career choice than journalism, the few exceptions like Ed Morrow notwithstanding.
It’s heartening to know there are still a few reporters out there who haven’t lost sight about the true mission of journalism, and who understand and appreciate the responsibility and privileges that come with being part of the profession. One such reporter is Dan Popkey, a political columnist with the Idaho Statesman. His name is no doubt familiar to more than a few for his coverage of the Senator Larry Craig saga. Mr. Popkey recently spoke to Matthew Felling, co-editor of the CBSNews.com daily blog “Public Eye”. The resulting interview speaks for itself.
Share This Post
October 24, 2007 1:20 pm : Comments 002
When I first relocated to New York City nearly two decades ago and knew just one person in the entire city, New York magazine served as my surrogate best friend. Each issue of the publication, then run by a legendary editor named Ed Kosner, was a “must have”, particularly to a newcomer trying to get his bearings in this bigger-than-life city. The articles were as incisive as they were well-written; I still have a particularly smart cover story Kosner ran November 2, 1992 about the deleterious effects of noise and its emotional impact on New Yorkers.
Kosner inexplicably resigned the following year, sending the magazine into a nosedive. A succession of editors came and went, each one eventually leaving the publication a little worse off than it was when they arrived. Over time, my former best friend became an acquaintance and then a stranger and ultimately, irrelevant to my life. The final straw was the issue featuring Montclair, NJ on the cover and likening it to the gentrified Park Slope section of Brooklyn. Showcasing any place in the Garden State in a magazine called New York was an abomination to me. Deriding New Jersey is one of my few simple pleasures (and frankly, what makes me feel most like a “real” New Yorker).
In early 2004, however, hope arrived in the form of Adam Moss, a wunderkind editor formerly with The New York Times Magazine. Shortly after he took the helm at New York, the magazine became worth reading again. Mr. Moss even ran a cover story about noise, and while it wasn’t nearly as good as Kosner’s original, at least the magazine wasn’t still trying to upgrade New Jersey to our sixth borough. For a while, it seemed my old best friend had returned.
But something has since gone awry.
It started with a rather critical feature about Matt Drudge, whose right-leaning Drudge Report website has emerged as a potent political force, much to the chagrin of the more left-leaning, “old school” media. The New York article let it be known early on that Mr. Drudge is “said by some to be gay,” and then gratuitously revisited the issue later with a rather nasty reference from PR man-turned-journalist Michelangelo Signorile who the magazine said “has broken down many a closet door.” (New York misspelled Michelangelo’s name, but I guess when you are heaving muck, factual accuracy is not as important as simply hitting the target).
Mr. Drudge, according to New York, denies that he is gay. I realize that Mr. Drudge is hardly the beacon of journalistic fairness himself, but do his own editorial shortcomings and misfires make him fair game for mainstream colleagues who want to color outside the bounds of fairness when covering him or his site? I don’t think so.
Then there was the photoshopped cover photo of President Clinton dressed as Jackie Kennedy with the caption: “Bill Clinton, First Lady.” I considered the cover to be an awkward and unnecessarily disrespectful depiction of a two-term president. As I don’t read New York to garner national political insight (The New York Times says I should be reading Mr. Drudge’s site), I never got around to reading the article. New York subsequently made mention of a yearbook photo showing President Clinton and a male buddy wearing dresses and holding each other, so perhaps I’m on shaky ground taking issue with the cheeky cover.
More recently, and most jolting of all, was New York’s cover story two weeks ago by Vanessa Grigoriadis about “the foul, bloggy sewer of Gawker.” For the uninitiated, Gawker is a snarky and sometimes mean-spirited blog that regularly lampoons, mocks, and otherwise savages celebrities and journalists like Ms. Grigoriadis who are far more accustomed to skewering others than being carved and filleted themselves. If Mother Theresa was alive and well in New York, even she’d be fair game for Gawker!
Ms. Grigoriadis apparently didn’t take too kindly to a Gawker posting mocking an article about her wedding in The New York Times. Her article – or more accurately her revenge piece – was a journalistic cocktail of vitriol and venom the likes I don’t ever recall reading in a major magazine. Ms. Grigoriadis didn’t just go for the jugular – she also fixated on the groin. She adroitly disclosed that one of Gawker’s male reporters allegedly has performance problems and talked about how New York Post’s Page Six has been “emasculated.” She also dutifully let us know that Gawker owner Nick Denton is an “upper class gay Jewish Briton” with an African-American boyfriend. Although Ms. Grigoriadis’ father also is an immigrant, I strongly suspect that her reference to Mr. Denton’s Commonwealth roots was not intended as a subtle form of endearment.
Given New York’s growing practice of outing prominent website owners (although my “in the know” journalism friends tell me Mr. Denton makes no secret of being gay), I got to wondering about Mr. Moss. A quick Google search reveals that he, too, is openly gay – and I’ve since learned that I apparently was one of the few people in New York who didn’t already know that. Then again, I also didn’t know that The New York Times Magazine is “pretty gay”, as Mr. Moss is alleged to have once described it, though he later pleaded the “taken-out-of-context” defense.
Still, I don’t accept that being openly gay gives Mr. Moss – or anyone else with a keyboard, microphone, or soapbox for that matter – the license to deny another person his or her right to privacy about something as intrinsically personal as their sexuality. And he is badly deluding himself if he somehow believes that Ms. Grigoriadis’ Gawker diatribe was journalistically dignified simply because it was published on fine paper stock. One of the dangers of peeking into sewers is that it’s all too easy to fall into them.
In its latest issue, New York excerpts a telling letter it received from reader Mary-Thomas Turnock of Larchmont who the magazine says “probably spoke for many”:
I’m so glad that I’m over 50 and Gawker.com is not part of my sensibilities. My sympathy to those in younger generations. Life is difficult enough without the gratuitous viciousness/bitterness described in this website.
Perhaps New York’s Westchester subscribers receive a different version of the magazine.
Share This Post
October 23, 2007 12:20 pm : Comments 000
I was saddened to read this morning that Vincent DeDomenico died. He was the man behind Rice-A-Roni, the well-known pasta-meets-rice comfort food with the catchy and enduring advertising jingle that I paid tribute to just last week.
Rice-A-Roni is etched in the minds of an entire generation as being “The San Francisco Treat” thanks to an addictively catchy jingle that was paired with an equally unforgettable advertising campaign highlighting the city’s beloved cable cars and the jangle of their bells.
“One thing my dad insisted upon was a jingle,” his daughter Marla Bleecher told The New York Times. “He said if there is a jingle, people will say it over and over in their heads.”
Mr. DeDomenico certainly got that right.
Given that the city and its famous cable cars are so much a part of the Rice-A-Roni story, it seems only fitting that San Francisco acknowledge the passing of a man who no doubt did wonders to boost the city’s tourism over the years. Rather than a minute of silence, however, I suggest a minute of loud cable car bell ringing to commemorate his memory.
Share This Post
October 19, 2007 9:35 am : Comments 009
I know I promised to not write about airlines for six months, but Jackie is off on a well-deserved vacation and I’m fairly sure she has no Internet access out on that big boat at sea. So I’m going to slip in one last airline beef that I just have to get off my chest.
I’m sitting on an airplane (Virgin America if you really must know) and watching yet another inane demonstration on how to fasten a seatbelt. What gets me is that after the demonstration, passengers are advised to shut off all electronic devices, including laptops, cell phones, and pagers (pagers? Who still uses a pager?).
Is it just me, or is there something ironic about being left to our own devices (no pun intended) when it comes to operating the sophisticated technology stuff they say interferes with the flight controls, but apparently we need a choreographed walk-through on those complicated seat belt buckles.
Yeah, Anthony, I know: “My name is Eric and I am an airline blogging addict.”
9 of 9
Share This Post
October 18, 2007 1:09 pm : Comments 003
Click Here for some mood music while you read.
I’m quite open about my fondness for San Francisco and for what locals refer to as the Bay Area. The region attracts some of the smartest, weirdest, and most passionate people in the nation, and if you love the outdoors as much as I do, it’s a delightful playground.
I confess to getting a rush every time I drive through Silicon Valley and see signs for places like Cupertino, Mountain View, Santa Clara, and Palo Alto. New York might be the nation’s center for finance and culture, but in Northern California they actually create things. At any given time, the guy or gal I’m passing (I drive like a New Yorker) could be a designer at Apple, a programmer at Google, an engineer at Intel, or a senior R&D executive at HP. Or the person who has made an absolute killing selling black mock turtlenecks to Steve Jobs. The folks out here have literally changed the world, and it’s exhilarating just to be among them.
Over the years, I’ve developed some fairly strong opinions on the best places to stay and eat in San Francisco. I always appreciate travel suggestions, so I thought I’d share a few of my own. I’ve limited my recommendations only to places in the financial and Union Square area, but if you have the time, I strongly encourage you to venture out into the city’s wonderful neighborhoods.
Where to Stay
The Prescott Hotel
San Francisco is filled with boutique hotels that are usually described on places like TravelAdvisor.com as having “charm” or being “quaint.” I generally avoid these hotels because too often “charm” means small and “quaint” means there is no view. One of the best known in this category is The Prescott, which is owned by the Kimpton Group (heck, they even refer to themselves as a boutique hotel on their website). I once booked a room at The Prescott Hotel, but checked out minutes later. The room was uncomfortably small and overlooked the side of another building. To be fair though, a lot of guests love the place (I will tell you how I know that in a minute).
Westin Market Street
My favorite hotel, on the corner of Third and Market, is a recently converted Westin. I’ve been staying here for more than a decade, first when it was the ANA Hotel and then The Argent. I like the place because the sizeable rooms have floor-to-ceiling windows, afford wonderful unobstructed views, and get flooded with natural light throughout the entire day. Third and Market also is an ideal location because it borders the financial district and Union Square, the Moscone Convention Center, and the Museum of Modern Art. AT&T Park, home of the San Francisco Giants baseball team, is an easy 15 minute walk. The Peet’s Coffee, Whole Foods, and the Verizon store I raved about earlier are all nearby.
I never cared much for the staff at this hotel under the previous ownership, but a no-nonsense hotel management firm out of Dallas has taken over the property and is fast making improvements. If you can afford it, or are fortunate to get upgraded as I once did (thank you Starwood Preferred!), I highly recommend the 06 line of rooms on the higher floors, which are end-of-the-hall suites.
Third and Market has quietly become Starwood row, as there also is a St. Regis, a Sheraton, and a W within blocks. I’ve never cared much for the W chain, but the one in San Francisco is quite a happening place, particularly for twenty-somethings. The Four Seasons also is located just off Third and Market.
If you prefer to stay in Union Square, I was quite fond of the Pan Pacific Hotel, but it has since been taken over by the JW Marriott so I can’t vouch for the property.
Places to Eat
Kokkari Estiatorio
A client took me here in June and I couldn’t wait to return to the wonderfully delightful Greek restaurant. I’ve never been to Greece, but I’m told this place is quite authentic. Everything is wonderfully fresh and delicious. And despite being one of San Francisco’s most popular restaurants, the staff is pleasantly down-to-earth and extremely accommodating. The restaurant also has some fabulous wines in the $40-$50 range. Given the quality of the food, Kokkari is quite reasonably priced, at least by New York standards. Take my advice and go when you’re next in town. You’ll thank me later.
Aqua
For many years, Aqua was my absolute favorite restaurant anywhere. Although it was always pricey, it served some of the most glorious foods I’ve ever tasted in one of the most beautiful dining rooms in the country. But then executive chef and partner Michael Mina left, now operating his namesake restaurant at the Westin St. Francis Hotel (as well as others around the country). Aqua subsequently expanded, opening new locations and introducing a prix fix menu. While the restaurant remains popular with the trendy crowd, the food no longer has the same pizzazz, and given the paltry portions, seems a tad overpriced.
Having said that, I still recommend Aqua for its signature tuna tartare dish, which unquestionably is still the best I’ve tasted anywhere. You can have it classically prepared or with a blend of moroccan spices, lemon confit, and fresh herbs. Fortunately, you can order the dish a la carte. I highly recommend going to Aqua to sample its tuna tartare and a glass of wine (it’s a great place to meet for a drink) and then go somewhere else for dinner.
Postrio
Wolfgang Puck’s Postrio is another popular local restaurant but, as the travel experts at Fodor’s write, “Gone are the days when Postrio was the destination.” The restaurant is located in the aforementioned Prescott Hotel, its home since opening in 1989. Overall, I’m as underwhelmed by the food served in the main dining room as I am by the hotel that houses it. Its bar food, however, is another story. The place makes its own gourmet lamb, veal, and duck sausages that are served with various sauces and pretzels. The magnificent three sausage dish costs all of $11, making it quite possibly the best gourmet food deal anywhere. Postrio’s sandwiches also are quite good, and I also recommend the mixed greens salad, for its freshness and generous size. Postrio also serves reasonably priced wines by the glass.
I frequently meet Prescott guests at Postrio, all of whom seem to quite like the hotel.
Dottie’s True Blue Café
It’s always dangerous to use superlatives, but I’m quite comfortable using one when talking about Dottie’s. This neighborhood joint serves the best – the very best – American breakfast anywhere. Jacob, our creative director, seconds me on this as do, it seems, many others. A few words of caution: The restaurant borders San Francisco’s rather seedy Tenderloin district and a line often begins forming even before the tiny place opens. Trust me, their fresh-baked muffins and the world’s most perfect pancakes are worth the trouble.
I’ll leave it to others to tell you where to shop and which tourist “must sees” are worth the price of admission. I’m just the Lodging and Food & Wine Guy.
8 of 9
Share This Post
October 17, 2007 10:05 am : Comments 001
People who know us know that I couldn’t ask for a better partner than Jackie; we’re complete opposites, which is apparently a very good thing. We go back now more than 10 years – a lifetime in this business – and have had our fair share of celebrations and setbacks. Fortunately, there have been far, far fewer of the latter! Like all partnerships, we’ve had our share of tense moments, but we always manage to quickly work through them and keep the business on track. There is no one in business I trust more.
Jackie also is a very gifted editor. I have never encountered anyone who could massage copy with the skill and deftness as she can, not even during my earlier years as a professional journalist. She can make words sing off the page, as they say. Jackie, never afraid to rein in my passion when warranted, has saved me from embarrassment on more occasions than I care to admit. Her record on this score is almost impeccable: she has only let me down once.
The year was 2001. While on a visit to San Francisco, I came across an issue of SF Weekly that featured three women striking a Charlie’s Angels pose on the cover. It turns out they were tech sector headhunters. Their big secret to finding potential job candidates? If memory serves, they would go partying wherever dot-commers liked to hang out. The story irked me because it celebrated these women as industry leaders, when I viewed them as the embodiment of the ills dragging the sector down. I found the article sufficiently outrageous that on my return flight home, I drafted a letter to the editor.
As always, I asked Jackie to review the letter before sending it. She cleared it with nary a punctuation change, a highly unusual event. I recall she was annoyed with me at the time, although I don’t remember over what issue. So I sent the letter.
Admittedly, the letter was a tad too passionate. Although Jackie vehemently denies it, I believe that she made a cold, calculated decision to let me hang that one time, figuring not much harm could come from me sounding a little over the top to readers of a free alternative weekly in San Francisco.
But this is the Internet age, and if you google my name and SF Weekly, that letter shows up in all its glory, as does the editor’s snarky introduction to it: “Choose one: This reader (that would be me) recently had a bad experience with A) a pretty woman, B) a job recruiter, C) A and B.”
I’m painfully reminded of this bombastic letter every time I’m in San Francisco. Thanks to Google, it will no doubt haunt me forever. Or at least until I get my payback. Hmmm…
7 of 9
Share This Post
October 16, 2007 2:35 pm : Comments 000
We always caution clients about the dangers of being an oracle. While making bold predictions is a surefire way to get media visibility – as Henry Blodget learned when he predicted in December 1998 Amazon shares would hit $400 within a year – they can forever haunt you if you turn out to be egregiously wrong. Tom Watson, former chairman of IBM, serves as a classic case in point. Despite his many accomplishments, Mr. Watson will always be best remembered for his suggestion that “there is a world market for maybe five computers.”
Another real doozy of a prediction was made by an unidentified New Yorker who was quoted by reporter Mark Calvey in a November 1996 San Francisco Business Times story saying that “the Internet is a hot fad that will be over in a year.” What was that guy thinking?! I’ll bet he feels pretty stupid now…
Okay, so that comment doesn’t appear to be one of my proudest moments. But for the record, I strongly maintain that I was misquoted.
As I recall my dinner conversation with Mark, I said that the excitement about dot-com companies was a bunch of hype because Internet technology at the time wasn’t sufficiently user friendly and that most dot-com entrepreneurs didn’t understand or appreciate the importance of good and reliable customer service. (I regard customer service as the best barometer of a company’s viability). In 1996, consumers didn’t have high-speed connections and if you ordered a product or service over the Internet chances were better than even that you never received it because the order never went through. I might have been wrong about the duration of the hype, but I think I deserve some credit for being among the first to predict that many of the era’s dot-com companies would eventually implode.
I consider Mark as being one of the most honest and decent reporters in journalism; after all, he could have legitimately quoted me as I never insisted beforehand (as I do when I’m accompanying a client) that our dinner conversation be treated as off-the-record. I long wondered if Mark even remembered my infamous quote, so this past summer I gave him a call and left a message on his voicemail. My worst fears were quickly realized when he called me back, as our conversation went something like this:
ME: Hey, Mark. Are you in New York? Your number showed up with a 212 area code.
MARK: No, I’m in San Francisco. I probably show up with a 212 area code because our phone lines are over the Internet. You know the Internet now has that capability, don’t you?
Yeah, he remembered.
ME: About that quote, you know that isn’t exactly what I said.
MARK: No, I’m pretty sure I quoted you accurately.
We agreed to forever disagree.
I’m coming clean on my infamous quote now because I figure it’s only a matter of time before Mark discovers that I’ve launched this blog. I can almost hear him snickering already.
Okay, Mark. Give me your best shot.
6 of 9
Share This Post
top of page