As many readers know, on Oct. 20, 21 and 22, The Daily Sentinel ran a front page ad for the Republican vice-presidential candidate's local visit. On the same page existed a "Note to Our Readers" from the publisher, "that readers could perceive a political advertisement on the cover of our franchise as a dangerous step toward advocacy or a blurring of the lines between advertising and news," and that readers should have the sophistication to tell the difference.
Many readers, myself included, perceived this note as condescending. On Oct. 20, I called The Daily Sentinel and left two voicemails, one to the publisher stating my opinion and one to the classified department to inquire how much a similar pro-Obama ad would cost to run on the front page.
Both the classified department and the Editor called me back Wednesday, Oct. 23.
The classified department told me that a similar pro-Obama ad on the front page would be $1,000 a day regardless of the day.
Wednesday afternoon, due to donors' help to pay for a pro-Obama ad, I called back the classified department to place the ad. The price had jumped to $1,995. Is inflation this bad that three hours later the price doubled? I don't think so.
I then talked to the publisher, and he stated that the quote of $1,000 was only a ball-park figure. Since when does a quoted price suddenly become a ball-park figure? Probably since The Daily Sentinel decided that Democrats live in a different ball park.
I have lost any loyalty to The Daily Sentinel. This was injurious, unjust and another example of how dysfunctional our political discourse has become, as well as demonstrating how people and organizations allow their biases to seem to make them dishonest.