Brian Hornback Responds To Bias Reporting By Shopper

In this statement, I am clearing the air on the erroneous reporting that appeared in Part III. It should be noted that in Part III of the reporter’s article pertaining to me several different people have observed that the reporter violated some common journalistic standards and ethics in her reporting.

The first violation involved the Objectivity portion of the journalistic code. “Persons who are the subject of adverse news stories are allowed a reasonable opportunity to respond to the adverse information before the story is published or broadcast.” On the first day that Part I of County Confidential appeared in print the reporter was interviewed on a local radio talk show of a small low watt radio station and a question was asked of the reporter about my involvement in this story as many of the allegations occurred about the same time as my election as Chairman. The reporter responded “that is coming in Part III”. It is obvious that the reporter clearly violated the journalistic standard in not allowing me to respond before publication. It is clear that the reporter’s failure to contact me within the two weeks prior to Part III being published that the reporter willfully violated this standard.

The reporter also violated the portion of the journalistic code that says “Reporter must avoid conflicts of interest – incentives to report a story with a given slant. This includes not taking bribes and not reporting on stories that affect the reporter’s personal, economic or political interests.” The reporters unwillingness to allow me to respond to the account as printed in the tabloid is a clear indication that she had written and published her story with a given slant and the reporter has a political interest in that she maintains a self named blog on a local blog forum and posts on her blog and in online forums as “bbeanster”. In many of her postings she professes her unequivocal support of Democrat candidates and in particular the failed campaign of U.S. Senate candidate and former Congressman Harold Ford, Jr.

In Part III of County Confidential several blatant things that are not factual include;

The story indicates that I “became the Ragsdale –approved candidate to Chair the Knox County GOP” I am happy to say that I was supported by Mayor Ragsdale, Sheriff Hutchison and every elected Knox County Republican officeholder. I had overwhelming support from a multitude of interests.

The story indicates that the immediate past Chairman had support from one Republican officeholder in his previous second bid for Chairman. (He had ran for Chairman once before several years ago unsuccessfully.) According to the article the support he received from the officeholder was “We sent out his letters to the executive committee, we got his stickers and his stationery. The deal was, we support him for Chairman, he helps us out when he can, and we support his judgeship” I can not speak to the accuracy of this account of the 2003 contested Chairman’s race. I can speak with authority about my 2005 race for Chairman. I paid for everything that was used stickers, envelopes and postage. I used the telephone and cell phone to contact many different people all across Knox County to personally ask for their support. I campaigned the old fashioned way. I am blessed to have had many different volunteers throughout Knox County that assisted my campaign as well as a group of Young Republicans that passed out stickers for my candidacy at the 2005 Lincoln Day Dinner.

The story indicates that my candidacy was orchestrated by a political machine to oust the former Chairman. This is simply not true. The former Chairman announced in December of 2004 that he would not seek re-election. I talked to many close advisers and friends during the month of December and announced in January 2005 my candidacy for Chairman. I am proud that every Republican officeholder endorsed my candidacy and I was elected unanimously by the legitimate Republican delegates at the Knox County Republican Party Convention.

The story indicates that “We really set it up so he got elected unanimously” This too is not true. I campaigned for Chairman by making hundreds of phone calls, visiting Republican Club meetings and campaigning. As I stated before, I am fortunate and blessed to have had many volunteers throughout Knox County that assisted my campaign as well as a group of Young Republicans that passed out stickers for my candidacy at the 2005 Lincoln Day Dinner.

The story indicates that I am 100% loyal and very easily-influenced by one officeholder or a specific select group of people. This is not true. My record as a public official (5th District School Board Member 2000-2004) and now as an online blogger (http://brianhornback.blogspot.com) will demonstrate that I am an independent. That I will criticize any public official when necessary. When my term as Chairman ends, you will see a more determined and dogmatic Republican independent. However, when I differ on policy issues. I go on record with my position and state the reason that I disagree. During my term as Chairman I have tried to honor Ronald Reagan’s 13th commandment “Not to criticize a fellow Republican”. This at times has not been easy for me as Chairman from March 2005 until present. As many individuals have never ceased from criticizing me.

The story indicates that the immediate past Chairman said that he “did everything he could to help Hornback” To my knowledge this is not true. I was told during the months and days leading up to the Convention that the past Chairman contacted many different people to ask them oppose me.

The story reports that I “announced some new people would be in charge of the office and were told “You’re not needed anymore” This is not true. I announced several appointments. The same positions that the former Chairman had appointed two years before. Minority Chair, Communications Chair and I announced an Office Director. With the appointment of an Office Director, I desired to take the office staff from a three person staff to four.

The story reports the immediate past Chairman as saying he got a call from “one of the ladies who’s been kicked out” This too is a lie. No one was kicked out. All volunteers were welcomed to stay and my desire was to utilize another person, another set of eyes, hands and feet.

The story reports the immediate past Chairman as saying that when the ladies got to the office “there were these people taking all the computers” The ladies were not there when I moved the two computer unit boxes (CPU) into my vehicle. The monitors, printers and other equipment were left in the office. It was a normal safety procedure to secure the data and the petty cash box. At this point in the transition, I am unaware of who or what had access to the office and the immediate past Chairman was less than cooperative in working with me prior to the Convention and was no where to be found after the Convention. On Monday morning following the Convention money was given to the party’s treasurer to deposit into the party’s checking account from the petty cash box that was in the office. A minimal amount of money should be kept in any office and regular deposits made to protect the financial condition of the office. There appeared to be no checks and balances or safeguards under the immediate past Chairman. It should be noted that I am the first Chairman to be transitioned with an operational office. Through the leadership of the Knox County Republican Party we have re-located the office to a more fiscally responsible, handicapped accessible and a more visible location.

The story reports that someone had “gotten the lists” and “changed the locks”. The computer boxes were taken from my vehicle and secured the same evening in an interior room of the office. The locks to the main door were changed on Monday, not on Saturday as the story reports. As for the lists, it was discovered and believed that the lists were already in one or two officeholders hands. The decision was made by the party leaders and I that the Knox County Republican party would make the lists available to every Knox Countywide, Tennessee or Federal Republican officeholder and candidates and in the future would make it available to any Knox Countywide, Tennessee or Federal Republican candidates that asked for it. This has been the practice since March of 2005. Some in the party believed that certain individuals desired to make money from the list. The best way to eliminate that threat was to make it available to every candidate.

The story reports “That afternoon, Republican officials called a meeting to sort things out. They asked Tindell to attend” This is not true. The fact is that I called a meeting with the current office volunteers and they asked about certain individuals to accompany them. I said they could invite anybody they wanted. They invited the immediate past Chairman. I started the meeting. The immediate past Chairman made a comment to the group about his political future and left before the meeting concluded. At that meeting I announced that the 4th person that I wanted to bring in the office had just received a permanent position with a private corporation and had withdrawn from the Office Director position.

It wasn’t until nearly two months after County Confidential Part III was published that I completely understood the motives for the portion of County Confidential Part III that pertained to me.

On October 20, 2006 the website of the E.W. Scripps owned Knoxville News-Sentinel had nearly 25 pages of emails. In the various emails were communications from the E.W. Scripps employed Editor of the Halls Shopper News about me.

On March 12, 2005 at 3:00 pm the Editor says “D—, Chad. I can’t believe this. Or maybe I can. Hornback is a perfect idiot sometimes.”

On March 12, 2005 at 5:04 pm the Editor said “Harber is not somebody I’d ever get involved with. That’s for sure.-s. County Confidential is E.W. Scripps Company and the Halls Shopper News interview of Harber.

On March 12, 2005 at 11:24 pm the Editor wrote: “Watch for Brian to close the account and reopen another. How many treasurers do we have? Sandra” Clearly this is a false allegation on the part of the Editor. The bank accounts were never closed. By the way the Editor is not a delegate or a current member in good standing of the Knox County Republican Party.

On March 13, 2005 at 3:52 pm the Editor stated. “He called back (sigh)” This is obviously the Editor’s disappointment in having to correct a false and misleading editorial that had already been written.

On March 13, 2005 at 5:21 pm the Editor in the most obvious revelation of bias, wrote the following in part: Chad – since Brian called me back, I’m giving him the benefit of the doubt with the revised story… This issue isn’t going away. There will be more stories. Betty Bean just called to tell me Lloyd Daugherty called her………

In the reporting of this story there are other breaches of common journalistic standards and ethics including but not limited to;

Objectivity

Unequivocal separation between news and opinion. In-house editorials and opinion (Op-Ed) pieces are clearly separated from news pieces. News reporters and editorial staff are distinct.

Competing points of view are balanced and fairly characterized.

Accuracy

Reporters are expected to be as accurate as possible given the time allotted to story preparation and the space available, and to seek reliable sources.

Independent fact-checking by another employee of the publisher is desirable.

Slander and libel considerations

Reporting the truth is never libel, which makes accuracy and attribution very important.

It is interesting to note that the Halls Shopper News has a weekly column entitled Gossip and Lies in which it intentionally reports untruths.

I believe that this portion of County Confidential targeted me by using Bias and in the process made numerous violations of journalistic standards and ethics. I have a record and history of returning every request by members of the main stream media for comments to stories about me. So, the thought by the reporter and editor in writing this story obviously were not to call me so that E.W. Scripps would not be forced to correct their work of fiction at the time of publication and in hopes that I would not desire to correct the story.

Since there are as many errors in the reporting of County Confidential Part III that pertain to me I can not imagine how many other errors are in the story and anything else written by the reporter in question and managed by the editor.

Thank You to E.W. Scripps management and in particular Bruce Hartmann for allowing me to correct the portion of County Confidential that has applied to me.