All these months later, I'm just now seeing CJR's updated "response" to a letter then-President-elect Clint Brewer sent to to the trade mag to ask for corrections of Gloria Cooper's shoddy reporting.

Here's Clint's letter:

"Given the lack of coverage CJR has afforded the Society of Professional Journalists over the years, it was surprising and disappointing to see SPJ criticized in the May/June (2007) Darts & Laurels column.

"SPJ is the nation's largest journalism advocacy organization. After years of journalism-ethics advocacy, groundbreaking legal defense fund work for journalists and SPJ'S national push for a federal shield law --all of which CJR has passed on covering -- SPJ leaders were stunned to see CJR pick on an internal decision-making process within the organization's national board and committee structure. To make matters worse, deputy executive editor Gloria Cooper did a remarkably poor job of covering this nearly year-old issue.

"Cooper's account of SPJ'S decision to create a series of journalism-education seminars, the first of which are funded by the press release distribution company Market Wire, was inaccurate and unfair. Her critique was one-sided and blatantly ignored relevant details SPJ'S national president, Christine Tatum, gave CJR editors on more than one occasion.

"As the result of its lopsided reporting, CJR erroneously stated that SPJ considered 'sharing [with Market Wire] the development of the curriculum' that SPJ would present during Market Wire-sponsored events. That is patently false.

"SPJ'S national ethics committee certainly should be lauded for calling the original proposal from Market Wire to SPJ into question. That is the committee's role. However, CJR gave that credit at the expense of other SPJ leaders who worked on this deal tirelessly and with tremendous integrity.

"For the record, Tatum asked CJR for corrections and clarifications you refused to give, citing 'semantics.' The error and omissions noted here are the result of sloppy reporting that should have been corrected. CJR'S staff should review SPJ'S code of ethics at www.spj.org. It appears you need a refresher course."

Clint Brewer, President-elect, SPJ

And then Gloria Cooper -- who departed from CJR's staff this past summer -- replied:

"As most followers of the column understand, a Dart or a Laurel is aimed at nothing more, and nothing less, than specific, concrete, isolated, and discrete journalistic actions; a Dart recipient today may be Laurelized tomorrow, and vice versa, and thus SPJ'S contributions in other areas, however admirable, are, in short, beside the point.
"This particular Laurel, to the society's ethics committee, was based on careful, word-by-word examination of the SPJ-Market Wire preliminary proposal, on extensive telephone interviews and e-mail exchanges with members of the committee who were present at the pitch, and on literally exhaustive interviews with president Tatum.

"As to president-elect Brewer's denial about the 'sharing ... of curriculum,' here is precisely what the preliminary proposal said: 'Together, the Society of Professional Journalists and Market Wire will develop a series of training programs (in a format to be determined) designed to educate public relations practitioners on how to better understand and work with journalists.... SPJ, with input from the VP of Marketing & Media Relations and/or other Market Wire representatives, will select training faculty and will develop the seminar curriculum.'

"Indeed, it was that very concept, along with such other questionable arrangements that we cited--the displaying of each other's logos on their respective Web sites, allowing promoting Market Wire to new members and students, and making Market Wire the exclusive newswire for SPJ--that so distressed the committee and caused it to withhold its support (as Tatum herself told me, the committee 'stuck its nose in the air and said no').

"In CJR'S view, the committee's blocking of this dubious proposal alone would have been sufficient to earn it a Laurel, but as it happened, the committee's impact went further still: as Tatum confirmed to me, the proposal that went to the board and was finally approved 'took into consideration everything they had to say.'

"For the record, the corrections and clarifications that Tatum requested were, in our view, not justified by the facts. To cite just one example, Tatum denied that she had 'pressed' the committee for its approval; however, in the course of our reporting, a number of those present described her manner as 'intimidating,' 'threatening,' and 'agitated.'

"It seems to us that if the Laurel erred in anything, it was on the side of kindness."

Tatum's response to Cooper and CJR: Oh, the arrogance. The public needs accuracy and fairness in reporting far more than your sense of "kindness." I certainly don't need or want CJR's charity. Getting the facts straight and presenting them fairly is good enough for me.

Gloria Cooper spoke with a few noisy critics (who were allowed to spout off from the safe and cowardly shadows of anonymity) and didn't bother to speak with (or maybe she did and just chose not to report the views of) people in the room who would not have described my behavior during that Chicago meeting as "intimidating," "threatening" and "agitated." (And those people, for what it's worth, would have happily reported their impressions on the record! What a concept!)

Cooper received a copy of a draft propsoal that was presented to SPJ by a potential customer (that some SPJ national leaders didn't have enough sense of business ethics to know that distributing such a preliminary document publicly is grossly inappropriate is another story ...). Elements of that proposal were highly flawed and unworkable. They were never seriously considered by any SPJ national leader -- so it's ridiculous for anyone to claim that I was pressing the ethics committee to sign off on that document. But was I looking to edit the document as quickly as possible? Absolutely. Unfortunately, some people at that meeting in Chicago were more interested in identifying problems and complaining than in coming up with solutions. If I was intimidating, threatening and agitated, I can assure you that I wasn't the only one.

Once again, for the record, SPJ never for a moment considered "sharing the development of the curriculum" with its customer as Ms. Cooper stated.

But would we want to seek input from Marketwire, as the preliminary proposal she and CJR clung to states? Why, yes! Said input amounts to, "Gee, you're our customer. What kind of things would you like for us to discuss? What sorts of speakers and instructors are you looking for? Do you want us to provide more working journalists, academics or a mixture of both? Would you like for us to provide time for Q&A and networking? Should we serve juice and doughnuts before the session or pizza and salad after it ends?"

Call me crazy, but I think that's just good business.

This is a fine example of how a written document is not necessarily enough to present a story wholly, accurately and fairly. But if you're the type of journalist who clearly makes up your mind about what you want to write before you report, are fine with anonymous sources taking jabs at people and are confident that everything will balance out in the end because you're so good at "erring on the side of kindness," the complexity of analyzing a preliminary business proposal surely would escape you.

And while I'm thinking about it: SPJ's business dealings with MarketWire have proven to be helpful to the Society and the general public on many levels without tarnishing the Society's reputation one iota. All these months later, SPJ is generating new revenue, connecting its members to a release-distribution service they might find useful, speaking to the general public about journalism ethics and the importance of freedom-of-information laws (which journalists don't corner the market on by the way) and the importance of diversity in news coverage. The Society has not lacked volunteers willing to pitch in to help with the Journalism Education Series that will be presented in six locations determined by MarketWire.