In Defense Of The R-J

I've been receiving a number of texts and emails from VegasHappensHere.Com readers and friends simply floored that the Review-Journal featured me so prominently in Corey Levitan's piece today about the Vegas blogosphere.

I am not blowing smoke when I say that I am completely unsurprised. No, really.

Yes, I have provided in this space some intense criticism of the R-J and its publisher, Sherm Frederick. Yes, I still think most of Sherm's columns are ridiculous and that his spending priorities do a disservice to his product. But I also preach that there's excellent work done there and that the sins of publishers and editors should never be blamed on the many terrific reporters working in this town.

And as brutal as I have been about Sherm -- and he has returned the love in kind on his blog -- I would never imagine that he would tell one of his reporters not to include a newsworthy element of a story simply because he's got a personal or ideological bone to pick. Contrary to the conspiracy theories out there about how news operations are run, it's always been my experience that publishers and even top editors meddle in the content very, very sparingly. I worked for three years in the 1990s at the R-J, a right-leaning paper on its editorial pages, and I write regularly for The New York Times, the epitome of what some view as the "liberal media elite." On no side have I ever been instructed as to how to slant or frame a story beyond the normal reporter-editor discussions fleshing out what we see as the news. In those conversations, though, throughout my career in daily journalism, editors defer to the judgment of reporters almost all of the time. (Magazine journalism is a bit of a different matter.)

So I'm quite thrilled to have received the coverage today from Corey's story. And I loved, loved, loved that he managed to include the libel lawsuit vexing that moron blogger Michael Politz. But I'm not surprised that Sherm behaved professionally. In fact, I suspect he probably didn't know the story was being done. It's not his job to micromanage that way.

Oh, and while I'm tooting the worn-out horn, UNLV journalism student Laura Davis wrote a extremely flattering profile of me appearing in the current issue of Q Vegas (free registration req.). So it's been quite a nice Sunday.

It had to happen sooner or later

Many of you are familiar with my distaste for Michael Politz, the publisher of a Vegas food-industry magazine who makes outlandish claims on his blog and is known to view himself as a legitimate journalist despite obvious examples of blatant shilling. He also feuds with everyone from Norm Clarke the the Greenspuns. Everyone's out to get him.

Now Prive, the nightclub at Planet Hollywood, has sued Politz for a panoply of defamation, extortion and copyright infringement claims. You can read the 16-page complaint here. A couple of lawyers have blogged their bafflement over what they view as weak copyright infringement charges here and here.

That may be so, but that's not the really interesting stuff here. No, I like the part where Prive pulls the curtains back a bit on how they believe Politz does business.

According to the complaint, Politz "has originated, written, and/or posted positive reviews and laudatory content on TheVegasEye.com regarding individuals and/or entities doing business in the local entertainment industry who have given cash amounts or granted favors to Defendant Politz, and has originated, written, and/or posted false and damaging content on TheVegasEye.com regarding individuals and/or entities doing business in the local entertainment industry who refused to give cash amounts or grant favors to Defendant Politz."

Wow. That's pretty intense. Also, given what's seen on Politz's site, totally believable. The claim says Politz panned Prive in January after being denied entry -- I'm guessing because he wanted to get in for free? -- then asked the owners for money to get back on his "good side." There's no telling until a trial whether Prive has any actual evidence behind those claims -- a smoking e-mail, maybe? -- but they go on to state:

"In March 2008, Defendant Politz contacted another member of Prive management and admitted to originating, writing and posting negative content in exchange for a cash payment from a competitor to Prive."

Wait! It gets even better! Four hosts quit Prive in the spring and went to work at competing clubs. Prive sued them, alleging they had breached non-compete clauses in their contracts and alleging that at least one of those hosts took a valuable, proprietary client list with him/her.

Politz pounced on Prive for this flap. In early August, he published on his site an anonymous letter he claimed was sent by a former employee to the Nevada Gaming Control Board that contained a long list of outrageous and, thus far, unsupported accusations against Prive owner Justin Levine and manager Frank Tucker.

The letter Politz posted alleged drug use and dealing, verbal harassment of staffers, underage drinking and theft of wages and tips. I'm being deliberately vague and not linking to the letter because it's so bizarre that I fear that even I could be in legal trouble for pointing you to it. (In reality, though, probably not since Prive reiterated all the allegations in their own court filing which is a public document.)

It's probably impossible to prove whether Politz wrote the thing himself as the Prive lawsuit suggests, but there are some clues that something's fishy with it. Among them, it's awfully unlikely a former employee would misspell a name as simple as Levine. It's more likely that whomever fabricated the letter to embarrass Prive did so to make it seem in some way authentic. Further, Politz himself misspelled Justin Levine as Justine Levine in an 8/19 post. These are really easy names so either he's doing in intentionally or he's really, really stupid. Or both! (Misspellings are actually really common in Politz's writings; he referred to Norm in that post I linked to above as having "inadequit" social skills.)

Either way, Politz is responsible for the letter's contents because he chose to publish it. It wasn't even posted as a comment on his blog; it was posted by the owner of the website himself. This is the fundamental principle that he seems to simply deny by claiming he didn't write it.

Politz wrote on 8/18, six days after he initially published this letter:

"I must make this clear to everyone that we don't endorse the anonymous letter or anything that is stated within the letter. The publishing of this letter does not reflect the opinions of anyone working here. We simply put the letter up for our readers to read and judge for themselves."

Uh, no, you yutz. That's not how libel law works, as any journalism-school freshman is taught. Can you imagine what the publishing world would be like if anyone could publish any allegedly anonymous statements and not be responsible for it? The Internet already allows for that to some extent because it's so easy to both publish something and be anonymous about it. But this is clearly Politz's site and he is clearly liable for the content he posts on it. And proving actual malice, the legal standard by which Politz wanted to harm Prive and its reputation and that this wasn't just some inadvertent error, seems exceedingly easy here.

Memo to Prive: Go get 'em, boys. I've never been in your club and I probably wouldn't much enjoy it. Not my thing. But anything you can do to foster more journalistic responsibility amongst schmucks like this who poison the well for the rest of us, I'm all for.

When sycophancy -- and spin -- becomes idiocity

That yutz Michael Politz evidently modified his silly Carrot Top post. He still says Mr. Top is "sold out for six months" but then indicates:

The Luxor on-line ticket office says tix are available so take advantage of it. We have just been notified that other writers in Las Vegas are blogging their opinions against my selection of this show.

Umm, no. I don't know that anyone with either high-brow or low-brow taste can believe that Carrot Top is the best show in Vegas, but I hold no grudge against him and enjoyed his show well enough.

No, Mr. Politz, it's the entire item, taken together, with its absurd notion that this show is sold out -- but now, lucky you, there ARE tickets which means it's NOT sold out -- that drives me bananas. That and that obvious effort to shill your opinion in order to appear on someone's advertisements and marquee. You know, I can see it now. "Best Show in Vegas! -- Michael 'Rent-a-quote' Politz"

I'm gonna try that! The only marquee I'm on that I know of is for Phantom, and I didn't really mean it but a phrase from my USA Today piece on the show made it. My name did not, sadly. So let's see if I can right that wrong here and now!

Here are my candidates:

Dixie Dooley is the biggest thrill you'll ever have in a Vegas theater!
Steve Wyrick is the new Harry Houdini!
Bill's Gamblin' Hall and Whachamacallit is the height of elegance and first-class service!

Any others, friends?

When sycophancy becomes idiocity

I like Carrot Top well enough. He was an affable guest on "The Strip" back in 2005 and I gave his show at Luxor a respectable B- in my book, "Gay Vegas." It's not brain surgery but he's likeable and he tries so hard you have to give him props.

But.

Do you recall a number of months ago, I wrote about a fellow named Michael Politz, who runs Las Vegas Food & Beverage Magazine and has a blog called The Vegas Eye?

Well, Mr. Politz's insistence on sucking up to his favorites has now made him seem even more ridiculous than he already did. Today he not only called Carrot Top the "best show on the Strip," but he claimed it's sold out six months in advance. (I'm including a screen shot because Mr. Politz is known for removing stuff and claiming it never existed.)

That, my friends, is not only false but silly. There is no such thing as that kind of advance booking in Las Vegas. I can't imagine what Politz was thinking and I imagine Mr. Top himself would be embarrassed by such a claim.

See to your left. You can buy tickets to his show any day you'd like. And you should. It's a fun time.

The Moron Strikes Again

There is a fellow in Las Vegas who fancies himself a journalist named Michael Politz who runs a trade magazine for the food and beverage industry, Las Vegas Food & Beverage. Yeah, that's him looking awful silly to your right. He traffics in rumor, occasionally getting one right, and he's has made a zillion enemies in Vegas not by being hard-hitting or overly fair but by playing favorites and frequently making an ass out of himself in public.

Each week, he publishes a column called The Vegas Eye in which he reports, re-reports and speculates on all manner of Vegas club and food scene happenings, sightings, etc. He desperately wanted to get onto the Party At The Palms With Perez symposium on celebrity journalism that we at the "The Strip" podcast organized at the Palms' ghostbar in January that included Perez Hilton, Norm Clarke, Robin Leach and Kate Bennett, but some of the other panelists refused to appear if he was going to be involved. Swell guy.

Today, Mr. Politz wrote a long paragraph about my coverage of Las Vegas in the current Conde Nast Traveler, which features the vaunted Hot List. That is, a worldwide listing and write-up of the best of the prior year's new restaurants, hotels, nightclubs and spas.

The operative word there is "new." Altogether now: New. We spotlighted out of Vegas in this year's edition Nove, Rao's and Guy Savoy for restaurants; the spas at Caesars and Red Rock; the Playboy Club/Moon bar for nightclubs; and the Red Rock Resort and Casino for hotels.

Politz's critique is the same as it was last year, based on a persistent inability to comprehend that this list is not a citywide verdict but only a commentary on this particular year's best of the newest:

"It's a seemingly odd bunch with some glaring omissions and somehow only touches three properties in the entire city. Oh well, perhaps the editorial and advertising departments are taking their lunch a little too closely together. ... While we appreciate the attention the magazine is bringing to Las Vegas, we just ask them to widen their scope next time around."

While I can -- and have -- argued for the inclusion of more new restaurants, the fact that Vegas got three when a town like Chicago only got two and the gastronomic Mecca of San Francisco got four out of the total of 95 worldwide is some evidence that my effort to represent this city's amazing food scene is starting to pay off. It was actually more of a challenge the year before because Wynn Las Vegas had just opened and I could have done four on their restaurants alone but had to be very selective in order to give Joel Robuchon at MGM Grand his props, too.

Anyhow, the point of this rant is that I explained that to Politz last year when he made similar snarks. So this year, there's no excuse. He's just willfully ignorant. And that drives me bananas.

By the way, if you want to hear the audio from the superb panel discussion that Politz was not involved with and therefore chose not to cover, click here or save it to your computer by right-clicking here.