By JIM BROOKS
Nelson County Gazette

(Monday, Feb. 8, 2010, 10 p.m.) — Colonel Michael Masters, a Bardstown entrepreneur, chef, author, bourbon connoisseur, Southern hospitality expert and now, candidate for the office of county clerk, has released a letter regarding the use of his title and its placement on the May primary ballot.

Masters — who has for years been the local personification of a gracious Kentucky Colonel and author of books and articles on Southern-style hospitality and dining — used his usual styling of his name on his candidate filing paperwork: Colonel Michael Masters.

While Masters is indeed well-known in Nelson County and Kentucky by this name, how his nickname is placed on the ballot is carefully spelled out by state law (see my earlier entry on this issue by clicking here). According to state law, nicknames must be placed in quotations and positioned immediately before the candidate’s last name.

In his  letter to Nelson County Clerk Phyllis Mattingly, Masters points out he has been known as “Colonel” since publishing his book on Southern entertaining and hospitality in 2001. Masters writes that he is aware the decision on nicknames and how the names should appear on the ballot rests with the county clerk.

“I understand the proper form by Kentucky statute is: Michael “Colonel” Masters. I would be pleased to use that form of my name should you declare that to be the proper way to place it on the ballot.

“If you decide that I should not use my nickname that every one knows me by then I would be pleased to have my name presented on the ballot as: Michael Masters.”

The Gazette received Master’s letter after the close of business at the Nelson County Clerk’s office, so Mattingly’s decision on how Masters’ title of “colonel” will appear — or if it will appear — is unknown.

The state law regarding titles and nicknames is designed to prevent their use by a candidate wishing to seek an advantage in how their name appears on the election ballot.

To view Masters’ letter to Nelson County Clerk Phyllis Mattingly regarding the use of his title on the May primary election ballot, click the link below.

Colonel Michael Masters – Nelson County Clerk

-30-

By JIM BROOKS
Nelson County Gazette

Kentucky Gov. Steve Beshear just can’t say no to expanded gaming. In his budget address to the Kentucky General Assembly, he included revenue from expanded gaming legislation that hasn’t been approved nor is likely to gain approval. Is this the governor’s political version of football’s “Hail Mary” pass? Or is there some part of “no” that he doesn’t understand?

Beshear’s proposed budget included $780 million in revenue derived from expanded gambling at Kentucky’s horse tracks.

It is no secret that Gov. Beshear has long since given up being governor of the people of Kentucky, and become the governor for the gambling lobby. Beshear’s budget plan sounds like the work of a desperate man, clinging to a nearly impossible — even irrational –  dream of getting his promise of expanded gambling through the General Assembly. Even those in his own party were left shaking their heads after his budget address Tuesday night.

House Speaker Greg Stumbo (D-Prestonsburg) is quoted in the Herald-Leader saying “He’s built his budget on legislation that I assume he has been working on passing.  And we wish him the best of luck in doing that.”

On Wednesday House Democrats met to gauge support for Beshear’s gambling proposal; Stumbo reported there was no sentiment in the House in favor of Beshear’s plan.

In Wednesday’s Herald-Leader, state Rep. Mary Lou Marzian, D-Louisville, called the plan “delusional.”

I couldn’t agree more.

And as if made-to-order, the Gazette’s newsroom received the following Gov. Beshear-related parody of the catchy “I Cain’t Say No” from the musical Oklahoma! To listen to the parody, called  I’m Just A Governor Who Can’t Say No, click the music player below (there’s a few seconds of a music prelude before the verses begin).

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

For those who don’t want to hear the song, the lyrics follow below.

I’m Just A Governor Who Can’t Say No

By A. Nonymous (with apologies to Rodgers & Hammerstein)

I’m just a Governor who can’t say no
Gambling is my favorite thing,
With or without the people’s votes
I’m gonna hear those slots ring!

For a while I tried to build sympathy,
By overstating our financial woes.
But I found that voters don’t believe
An honest politician — heaven knows!

I’m just a Governor who can’t say no
I’ll keep on hammering this cause
More gambling will cure our money blahs
We don’t need to change the stinkin’ laws
I can’t say no!

Whatcha gonna do when lobbyists get chummy,
Start talking campaign money,
Whatcha gonna do?
Supposin’ that he says your support is necessary,
We’ll trash your adversary,
Whatcha gonna do?
Supposin’ that he says that you’re needed on the team
Ignore what your constituents say,
Whatcha gonna do when he talks that way?
Turn him away? Hell NO!

I’m just a Governor who can’t say no
My budget’s in a terrible fix
The racetracks are saying “C’mon let’s go!”
Just when David Williams said “Nix!”

When reporters try to talk to me,
I always tell them gaming lobby crap,
Because their friends fund campaigns for me
And they promise to fill up my budget gap!

I’m just a Governor who can’t say no,
I can’t be subtle or quaint
I ain’t the type whose a saint
Don’t expect me to be what I ain’t!
I can’t say NO!

-30-

By JIM BROOKS
Nelson County Gazette

Thursday, Dec. 31st, 6 p.m. — Like print journalist across the country, I am saddened to read that the publication known as “the bible of the newspaper industry” for more than 100 years is officially dead. Today, the staffers of Editor & Publisher cleaned out their desks, its operation shut down for the foreseeable future.

For parent company Nielsen Business Media, this was a business decision. For journalists like myself it was a sign of a much larger issue.

There’s no doubt in my mind that this was a true business decision on the part of Nielsen. The newspaper industry — particularly large metro dailies – continues to face hard economic times and declining advertising revenues. Even smalltown newspapers have frozen wages and hiring as well as instituted mandated days off without pay.

As readers, we’ve seen newspapers physically shrink in size as publishers seek to cut costs by reducing the amount of paper they use. Advertising-to-editorial copy ratios have permanently shifted to more ads than copy in an effort to have leaner, more profitable papers.

Newspapers’ classified ad sections — once a huge profit center for newspapers — have been gutted in some markets by online sources like eBay and Craig’s List.

It’s easy to repeat the mantra that has crossed my lips repeatedly for more than 15 years: “Newspapers just don’t get the Internet.”

In the early days, this was largely true.

Back in 1995, when the corporate parent of my newspaper was setting up some of its holdings as dial-up Internet Service Providers (ISPs), I was ecstatic. I had been a not-so-quiet lobbyist for entering the age of electronic media, and this ISP venture would be the county’s first local dial-up Internet access. It was admittedly a very progressive move for a newspaper company.

But the newspapers’ managers didn’t see it that way.

The business plan was for each newspaper to create a “brand” for its Internet business – a brand that would be tied directly to the newspaper. This would give it instant credibility that comes with being tied to a trusted name in the community — and what entity is more trusted than the local newspaper?

But at my newspaper managers were suspicious. Weren’t the majority of the news stories about that “Internet thing” always bad? Wasn’t it risky to tie the newspaper’s reputation to something so … unknown (and possibly sinister) as the Internet? The die was cast, and the decision made: Instead of branding the ISP business and making it its own (as did the other sites), the newspaper avoided mention of any relationship between it and the Internet business. Even the first newspaper ads for the service purposely failed to mention a connection with the newspaper. While corporate suits later squawked about it  –  and a disclaimer noting the relationship later added — it was indicative of things to come.

Management’s support for the ISP venture was tepid at best. An April 1996 WIRED magazine article that parodied a future issue of Time Magazine citing the death of the Internet (click here to read “The Great Web Wipeout”) didn’t help matters. The article caused a lot of worried murmuring among managers, who never understood it was satire or noticed the month of publication.

Like all new technologies, there’s a learning curve and a period where you wonder “what the heck can I do with this now?” Fifteen years later, newspaper managers and corporate suits certainly “get it,” and they understand the Unversal Truth: What has worked for decades to make money in the printed newspaper industry doesn’t translate directly to the Internet.

To be sure, advertising is still advertising and revenue is created from the sale of it, both in print and on a web site. And news is still news, and still in demand. With readership coming from outside the printed pages, the hunger for news has increased exponentially in the digital age. It’s easy to see that it isn’t journalism that’s been in decline the past few years, it’s the paper medium on which it is printed.

Newspapers still haven’t found a way to translate the newspaper business model into the digital age. The reason is simple – it isn’t possible. This may explain why so many newspapers treat their web site as an item to add value to the printed product.

Newspapers have been trying to determine how a web-based business can support the same management structure and business model that has worked for years in the printed newspaper industry, yet the answer remains elusive. Why? Because the long-established management structure isn’t needed in the age of digital newsgathering. Instead of trying to change the Web to fit their profit and organizational structure, the question newspapers should ask is: “How do we change our business structure to succeed in the digital age?”

Rather than adapt its business model, Nielsen simply discontinued Editor & Publisher. And while the printed magazine may no longer be worth continuing, there’s no question in its readers’ minds that news about the print journalism business will always be in demand. It is worth covering, and for the right group willing to drop the old print business paradigm, it may even be profitable.

Locally, the news media is in no real danger of going away. There will always be a demand for news. What really is at stake here isn’t the demand, but the provider. And unfortunately for the print newspaper industry, the Barbarians are at the gate.

One of the biggest threats to smalltown newspapers is a web site called Topix. Topix is a news aggregator that automatically collects news stories and displays the content on web sites targeting a specific community — like Bardstown. But the real power – and threat — of Topix isn’t just the newsgathering, it’s the community it is creating.

Topix reminds me of a biker bar I used to frequent in Jasper, Ind. It was a fairly wild and wooly place at times; you heard the damnedest rumors, most of which were rooted in fact. The forums on Topix are much the same, complete with the digital-age equivalent of barroom brawls, hair-pulling and shouting matches.

Topix is creating a name as a place to go online to find out what’s going on in the community. In Topix forums they don’t just discuss the recently published news, but also the news that’s just happened. With real-time online reporting and discussion of news by those who see it, the real threat to the print newspaper is the usurping of its entire news franchise.

As we enter the second decade of the 21st Century, it might be time for some bold thinking: It’s time to change the relationship between newspapers and their web sites. Instead of the web adding value to the print edition, it is time to put the web first, using the newspaper as a vehicle to add value to the online product.

It may sound like a far-fetched idea, but it would achieve two important goals: The first is to meet the needs of a growing community who find a printed newspaper no longer relevant to their lifestyle; the second is to restore the newspaper’s role as the news authority within the community.

-30-

By JIM BROOKS
The Nelson County Gazette

Sunday, Dec. 13, 2009, 6 p.m. – - With nearly a week to take in all the post-election watercooler talk and speculation from my fellow political pundits, your editor has decided to draft my observations on why Jodie Haydon lost his bid for the 14th state Senate seat last Tuesday.

The simple answer is that state Rep. Jimmy Higdon outpaced Jodie in all but Nelson County, losing to Haydon by a mere 858 votes on his home turf. On last Friday night’s broadcast of “Comment on Kentucky,” C-J political writer Joe Gerth had it right — the reasons Haydon lost are complicated. How could the candidate who outspent his opponent nearly 3-to-1 lose? Below, in no particularly order, are my observations. For more discussion, don’t miss “Brooks & Company” Tuesday, Dec. 15th from 11 to Noon on WBRT AM 1320.

MISSED OPPORTUNITY/INCONSISTENT MESSAGE. Jodie Haydon hit the ground running with an excellent TV spot early in the 35-day campaign. In the ad he spoke about in tough times as a businessman you tighten your belt, and that state legislators should do so too. But in the balance of his campaign and media appearances, Haydon failed to really hammer this point across. In fact, he could have taken this issue away from his opponent had he really gone after it. But Haydon could not have done so without eroding support for expanded gambling. If he lobbied to cut state spending, how could he justify raising more revenue with gambling? As a strategy, he chose to forgo being a strong advocate of cutting the state budget, focusing instead on the need to raise more revenue. His campaign coffers show that he had thousands of dollars in support from the gambling lobby, and they were depending on him to support their issue. His statements were sometimes inconsistent; on my radio show he called himself a fiscal conservative, yet he did not support cuts to balance the budget.

WHERE’S THE GAMING? I think voters noticed that (at least in our TV/radio/media market) Haydon’s campaign ads were noticably devoid of any direct mention of expanded gaming. The truth is that in many ways, this special election was both a referendum on gaming and Gov. Steve Beshear’s not-so-secret moves to use his political power to try to change the balance of power in the state Senate.

HIS OWN WORST ENEMY. I can’t say that I was unbiased in this election, but even some of Haydon’s supporters had to wince at some of the things that came out of his mouth during the campaign.

TOP DOWN GOVERNMENT? During the first televised debate, Haydon told viewers that we need to govern “from the top down.” It didn’t matter to me which man said it, it was a statement that came across packed with arrogance, ignoring that in a democratic republic such as ours the power of those we elect comes from the consent of the governed. This quote surfaced in an ad against Haydon, which was exactly where I expected to hear it the second (and subsequent) times.

PRO-LIFE BLOW BACK. Haydon’s campaign blew it, plain and simple. There’s nothing in politics more devastating than having facts thrown in your face right before the election — facts that dispute the candidate’s statements on TV and in print.

Haydon’s debate accusation that Kentucky Right To Life withheld their endorsement of him solely because he’s a Democrat didn’t pass the smell test the night he said. An ad explaining why the group did not endorse him was subsequently published, and Haydon refused to comment to the newspaper on the specific legislation that Right To Life mentioned in their ad. Note to future candidates: You can’t vote with Pro-Choice Democrats and expect to be endorsed as a Pro Life candidate. When I saw Haydon’s campaign consultant being quoted, I knew they were already in major damage control mode. You can wave away questions from the media, but you can’t escape the truth. Haydon’s attempt to sway voters with his granddaughter’s preemie diaper in the second debate failed to sound convincing, especially in the light of the ads and media reports that followed the debate.

FAILURE TO GIVE OPPONENT DUE CREDIT. Jimmy Higdon’s campaign correctly stayed on message and targeted the main concerns the campaign’s polling indicated: jobs, affordable healthcare and education.

In a televised debate, Haydon challenged Higdon’s assertion that residents of the 14th District wanted to vote on expanded gambling. Haydon’s claim that people had lost faith in their government and wanted gambling rammed through without a vote of the people sounded like “we know what’s best” arrogance. Higdon stuck by his message and didn’t let Haydon’s challenge rattle him. The vote totals shows Higdon’s polling was indeed correct.

THIRD WORLD COUNTRY & CHICKENS. In one of the most bizarre moments in the first televised debate, Haydon gave an ominous warning about the potential impact the loss of the thoroughbred industry would have on Kentucky. As the camera zoomed in, Haydon warned that Kentucky would become “a Third World country.” Topping that remark, he continued by asking “Do you know what our No. 1 cash crop will be if that happens?” With emphatic gestures he answered his quesiton, “Chickens! Chickens!” Surely there was a better way to explain to voters the economic impact than to use the terms “Third World country” and “chickens.” In these tough economic times, does it make sense for any candidate to cry to voters that we need to save an industry – the self-described “Sport of Kings” — when it mostly caters to the elite and wealthy?

FOCUS ON GOVERNOR’S AGENDA. One of the biggest differences between the candidates during both televised debates was that Higdon’s focus stayed on constituents’ concerns, while Haydon’s focus was clearly on an agenda with expanded gambling as its primary goal. That agenda also included Haydon’s attacks on the Senate president; accusing the state GOP of a conspiracy to back standalone casinos and deny expanded gaming to the tracks; Haydon’s refusal to acknowledge the 14th District residents wanted to vote on expanded gambling; and Haydon’s overstatement of the need for expanded gambling at the state’s horse tracks. In the end, he began sounding like a lackey for Gov. Steve Beshear’s agenda.

Senator-elect Jimmy Higdon will defend his seat in less than a year, and all eyes will be watching to see if a challenger from the Democratic party comes out to give Higdon a run for his money.

While not in our district, the next race that will be worth watching will be the special election to fill Higdon’s 24th District state House seat. The Democrats may focus on that race in order to replace the Democratic seat the party lost last week in the 96th House District special election. Once Higdon is sworn-in on Dec. 16th, Gov. Steve Beshear will determine the date of the special election to fill Higdon’s seat.

With the next session of the General Assembly set to start in about a month, there will be no shortage of politics inside and outside of Frankfort.

-30-

The candidates for the special election to fill the vacant 14^th District state Senate seat met last night at the PLG-TV studio in Bardstown for the first of two scheduled debates.

Democrat Jodie Haydon and Republican state Rep. Jimmy Higdon of Lebanon squared off, responding to questions asked by a panel of Landmark Community Newspaper journalists. Other media were not invited to participate (its their sandbox, they make the rules).

A fellow student of politics and I have been discussing the debate since it ended Wednesday evening. His identity will remain anonymous, but this writer believes his observations are noteworthy, and I’ve incorporated much of his comments in mine.

Early in the 90-minute debate, Haydon implied that his opponent has been and will continue to be a “lapdog” for Senate President David Williams.

GAMING. If there was any doubt about this election serving as a referendum on expanded gaming, those doubts were quickily laid to rest. Haydon expressed his strong support for expanded gaming and other effortrs to increase revenue for the state budget.

Rep. Higdon explained his vote against Gov. Steve Beshear’s slots bill was because he believes the people of Kentucky should  have a voice in the decision, and they should be allowed to vote on this issue.

HAYDON FOR GAMING. Haydon repeatedly attacked Senate President Williams for refusing to allow legislation to move forward that would allow expanded gambling. “No doubt in my mind, we are about to make another (budget) cut. And that cut will come in education,” he said. The state has lost opportunity for needed revenues, he added.

He also suggested that the Senate Republicans were blocking slots at tracks as a favor to casino lobbying groups who wanted to keep gambling away from horse tracks. Haydon said Penn National Gaming, a casino and horse track owner/operator and investor, had spent $40 million in Ohio to keep gambling away from the horse tracks. Penn National owns at least one Ohio horse track, and is currently lobbying Ohio’s governor to approve slots at the state’s tracks.

SLOTS  UNCONSTITUTIONAL. Hidgon pointed out the slots at the tracks – referred to as VLTs, or Video Lottery Terminals – were unconstitutional. Higdon was critical of the proposed split on the revenue gaming would generate. “The original bill gave too much money to the race tracks and not enough money to the state.”

SLOTS vs. EDUCATION FUNDING. In a discussion on education funding, Hidgon said he had supported a measure that would have given $50 million to schools; however, after he voted against the gaming bill, the funding was cut from the bill.

Haydon noted he would not have let that happen. “I would have voted for the bill — just for my schools.”

Higdon highlighted his work in economic development efforts in his home county of Marion. With the sluggish economy and projected budget shortfall,  it will be  necessary to cut spending and eliminate waste.

STATE EMPLOYEE BENEFITS. When asked about increasing state employees’ contributions to their own health insurance, Haydon said he would not support that as a cost-cutting move. The state should move ahead on expanded gaming instead, he said, citing opinions by two Attorneys General. Higdon disagreed that expanded gaming was the answer, and that the AG opinions were just that, opinions.

Haydon scored points in the debate at the end of the exchange, saying he was all for cutting spending, but added,“You might ask some of those folks that have been cut (from state jobs) and are looking for jobs.

“I don’t think anything is going to change in Frankfort until we change some of those faces in Frankfort,” he said.

CHICKENS? Near the end of the debate, Hawydon warned viewers of the consequences of the state not allowing tracks to have slots.

If Kentucky loses what Haydon called its “No. 1 signature industry,” the state could wind up a third-world country.

“Do you know what would replace the thoroughbred horse industry as our No. 1 cash crop?” Haydon asked. “Chickens!” he said “Chickens! The Third World is where we are balancing today if we don’t find a way to take our state by the ears and pull it into the next century.”

Hidgon noted he had worked on another of Kentucky’s signature industries: Bourbon. He helped lead an effort against legislation to place additional taxes on bourbon. That effort was unsuccessful.

In his closing statement, Higdon warned that giving the Democratic Party control of both the Kentucky House and Senate was not in the state’s best interest.

“Right now we have a two-party system in Frankfort,” he said. “The single worst thing we could do is have one part in charge of the Governor’s Mansion, the House of Representatives and the Senate. We’ve seen that happen on the national scene, and I think Kentucky deserves a strong two-party system.”

Higdon promised open and honest government. “People don’t want to see us raise taxes, they want us to cut wasteful spending,” he said. “I ask that people look at my record of serving the people of my district these past seven years.”

Haydon told viewers that he wanted to improve the state and asked for their support in his bid for the Senate seat.

“The issues are tough today,” he said. “It’s all about the money, or the lack of money. I ask for your support to take back our government.”

-30-