In an article Saturday (February 2, 2013) the El Paso Times wrote “A Socorro City Council member was secretly recorded offering Licon Dairy a $40,000 advertising campaign in exchange for its support of the city’s controversial annexation plan that includes part of San Elizario.” You can read the article here.
In Texas either party to a telephone conversation can record it without notifying the other party. I doubt the council member recorded it. That only leaves the dairy guy unless the call was recorded illegally. That leads me to conclude that it was in effect a setup. The dairy guy probably led the council member on in order to get the recording and to use it to fight the annexation plan..
The Times makes no mention of any law being broken. Nothing is said about any law enforcement agency getting involved. Why would the Times take the bait and write about the recording, thus helping one side and hurting the other?
Is it possible that the real issue here is that the City of Socorro is trying to annex some land that the cabal that is controlling things downtown doesn’t want them to have?
I’m confused. How should I categorize the $9.4 million that the City of El Paso paid the owners of the Times recently? The city got a building and two parking lots for the money. Did the city get anything else? How long does a subscription to the “I won’t criticize your government” service cost? Does the subscription include the Times carrying your water for some period of time?
The Times published a front page article about something that I would rather not have had happen. So far no one has said the conversation was illegal.
I have high hopes for the Times as an institution that helps us to improve our governments. I quote Julianne Schultz: “The assertion by journalists and editors of independence from proprietors and sources is essential if authority for the Fourth Estate is to remain relevant …”.
What about all of the stuff that is happening to us over at the city? Why won’t the Times write about that?
We deserve better
Brutus
elpasospeak 
Gee, Brutus. Do you really have to ask? Intrigue and sensationalism sells newspapers. The corruption angle has been working pretty well for the TIMES over the past couple of years. Now that there is less real corruption to write about, the TIMES is apparently trying to manufacture corruption where it doesn’t exist. Some people are happy to feed them material. The best example is all the hooplah over Councilman Noe obtaining an offer of FREE land from a local developer. No money was to change hands, which might be exactly why some on city council were so opposed to the generous offer from a family that does a lot for the community, but keeps a low profile.
LikeLike