I was wondering that too. If they don't have a policy against covering them, why have they covered exactly 0 of Barrett's opponent's events?
 

Glenn was out last week - had an operation on his cancer. I think he is back this week. I think this problem is why the Transcript has been ailing too.

As to covering events, wasn't this the Mayor's official announcement of running? And didn't Alcombright's announcement also get covered?

The problem with the Transcript is that they don't keep stories around very long, and many of them are impossible to find in the archives.

Doubt that this is intentional, just the cost cutting ways of the out of town corporation that owns the damned paper and is letting it decay into irrelevance.

The Topix columns where the cranks and scolds hang out to settle old scores is about the only interesting thing there these days, but most of the posts sound like they were written by high school dropouts.
 

Larry, I do not believe that there is a conscious bias at Transcript. However, there is a strange double standard at times, that is oddly inconsistent.

I know and like Glenn. He's in an impossible position given the decline of the industry, the local paper and now his health. Their beat reporters perform herculean feats almost daily, writing multiple stories while being paid along the lines of a convenience store clerk.

But at the same time, I think it would be a mistake not to hold the paper's feet to the fire when it comes to hot button local issues. They are the paper of record for our city and it is important to treat subject like politics as even handedly as possible, not just for the contemporary reader, but for the sake of the historical record.