The local media reporter for the MinnPost, David Brauer, has published an article titled "The Conflict Column", in which he explains why he has not covered the WCAL issue. The reason?
His wife, Sarah Duniway, is one of the Gray Plant Mooty attorneys representing St. Olaf College as a respondent in SaveWCAL's Petition to Redress Breach of Trust which is currently before the Minnesota Court of Appeals. They have discussed the case with each other.
Brauer wrote the column primarily because his wife represented Minneapolis Mayor R. T. Rybak and the RT for Minneapolis Committee in a failed case before the Minnesota Campaign Finance and Public Disclosure Board and her name appears multiple times in the Board's recent ruling (pdf). The Minnesota Independent reported on the Board's decision in their article "Rybak slapped: Campaign-finance board says mayor polled for guv race".
Later in his own article, Brauer writes:
Thankfully, Sarah is not a media lawyer, though one of her cases has affected what I cover. She’s part of a team defending St. Olaf College in a lawsuit brought by fans of WCAL, the religious and classical radio station MPR bought and turned into The Current. I’ve told my editors I can’t write about the WCAL case, mostly because Sarah and I have talked about that one over the dinner table. (The long-running case is quite public.) I've forwarded any coverage requests for my superiors to farm out. But I haven’t told the rest of the world, so consider this belated disclosure. Although Sarah does not represent MPR, the network is involved because the group SaveWCAL is challenging the sale.
Sarah Duniway's name does not appear on any of the papers filed in the first case — the St. Olaf College Petition before Judge Wolf — although it is possible that she could have been doing some research in the background.
Her name first appears on the motion for summary judgment filed by St. Olaf on October 18, 2008 in the SaveWCAL Petition to Redress Breach of Trust.
{ 3 comments… read them below or add one }
Am I the only one that thinks this is a bit strange? Did David Brauer ever disclose this "conflict" to SaveWCAL? Has he ever written anything about the WCAL case? And why is he coming forward with this information now?
SaveWCAL has been made aware that Brauer had phone and email contact both with individuals in the SaveWCAL leadership and SaveWCAL supporters over the past couple of years. None of these individuals were aware of Brauer's "conflict" until the publication of "The Conflict Column". His "conflict" apparently did not prevent him from publishing news of SaveWCAL in his October 15, 2008 and April 24, 2009 Daily Glean columns.
Brauer says "I’ve never known all of Sarah’s clients — obviously — and I won’t going forward."
Obviously? What's obvious is that Brauer gets all the inside political info he wants without revealing his conflicts. Some journalist…