By editorial board • 

Moore needs to come clean on his ugly 2016 campaign

One sentence in Tuesday’s edition required a correction appearing on Page 2 of today’s issue. In a story about Ken Moore’s write-in victory in the Democratic House 24 primary, the News-Register said: “He went on to repeat several of the attacks he launched against Noble during the 2016 campaign, including attacks the News-Register found to lack any basis in fact.”

That sentence is an erroneous assertion that developed from miscommunication between a reporter and editor on an e-mailed statement. In it, Moore blasted a Noble appeal for Democratic and Independent write-ins, saying Noble “failed to mention his support of anti-Democratic values, including sponsorship of anti-abortion bills, voting against access to affordable health care and voting against taking guns out of the hands of convicted stalkers and domestic abusers.”

We apologize for our error. We hope Moore can apologize for his, in return, even though it is two years late.

The “attacks launched against Ron Noble” refers to an eleventh hour electronic and print barrage accusing Noble of disregarding the safety of female Linfield students while serving as head of security. It flagrantly and deliberately skewed facts in an attempt to tie Noble to the growing national issue of sexual violence.

The campaign was created by the Oregon Democratic Party. But instead of distancing himself from what this editorial board called “the ugliest local example of dirty politics in our memory,” Moore doubled down repeatedly — despite having pledged a respectful campaign.

Moore drew criticism from all sides, and rightly so. It cost him any chance to win the race, as Democrats and independents turned against him in force.

He refused to respond to questions from the News-Register the rest of the way in 2016, falling back on often unresponsive e-mail statements. When the News-Register called him to discuss his May 2018 write-in win, he again refused to engage in dialogue, resorting to an e-mail dodging the main point.

Perhaps we too quickly picked up on a tone suggesting any new campaign would take the same nasty course. Our overreach gave his supporters fuel to blast an entity easy to view as the enemy.

Moore continues to be active in local affairs. And his public access TV show is an asset to the community.

But if he wants a second chance, he needs to muster the courage to take personal responsibility for the 2016 debacle and show he’s capable of engaging reporters directly.

Voters won’t forget. If he sticks to politics as usual, they won’t forgive either.



Thank you for acknowledging the error. I hope you don't actually believe that any of those who wrote in view you as the enemy. When you're doing your job right, we're all supposed to be a little mad at you -- I just want to be mad at you for forcing me to see another perspective, not for turning a statement focused on Noble's public legislative voting record into a partisan "attack" from two years ago. That's not a "miscommunication", it's an intentional choice to focus on a different aspect of the story. Your reporter was free to bring up the history between Moore in Noble in other ways in that article - it's obviously relevant to the story - but instead choose to misrepresent Moore's actual statement. Next time, please quote me less, and instead make space to tell the real story.

Web Design and Web Development by Buildable