Despite the fact that he updated his old blog’s WHOIS registry yesterday, it had an “Under Construction” homepage throughout yesterday that occasionally put up his old site back up, and he posted a video on Ohio Daily Blog from his’s YouTube channel, Tim informed Eric in no uncertain terms that he does not plan to return to his blog or any other.

We hope Tim reconsiders.  Simply because we couldn’t work out our differences for the direction of the site with him is no reason to walk away from something he’s done for five years.  Regardless whether he changes his mind and decides to return to blogging, we wish him the best of luck in whatever he does.

  • Since it appears you only call a source when you are calling someone on ODP’s payroll, let me clarify.

    My blog’s URL, incredibly, expired yesterday as you guys were cutting me loose. Sublime. Rather than let someone buy it, I rebought it. I don’t know where the content went.

    I’m glad the commitment to journalism here is now so strong after your big personnel move. God forbid you post something that doesn’t actually include anything from the source you’re writing about. And you didn’t even leave me a voicemail, which apparently is the new standard for paid flacks to return a call to someone writing about their employer.

    Guess we just have a difference in style.

  • Oh, and there was no “announcement.” It was in a private email to Eric, which I guess are now public. Good to know!

  • Anonymous

    My god, Tim, you wrote to Eric demanding that we correct it, so we did. Now you’re complaining that we made your request public?

  • Well, if you had called the source before you wrote your post, there would be no issue here, right?

    And the email did not “demand”, anything, in fact, here’s what it said.

    “In the meantime, given your new found commitment to journalism, you might want to ask Brian to revise his post claiming I’m somehow returning to blogging. I’m not. I don’t know how he came to this claim, because he never asked me about it, and is only assuming because my blog’s URL expired (familiar) I will now be writing there again. That logic doesn’t work, is quite a leap or three, and is infinitely more unsubstantiated than the piece you both fired me over.”

    If I didn’t know better, I’d think you weren’t interested in talking to your source, now are you. Maybe you have some sort of “agenda”, or perhaps you are “rageful”. Or maybe you just didn’t have the nuts to pick up the phone. Gee, wonder who else wouldn’t do that when she knew someone was calling about her client. Shoulda left a voicemail.

    Either way, your professed “new direction” is off to a fine start.

  • Anonymous

    Well, first of all, Tim, all I said is that it would APPEAR that’s what you’re doing. I never said it definitively because I hadn’t talked to you directly and made that perfectly clear, and given that you posted a video on another blog that you attributed to your old blog’s YouTube channel, and everything that we were seeing on your site, it was more than justified to say “it appears” you’re in the process of relaunching it.

    Again, Tim, we hope you reconsider, but you need to stop coming here and lying about what happened. We didn’t make a personnel move. You told us in no uncertain terms you weren’t willing to work with us on the site anymore on the terms we all had initially agreed. If you’re regretting what you said to us last Wednesday and then to Eric separately throughout last week, we can talk about that, but we’re not going to sit back while you tell one lie after another about what happened.

    It was your choice, not mine, Eric’s or anyone elses. It’s not our fault. We asked you REPEATEDLY to work with us on resolve this. You responded with “Fuck you.” Now, you’re pissed at us for hoping you continue at BloggerInterrupted? Fine. Sorry we offended you by wishing the best for you.

    Tim, I think everyone seeing your comments can understand why I’m not exactly rushing to the phone to call you. You, of course, have not called me since last Tuesday.

    This is hopefully the last I have to reply to this nonsense. If you regret the choices you made, you can let us know and we can move forward.

  • I don’t regret anything.

    Specifically, I don’t regret never including the paid spin of a flak whose story had changed, had to be asked who her client was, and stopped picking up my calls several times, most recently November 22, for a blog post in which she and her fellow financially interested parties were the subject of a story she damn well knew I was writing about her client.

    That source is your source for your opinion. I have sources for mine. If you’d like to litigate that publicly, I’m quite happy to, Brian.

    But it is you who has made up stories about me, this post, without so much as attempting to contact your subject, ever. As you escort me to the door.

    Different styles, I guess, aren’t they. I must be so rageful.

  • Anonymous

    Grow the fuck up, Tim.

    You asked us to correct it; we did. And for the last time, we didn’t “fire” you over a post. We asked you if you’d agree to work to develop relationships to get people to talk to you so you could develop your stories. You said no, that’s not your job.

    We asked if you could agree to at least present both sides of a story before saying one side was lying. You said no.

    We asked if you would agree to acknowledge the biases of both sides of a story, you said no.

    Tim, writing that it looks like you might be restarting your own blog was not a news story, it was a personal observation so if people wanted to know where to find your stuff they could. Sorry that I was trying to do you a favor and you want to be a dick about it.

  • Sidneyindependent

    I would just like to interrupt this conversation to let you all know you are more than welcome to post on my blog, The Sidney Independent. Small town, small reader base, no money but lots of small town drama. We are currently in the process of getting a recall petition against a crappy sheriff. Any shit stirring pointers would be lovingly appreciated.

    Now back to your post thanksgiving family drama.

  • Anonymous

    Tim, I’m done responding to your nonesence. Your own source called me Thursday, at your beheast, but told me you had taken him entirely out of context. He, too, is a paid flak, something that you never bothered revealing or even considering in writing your story.

    I would have thought the dozen times I said it on our hour and half long phone conversation would have made this point PERFECTLY clear, but you are FUNDAMENTALLY WRONG about who my source was. Regardless that’s not the issue.

    I didn’t escort you out of any door. You said “Fuck you” to me and Eric and stormed out. That’s what happened, Tim.

  • Well, for this story, you didn’t really “work to develop a relationship” with the guy you were writing about, even though you have one.

    You didn’t “present both sides of a story” for this.

    You didn’t “acknowledge the biases” of a story you are writing about the guy you just changed the password on.

    But you did, once, regurgitate the paid spin of a known representative of a subject of a story which you knew I was working on, and who you knew had stopped returning my calls.

    Appears to be a difference in styles, doesn’t it.

  • I have more than one source, Brian. Much more.

    You, however, have one source, the paid client and his payors. Whose story changed. Who’s spokesperson stopped taking my calls.

    This thread should be attached to her resume as evidence she knows how to play two bloggers off each other to a perfection.

    It’s a shame you aren’t seeing that, Brian. But it did get you to up your standards by throwing a friend to the curb. Get that woman a raise.

  • Also, I believe your headline was, “Tim Russo can now be found at Blogger Interrupted”, which if you link to has nothing. So I can’t be found there.

    Now, if I had spent an hour on the phone with the state party chairman, thinking there was a story there, and had instead heard “under construction”, well of course I would come to the conclusion that someone could be found there, why wouldn’t I? I have standards!

    No, what you did was take that one source and use it, in it’s entirety, without a single disputing source, to refute a post I’d spent a week working on, which the party to the story’s paid flak refused to take calls on. All of which you knew.

    We can continue to litigate this publicly if you prefer, Brian. I fully intend to.

  • Anonymous

    For the last time, Tim, you are FUNDAMENTALLY wrong on your presumption of her role in this. I’ve told you this repeatedly. Your sourcing was so great it was contradicted by exit poll data, polling data, and oh yeah, the election data. You seem to forget those sources. I’m tired of arguing to a guy who wants to make this about a post when the issue was your reckless attitude in which you told us you “don’t care” whether what you put out may be wrong.

    Because this comment thread has run its course and has completely moved away from the actual post, we’re closing the comments on this. If anyone has any comments on this post they’d like us to know, just e-mail us.

    (P.S.- Tim, I didn’t throw you to the curb. You quit on me.)

Looking for something?

Use the form below to search the site:

Still not finding what you're looking for? Drop a comment on a post or contact us so we can take care of it!