Cox fires her campaign manager
A Georgia gubernatorial candidate accepted the resignation of her campaign manager Wednesday after he was accused of changing the online Wikipedia biography of an opponent in the upcoming Democratic primary.
Secretary of State Cathy Cox’s opponent, Lt. Gov. Mark Taylor, said Cox campaign manager Morton Brilliant altered an online encyclopedia entry to include a reference to Taylor’s son being arrested for DUI after an accident that killed his passenger.
“We have reviewed the situation carefully and everything I have seen in this short period of time indicates that the posting originated from my campaign office,” Cox said. “I am genuinely sorry for any anguish this incident has caused the Taylor family.”
This is not the first time a Wikipedia entry has caused a flap. Because anyone may edit an entry, the site has become a popular tool among politicians wishing to slam a rival or laud themselves.
The problem is so widespread that Wikipedia has tightened its submission guidelines and set up alerts so that its operators know when Capitol Hill staffers edit online profiles.
No comment.
I don’t get it. Was Taylor’s son really arrested for DUI after an accident that killed his passenger?! If it’s true, I don’t see why the campaign manager is being fired.
Politicos slinging mud in a campaign? Hard to believe. Bully for Cathy Cox for making a stand on this. A lesser politician would have defended his actions.
My wife knows Cathy Cox, and she knows that Cathy would only run a clean campaign. She is not going to put up with mudslinging from anyone in her campaign. She is genuinely an excellent candidate for governor.
#1
Why should his kid’s DUI have any impact on his election?
“Why should his kid’s DUI have any impact on his election?”
None, but we’re not talking about campaign literature that was distributed. We’re talking about Wikipedia. Are you saying a person does not have the right to publish the truth on Wikipedia?!
Let’s turn this story around: “Employee fired for posting the truth on Wikipedia.” Don’t you find that outrageous in the least?!
#5
The obvious intent of the post, regardless of truth, was to smear the opponant. I believe the CM was fired for the intent behind the post, not for its truth – though I have no proof.
Is it fair or not? (Srug).
“Is it fair or not? “
Well, we’ll have to agree to disagree. As I don’t see the posting on Wikipedia as being directly related to the campaign. If he had issued a press release or some campaign literature with the information, I’d agree. But I feel the guy should be able to post any truth he wants on Wikipedia without risking his employment.
However, since he works at the discretion of his employeer, it’s obviously not my call to make!
Attacking your opponent on the issues is fine. Personal attacks should always be off limits, and it can really backfire if a candidate engages in them. It really only works if it’s about the opponent directly and it’s current. A candidate who cheated on his wife 5 years ago is nothing, but a candidate who is doing so now is fair game. Any attacks on family of an opponent is campaign suicide.
They might have hoped this issue would be caught by the press and Cox’s campaign could say “we have nothing to say about it.” What makes the manager an idiot is that anyone could figure out where the post originated from with a little fact checking.
Since no laws govern this situation, it was a judgement call. Cox decided that this behavior didn’t accurately represent the ethics and image she wanted to portray. Maybe she even thinks this distracts from issues she feels are more important. On the other hand, if Tayor had used his influence to get special treatment for his son, that would be another matter entirely because it would be relevant.
“Well, we’ll have to agree to disagree”
Just one more thought and I’m done.
I’m not trying to beat this to death, but do you really believe that the CM of the person running against you posting a personal and no doubt embarrassing family problem on Wikipedia comes under the category of altruistically disseminating the truth?
What struck me was that the bio already had the info on it. The CM just changed the wording to be more blunt.
But, Cox did the right thing, You can’t even give the appearance of doing something sleezy to an opponets family.