Impertinent questions on the new Hearst shenanigans (part 3)

|
(0)

Email questions sent on Thursday to Chronicle Publisher Frank Vega, Editor Phil Bronstein, Managing Editor Robert Rosenthal, Metro Editor Ken Conner, and Business Editor Ken Howe

Folks:

I have some questions I would appreciate if you (or Hearst corporate in New York) would answer.

As you may know, the Guardian did a story this week on the Oct. 6th Wall Street Journal story on the Hearst subsidiary and prescription pricing. And I have done two blogs on the Bruce blog at sfbg.com.

Has the Chronicle/Hearst done any stories on the First Data Bank/Hearst settlement and story? (Note the AP story in the Houston Chronicle on a link below). If so, could you send them to me? (We couldn't find any.) If not, will you do a story? If not, could you please explain?

Note also the Justice press release below, dated Oct. ll, 200l, with the head stating that "HEARST CORPORATION TO PAY $4 MILLION CIVIL PENALTY FOR VIOLATING ANTITRUST PRE-MERGER NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS, Largest civil penalty a company has paid for violating antitrust pre-merger requirements." Did you do a story on this at the time or later? If not, please explain.

Are these decisions not to publish these two major stories made in San Francisco or with Hearst corporate in New York and, if so, by whom?

Thanks very much. This is for my Bruce blog and perhaps for follow stories that our reporter G.W. Schulz is doing for the Guardian.

Sincerely, B3

The Wall Street Journal
Justice Department Press Release
A tough pill to swallow by G.W. Schulz