Questions of taste in connection to obituaries

(Note: I have had this post in drafts for a while. I wrote it before the item about the nasty obituary for Kathleen Demhlow in the Redwood Falls Gazette.)

Should people only be remembered on the upside? It's a re-occurring question in the journalistic world, even the world of small town newspapers. When someone dies and that person had a dubious part in his/her background, so conspicuous we feel we shouldn't ignore it, should it be in the obit?
I remember here in Morris, we had a short front page article about the accidental death of someone who had allegations connected to him. I vaguely recall the details but won't get into that. I didn't write the article but I witnessed some of the highly-charged reaction.
At the time I didn't understand the severity of the reaction. Some of my cohorts thought likewise, that it wasn't that big a deal. I remember them reasoning that the article was factually accurate. So. . .
In those days, us journalistic types could show hubris about such things. The current manager of the Morris newspaper thought the article was reasonable and even praiseworthy. "Journalism" seemed more on a pedestal then, at least corporate journalism which was the type that still prevailed. Today my perspective is rather different. I'm much less likely to defer to corporate journalistic sources. Corporate journalism is just part of a wide mix of information and opinions that are dispensed today.
Non-corporate journalism is not to be assumed inferior. The reader must use discretion. While some of us do that better than others, the overall landscape seems healthier and more accountable. David Hogg and others use this Twitter thing to have real impact. I have not gotten into either Twitter or Facebook. Admittedly I'm a dinosaur who continues doing "long-form journalism." It's my nature.
Another exhibit of obituary controversy, this at the state level: it's regarding the death many years ago of a guy who ran the Minnesota Poll. I was still at the Morris newspaper at the time. The obit for this poor fellow appeared in the Star Tribune. It included with some emphasis the crash and burn the Poll experienced in connection with statewide political races in the late 1970s. That's going back a ways. As I recall the Poll favored the Democrats which fed into the long-time bias meme regarding the media, and let me tell you, the Star Tribune of the 1970s was truly liberal-biased in a way that was clear as the back of your hand. I say this not as some contemporary Sean Hannity type because I'm anything but, as regular consumers of my writing know. The Star Tribune of the 1970s beat its chest in presenting the paternalistic form of entitled liberalism that had currency.
So the public was revolting against that at the time. They revolted against Wendell "Wendy" Anderson, a Democrat once quite in favor, who crashed politically just like some eccentric guy in a wingsuit. "Wendy" appointed himself to the U.S. Senate. Meanwhile he pushed Rudy Perpich up to governor. I once read that if you watched carefully, you noticed that Perpich never finished a sentence. After I read that, I was always distracted watching Perpich in an interview.
I remember when the state media had a big bulletin about how Perpich would start going by "Rudolph." I remember when Perpich made a visit to Morris and I tried reporting his name as Rudolph but Jim Morrison changed it back to Rudy. Jim was right. That "bulletin" was no big deal because the real story was that Perpich was only intending to sign legal documents with the more formal name, he wasn't intending to become the red-nosed reindeer.
In the wake of the obituary for the Minnesota Poll guy, with the non-flattering paragraphs, there was high dudgeon in certain quarters. I had reason to exchange emails with a Star Tribune obit writer, not the one who wrote the obit in question, some time after that. Her name was Trudi. Trudi remembered well the tempest over the obit for the Minnesota Poll guy. She gave me helpful background about this. She said the deceased was part of a good old boy network connected to the Star Tribune. Thus the reaction of umbrage within the hallowed halls of the Star Tribune.
Factually the obit was right on with how badly the Minnesota Poll misfired. But the question is whether the failure should have been part of the obit when the poor fellow died. My opinion now, as we're surrounded with the new media landscape, is to leave people alone when they die. Report on family and cover the guy's basic bio with nothing dubious or notorious.
Which brings us to the subject of Milt Pappas. Guys my age who followed baseball in the 1960s well remember this name: a guy who was a solid if not outstanding pitcher, very consistent over a number of years. Athletes perform in such a fishbowl. We must step back and realize they're human beings. Pappas died in April of 2016. God rest his soul.
It seemed every obit for Pappas included with some emphasis how he was on "the wrong side" of a major trade (allegedly) gone bad. The ESPN article acknowledged this in the first sentence. Those old good old boy friends of the Minnesota Poll guy should know their beefs were not an isolated instance of media behavior.
Pappas appeared in his first major league game when he was 18. He settled into a pattern of reliably winning 15-16 games a year. His career record was 209-164 with an ERA of 3.40. Special distinction: Pappas was the first major leaguer to win 200 games without ever winning 20 in a season. He just missed winning 100 games in each league: his National League total was 99.
Although several players were included in the trade of note, the key figures were Pappas and Frank Robinson. Robinson went from the Reds to the A.L.'s Baltimore Orioles and blossomed into a total superstar over a long time. He won the Triple Crown in 1966. Were it not for him, our Minnesota Twins might have repeated with the A.L. pennant in '66. And Pappas? The myth grew that he was a dud in the trade.
It probably didn't help that Pappas was an early activist in the players union. He sought the role of "player rep" when it could be contentious. Today's players owe a debt to Pappas and others like him. There was a controversy involving how baseball should conduct itself at the time of the funeral for RFK. I won't wade into all the details, but let's just say Pappas picked up baggage, mostly undeserved, that might have fed a meme about how he was the poster boy for bad trades. It was essentially, factually untrue. Pappas was the same pitcher after the trade as he was before.
I view those errant obituaries as a journalistic embarrassment. But such issues are not unusual and can arise at all levels, even our small town papers. Will my obit someday say "Brian Williams, who resigned from the Morris newspaper amid severe duress in 2006, amid a time of rapid change for the print media?" I don't know. I am of a mind now that obits should be private matters, overseen by the family and not turned over to press people or even the funeral home. But I will note that funeral homes appear to defer totally to the family's wishes, so that's probably a non-issue. The prices charged by funeral homes for everything is the bigger issue!
Let's back off and stay simple and respectful with material published at the time of someone's death. A dry biography is called for. In a previous era, the Norman Rockwell era, obits for many women were loaded with details about what their husbands did, as if their husbands defined them, which unfortunately in many cases they did. That's a whole other subject for examination at another time. Thanks for reading.
 
From RealClear Politics, Nov. 11, 2002:
The Minnesota Poll has a long and inglorious history in Minnesota. Most famously, in 1978 the Minneapolis Tribune (as it then was) called all three major statewide races wrong by a wide margin on the basis of its Minnesota Poll. According to the Tribune on the Sunday before the election, the Democratic candidates were about to sweep the gubernatorial and two senate races.
Instead, 1978 was the year of the "Minnesota massacre." The Democrats were routed; Republican Al Quie was elected governor, and Republicans Dave Durenberger and Rudy Boschwitz were elected senators.
The Tribune immediately acknowledged the gravity of its errors and promised to set things right. In 1987 the Star Tribune hired Rob Daves to run the Minnesota Poll and the poll was returned to the newsroom. Daves has continued to direct the poll since that time.
In the past two elections, the Minnesota Poll's final pre-election poll results have proved wildly misleading in comparison with the actual electoral results. In each case, the final poll results have dramatically understated Republican support. The discrepancy between the Minnesota Poll results and actual electoral results does not appear to be random; it has consistently disfavored Republicans.
 
- Brian Williams - morris mn minnesota - bwillhy73@yahoo.com