Last week, after quite the active back-and-forth on a post about how Filling Station owner John Hughes accused Edwin and I of payola, Hughes finally responded. Did he give the apology he owes us for his serious accusation? Is his food a bargain? Here's Hughes' note:
It appears the touchy one is you!
There is no need to use defamatory language while representing the OC Weekly.
It seems reasonable to point out to a reviewer who states “I
thoroughly enjoyed my turkey chili cheese omelette” and “The food
quality doesn't match the Filling Stations high prices” to be
potentially contradicting statements. Whereas, your response above
shows a lack of maturity expected from a “professional”.
When we first opened we were constantly approached by OC Weekly to
advertise and in return we would receive a good review. That is just a
simple fact.
Damn straight I'm touchy on this subject, John. Payola, along with plagiarism, is the worst sin a reporter can commit, one so grave I'd be rightfully fired for immediately. And what you pointed out above isn't the original charge you made, which was, “I always found it funny that OCweekly [sic] gives great reviews for people who advertise.” (bold mine, for a reason)
I have little to no idea what the advertising side of our paper does. It's designed that way–you know, editorial independence so readers know what we write about can stand on its own and isn't dictated by ad dollars. I know that the ad folks come and go, are almost always much better-looking than us editorial schlubs, and rarely read what we write. I don't know what black magic they cant on potential advertisers, but it wouldn't surprise me if they promise the moon and the stars. Doesn't matter: what they sell and say have no influence whatsoever on what we write.
Saying this is not mere flapping lips on my part; I already proved my point. You, the non-film John Hughes, on the other hand, has been shown to be talking out of his ass. Don't fight it, John: just admit you have no idea what you were talking about.
