Why Did Press Democrat Run Untrue Extortionist Claims Against Hospital on Front Page?

The latest from the Sonoma Independent full article here:

Why Did Press Democrat Run Extortionist Claims Against Hospital on Front Page?

Newspaper Editors Refuse to Answer Questions or Run Letters About Journalistic Ethics of Providing Megaphone for Shakedown Lawsuit

by Jonathan Greenberg
for The SonomaIndependent.org

In one of the worst breaches of journalistic ethics by a major California newspaper in recent years, the Santa Rosa Press Democrat last week used its front page to smear the Sonoma West hospital and its largest philanthropist based upon unsubstantiated, easily-disprovable allegations by a disgruntled former employee bringing a shakedown lawsuit.

The Press Democrat (“PD”) breached a fundamental rule of journalistic ethics by rushing to publish damaging allegations as front-page news. The headline, “Lawsuit: Hospital donor dishonest” was followed by the sub-head, ‘Ex official Goldfarb says Smith asked him to cook Sonoma West books.”

Neither the article by reporter Martin Espinoza nor the lawsuit itself provided a shred of evidence to support the article’s reckless headlines. Espinoza noted that neither hospital chair Dan Smith nor the hospital itself could comment on pending litigation. Indeed, as any journalist knows, when a person or a hospital is slapped with a lawsuit, their attorneys require them to not talk to the press until their legal response is filed.
Soon after the article appeared, Gail Thomas, president of the foundation assisting the Sonoma West Medical Center (SWMC), wrote to supporters, “It is disheartening that what we view as completely unsubstantiated allegations can be spread in the press because of the filing of a lawsuit and, since the allegations involve personnel matters, the hospital is prevented from readily and easily refuting all the allegations.”

Why did the Press Democrat not wait for a legal response to the incendiary allegations? Why instead did they choose to publish a one-sided story that did not come close to passing a journalistic sniff test for veracity? What was the rush to vilify Smith and disparage the struggling community hospital?

In its opening paragraph, Espinoza’s article misleadingly called Douglas Goldfarb’s shakedown a “whistleblower lawsuit.” At the same time, the article also noted that the former CFO, who worked at the hospital for only six months before quitting, would settle his claim and stop trying to ruin the hospital and Dan Smith’s reputation if he were paid $250,000—or 12 months salary. ‘If they go to court,” Goldfarb’s attorney Daniel Bartley warned, “it will be a lot more.”

In other words, the newspaper delivered the extortionist’s ransom note, price-included, while somehow still calling him a whistleblower.

Any common sense analysis of the lawsuit (which I have fully read) shows the Press Democrat’s headlines to be misleading and irresponsible. The plain reading to a reader of the phrase “cook Sonoma West books” and the term “dishonest” means self-interested corruption. Smith and his wife, Joan Marler, have, as reporter Espinoza well knows, sacrificed most of their net worth, have gone massively into debt, and have had to sell the restaurant they’ve owned for a decade in order to come up with the $15 million in donated capital necessary to reopen and sustain the hospital and its life-saving emergency room.

In addition, Smith has donated two years of his time without pay to manage the Herculean effort of being the first community hospital in California history to close and then reopen. Smith has also donated the electronic medical-records system and related support services for the new hospital.

In spite of these sacrifices, the lawsuit claims that Dan Smith’s true nefarious objective has been to “use SWMC as a vehicle for self-dealing in service of his personal financial interests and the financial interest of his business.”

The Press Democrat’s one-sided coverage made sure to fulfill the claimant’s extortionist intention to not just disparage Dan Smith and his software company, but the reputation of the hospital itself. It repeated the lawsuit’s unsubstantiated claim that the Sonoma West Medical Center’s electronic medical record system, “often produced serious errors that ‘endangered patients lives.’”

There have been no reports of harm done to a single patient since last November’s reopening of the small community hospital. SWMC’s reputation for personal, humane care remains identical to that of its predecessor, Palm Drive Hospital, which Consumer Reports in 2013 ranked as the safest hospital for patient outcomes not just in Sonoma County but in the entire state of California.

READ MORE HERE

It should be pointed out that my brother Dan and sister in law Joan began funding life saving endevors here in Sonoma County decades ago. They funded needle exchange here in Sonoma County. They provided funds for that program because the County was too afraid of the politics even though every metric showed needle exchange could and was saving lives. AIDS was a death sentence at the time. They funded this program long before they had any real financial wealth. After Dan and Joan sold The Master Builder they were asked to help save Palm Drive. Dan had spent weeks in Palm Drive when he shattered his pelvis in a construction accident years before.. Dan and Joan were never billionsars. Their wealth was more akin to that of a professional baseball player, and not a top player. We aren't talking about Buster Posey wealth. It is important to note that Dan and Joan bailed out Palm Drive years before Dan even had the notion of developing hospital related software. It was becoming involved with tryinng to save Palm Drive that Dan became aware of the need for an affordable software system for small hospitals.


Please note the timeline. Dan and Joan first bailed out Palm Drive years before any idea of creating hospital related software.


It has been suggested by some that Dan and Joan's efforts are somehow an attempt to use the hospital to enrich themselves. The timeline doesn't support that nor do past actions. Dan and Joan don't really seem to care all that much about wealth beyond what good they can do with it. We were brought up to value community and social justice above wealth. To better understand my brother Dan and Joan ask yourself how many people do you know who on a middle class income, owning only thier own home and struggling business would step in and rescue and fund a needle exchange program with all the hate telephone calls and legal risks, even running it out of their office in Sebastopol for a time. The awnser is no one. No one else in Sonoma County was willing to do that.

you ask Why did the PD choose to publish a one sided-story?? i don't mean to laugh, but i am!
for all of us on this thread and many others where our "own" interests trump others, i for one have ALWAYS
Wondered why the press democrat chooses to be one sided. my interest, is law enforcement, and the lack of oversight. the Press Democrat for 3 (THREE YEARS) have chosen to give only a one-sided story to the killing of Andy Lopez by Erick Gelhaus or any serious scrutiny of Sheriff Freitas whose runs a dept. laden with lawsuits and just received a scathing report from the Justice Dept.

They ARE a one-sided newspaper. Has anyone ever read stories on their wholehearted support of the Wine Industry, So, if anyone involved in the Hospital, whether pro or con, IF you choose to speak to the Press Democrat- then don't expect to be quoted accurately and don't expect them to not hang their bias out there! then you won't be disappointed and dismayed. i'm just taking a wild guess here :) but i don't think they like WCMC- so they are gonna slam it every chance they get!

I'm sure there were many mistakes made with the hospital. Perhaps, not enough people involved knew or understood just how much $$$'s and energy it was going to take to resurrect and function? maybe, too many smart people-too smart for their own good as mama used to say.

"one of the worst breaches of journalistic ethics by a major California newspaper in recent years" sounds a bit over the top. I mean really, the PD is one of the state's major newspapers? I highly doubt it.
But since you're talking journalistic ethics, or "journalistic sniff test" as you call it, wouldn't that have required you to you note at the end of your Wacco critique that Mr. Smith is listed as a donor on your Sonoma Independent website?
That oversight certainly doesn't mean the bulk of your criticisms are not justified, but such transparency does provide a more fair-minded context for readers.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by Peacetown Jonathan:

The latest from the Sonoma Independent full article here:

Why Did Press Democrat Run Extortionist Claims Against Hospital on Front Page?

---

Re: Why Did Press Democrat Run Untrue Extortionist Claims Against Hospital on Front Page?There are several points and questions to consider on this messy subject.

1. The suit and the attorney's comment certainly sound like an attempt, principally, to extract, almost extort, money from Dan Smith.
2. But then, on the other hand, one has to ask, if Mr. Goldfarb is (was) of such nefarious character why was he hired in the first place? Did Ray Hino not check him out thoroughly? Did Dan Smith agree to his employment? Now this is a serious position one is talking about: CFO of a hospital with a troubled fiscal past. You want someone with a good track record, and you're willing to pay him big money ($150 - $200,000 a year?) because he's that good. Seems like you would really be careful and make sure you had the right person. So why was he fired after 6 months?
3. Incidentally, the same question has to be raised about the Chief Nursing Officer who was fired after complaining about the accuracy of the hospital's data system. Very senior position. Who checked her out?
4. OK. So maybe its all Ray Hino's fault. Let assume he, without Dan Smith's concurrence, made bad personnel choices. But wait! Ray Hino came with a lengthy track record, how many years running a hospital in Mendocino County? But maybe Dan Smith didn't do a good job in selecting Ray Hino. This gets complicated and makes you wonder...

And then there's the Press Democrat and reporter Martin Espinoza. You are trying to sell newspapers and SWMC and Dan Smith are certainly interesting topics. You've reported before on SWMC and Dan Smith,including this one https://www.pressdemocrat.com/home/43...une?artslide=0 So you wouldn't run a story about SWMC and Dan Smith being sued by the former CFO? Of course you would.

Palm Drive and SWMC have lousy track records finding executives and the good ones have usually been driven off (possibly because they were competent) before they could be effective. There have been at least a dozen CEOs there since it became a public entity and Pipeline is the third management partnership. Mr. Smith has had a hand in most of those decisions in some way either as an influential donor or as a member of one board or another.

Additionally, the marketing proposal run out when the "Open Our Hospital" campaign was in full swing has been proposed at least twice before by previous hospital administrations. I think the lipstick tube is empty at this point.

Quote:

---

Posted in reply to the post by luke32:

Re: Why Did Press Democrat Run Untrue Extortionist Claims Against Hospital on Front Page?There are several points and questions to consider on this messy subject...

---

In journalism it's always true that "if it bleeds, it leads." Bad news sells newspapers.