My op-ed, a slightly different version of the posting that launched this site, runs in the Tuesday paper. I'm expecting it will provoke some reaction from those interested, perhaps even our critics.

I've been told The Inlander plans a story for this week's edition. It will be interesting to see if they bother to talk to me about the review or base their report on second-, third- or fourth-hand accounts.

Meanwhile, I have taken some heat on the choice of the Washington News Council. I received a call last week from an offical representing a regional professional organization upset that our agreement with the council lends it credibility at a time when other news organizations (the Seattle PI at the moment) are essentially boycotting the council's more typical hearings process.

My response, to inside critics and outsiders, is this: There were no perfect alternatives because no one has really done this sort of review before. The council has its issues, to be sure. But the review process is consistent with its purpose and goals and the key players have impeccable credentials. Furthermore, their independence from us and from the council is indisputable.

I have let reviewers know that this forum has been set up and have offered to give them posting ability. But they may choose to pass on the opportunity in the interest of maintaining arm's length as the review unfolds. I can certainly appreciate that possibility. I'll post the response.

steve