Aides to House Speaker Tom Finneran say the Boston Herald broke an agreement not to divulge the details of Finneran’s congressional-redistricting plan until it could be formally unveiled at a news conference. Herald editors say they never made any such agreement. In other words, a classic he said/she said.

The larger issue, though, is why Finneran thought it was acceptable to give a sneak preview of the public’s business to Boston’s two big dailies (the Globe got the same treatment as the Herald) while leaving out other media organizations (such as, for instance, the Phoenix). Those spurned included regional papers covering areas directly affected by the plan, Finneran’s own members, and the congressmen of the districts in question.

Here’s what happened. Boston lawyer and former city councilor Larry DiCara, who helped draft the plan for Finneran, contacted Herald editorial-page editor Rachelle Cohen in order to set up a briefing with the paper’s editorial board. They spoke several times before the meeting was finally arranged for last Tuesday, July 10.

DiCara says he made it clear to Cohen that the information would be embargoed until Wednesday at 2 p.m., when it would be released at a State House news conference. His " recollection, " he adds, is that he specifically used the word " embargo, " although he admits that he’s not entirely certain. Says Cohen: " The word ‘embargo’ was never employed. Larry did say — and this is a fair quote — that they would be ‘rolling it out at a news conference’ " sometime after the editorial-board meeting.

Finneran and several aides showed up at the Herald on Tuesday morning to find not just Cohen and her editorial-page crew, but news reporters and editors as well. And here’s where things get dicey. At some point after the briefing had already begun — Cohen estimates it at about the half-hour mark — Finneran spokesman Charlie Rasmussen " reminded " those present of the embargo. Cohen says that was news to her, but that she leaned over to Finneran and told him that she had no plans to do anything with it on the editorial pages until after it had been officially released anyway.

Herald political editor Joe Sciacca says he told Finneran point-blank that it would be " impossible " to contain the news. He adds that he neither agreed nor disagreed to respect the embargo, because at that moment he didn’t know what understanding Cohen had reached with Finneran’s office. After the meeting, he says, Cohen assured him, editor Andy Costello, and managing editor Andrew Gully that there was no embargo. " At that point we felt we were free and clear to go with whatever we had, " Sciacca says. Of Rasmussen’s mid-meeting warning, Sciacca says, " There is no such thing as a retroactive embargo. "

There was no such confusion over at the Globe, and deputy editorial-page editor Robert Turner stuck with the embargo — despite what sources say was the importuning of political editor Carolyn Ryan, who’d gotten wind of what was going on and who apparently feared the worst.

The result: a big front-page Herald story on Wednesday morning complete with maps and sidebars. And a lead story in the Wednesday Globe that was at best incomplete, developed from State House sources but lacking the still-confidential information. On one level, it seems almost idiotic that the editorial side of the Globe would let the news side lead the paper with such a story. But obviously Turner was in an incredibly awkward position — one he says he won’t let himself get caught in again. " Given what happened last week, I would not agree to a briefing of this kind, with an embargo, if the folks were going to the Herald, " he says.

So did the Herald knowingly break an embargo it had agreed to? DiCara’s concession that he may not have used the word " embargo, " and Rasmussen’s not mentioning the arrangement until the briefing was under way ( " It might be argued that I made a mistake in that I didn’t lay out the ground rules at the beginning of the meeting, " he says), suggest that it’s not all that clear-cut. The best explanation may be that Finneran’s office left the door slightly ajar, and that the Herald drove a truck through it.

But what of Finneran’s own actions? When the news conference was finally held, Mr. Speaker expressed bitterness at the Herald, and blamed the media for getting the word out before he could inform his own members and the congressmen affected — principally Representatives Marty Meehan of Lowell and John Tierney of Salem, whose districts would be combined under the Finneran plan. But it was Finneran himself who chose to tip off the Globe and the Herald before anyone else could have a look. And given the public nature of the information, that’s inexcusable.

" The Speakers of the House of Representatives have been coming from the 617 area code from time immemorial, and they can’t see anything outside the shadow of the Prudential Center anyway, " complains Lowell Sun columnist Paul Sullivan. Salem Evening News editor David Marcus is more philosophical, saying, " When it’s a matter of a day or so, it’s almost too fine a nit to pick. "

Adds Ken Hartnett, editor of the New Bedford Standard-Times, where Finneran has proposed the creation of a Southeastern Massachusetts district: " It’s very irritating, but you put up with this stuff. It’s also Finneran’s way of trying to get out in front with the Globe and Herald, and shut off all the criticism. He’s a master, but what are you going to do? "

Issue Date: July 19 - 26, 2001