Has the city attorney nothing better to do than to harass the local paper?? And on whose directive was the letter to the weekly sent?? I have never heard of a city attorney contacting a newspaper to “question” their activities and motives, especially one who has been in business so long.
Whoever is a subscriber is of no importance to the attorney nor the city. I subscribe to the San Jose Mercury and I do not think my address is important to them until it is time to pay, or a delivery is missed. I doubt the city of San Jose cares who subscribes to the local paper!! Where the local paper is printed, who advertises in it, likely even what brand of ink is used, is of no importance to any city attorney. Is this what he is paid to do??? As for the circulation numbers, the Mercury has a larger one, and I wonder did he contact them as well?? Why question anything for the past 36 months??
This is a vendetta against the paper by those who have felt the pinch of truth when it is printed. This paper has been in existence long before the current city attorney was in office. Why all the questions now, and who cares??
