George Boardman: “All hat and no cattle”

(Credit: The Union)

Editor’s note: This is one of the most pathetic resumes I’ve read for a journalist who deems himself qualified to pass judgment on others’ professional achievements as The Union’s paid weekly columnist— whether it’s other journalists or elected officials. Small towns are a hoot!

“Boardman to cover business for The Union
The Union staff
March 22, 2004

“George Boardman, a veteran journalist and public-relations professional, has been named business reporter for The Union.

“In 2001 and 2002, Boardman served as assistant city editor for The Union. He previously served as a copy editor for the Independent Newspaper Group in the San Francisco Peninsula.

“His extensive resume also includes stints as business editor and city editor for the San Mateo Times in the early 1970s. He worked in public relations for a variety of businesses in the 1980s and worked as a public-relations writer and consultant through much of the 1990s.

“In recent months, he has contributed several free-lance articles for The Union.

“A San Francisco native, Boardman is married to Mimi Boardman, a co-owner of the Stonehouse Restaurant in Nevada City. They have one daughter in Portland, Ore.”

The article is here.

Yesterday’s news tomorrow?

The Union posted a “sneak peak” (sic) of the front-page of Tuesday’s newspaper on Monday evening. This blog already had published the news from two of the four bylined articles, as well as shared it on social media:

The sale of the National Hotel, on Sunday:

District 3 Supervisor Hilary Hodge’s first campaign finance report, on Feb. 1:

I hope the staff isn’t looking up to its paid contributor George “Biz Bits” Boardman as its role model for journalism! lol


“Journalist” Boardman: “That was an editor I can related to.” (sic)

Small towns are a hoot! You have a lot of pretenders. George Boardman is a “pretend” journalist. He talks a big game, but never made it to the “big leagues” of journalism. He lacks the skills and experience to be the BMOC journalist. He fled to the more comfortable world of P.R. instead.

On his blog, George pretends to think we care about his review of “The Post.” The movie, as Time magazine explains, is about “the feverishly debated decision behind The Washington Post‘s 1971 publication of top-secret information in the Pentagon Papers comes to life in the new movie The Post, in which Meryl Streep plays legendary publisher Katharine Graham and Tom Hanks takes on the role of the gruff but brilliant executive editor Ben Bradlee.”

It’s a good film, but not good enough for George. “Maybe it’s because I’m familiar with the story,” he brags, concluding: “If you want to see newspapers at the top of their game, watch ‘Spotlight’ and ‘All the President’s Men.’ If you want to see a good story of a woman coming into her own, go see ‘The Post.'”

Then Mr. Wonderful Journalist proceeds to criticize Tom Hanks in the role of Ben Bradlee. “Maybe it’s his good guy image, but Hanks wasn’t as believable as Jason Robards, who played Bradlee in ‘All the President’s Men,'” he writes. OK, whatever you say!

And this is the kicker. Boardman concludes: “That was an editor I can related to.” Huh? I think you mean “That was an editor I can relate to.”

You can’t make this stuff up!

The Union’s “retraction” on “roofie madness” leaves paid columnist Boardman with (more) egg on his face


“What, me worry?” (Credit: The Union)

Regular readers here know that The Union’s front-page article on “roofie madness” — vastly under-reported  and under-edited —  was met with much skepticism in our towns. It was a classic example of podunk journalism.

And sure enough, weeks after a police report was issued citing “no evidence” in the so-called spiking of drinks at Nevada City bars, The Union follows up with, well, the same conclusion. Imagine that! You wonder why it took so long for the followup. (If walls inside a newsroom could talk).

The dumbest sh… (I mean “poop”)  in all of this is The Union’s weekly columnist “Board Georgeman,” (AKA George Boardman), who went out of his way to defend the lame report.

“When is there enough ‘information’ to write about an alleged crime?” this doofus wrote. When there is enough “information” beyond a one-source claim, that’s when.

This week, Boardman launched an unsubstantiated attack on our local hospital, claiming its parent’s merger would be a blow to the community. But he offered no concrete evidence —just like his defense of the “roofie madness” reporting.

When will The Union dump George? Or does it hang on to him because he defends the indefensible? Either way, The Union loses credibility.


The Union should improve its journalism, not just ring bells for the Salvation Army


True Union Believer
True Trump Believer

The Union’s paid weekly columnist George Boardman has become a fierce protector of The Union’s newsgathering practices.

Think of him as the opposite of a newspaper ombudsman and more like a “flack.”

For Boardman, this is par for the course. Despite his desire to be a credible journalist, George has spent more of his career as a p.r. person than a newspaperman. And it shows.

I figure this “brown nosing” is an effort to hang onto his weekly column, which is not that popular, but an ego booster for him.

In the latest example, Boardman is defending The Union’s claims on the front page that “dozens of locals say they’ve been ‘roofied’ at Nevada County bars.”

This conclusion — affecting a wide swath of local businesses — is based on nothing more than hearsay from anonymous people. The Union hasn’t turned up a single toxicology report, videotape, or other hard facts to support this.

It is a reckless approach to newsgathering. But like a bulldog gnawing on a toy squeaker, George won’t let it go.

Instead of “coaching” along the newspaper like a skilled veteran journalist, he touts The Union’s bellringing prowess for the Salvation Army. OK then.

The Union’s George Boardman’s “modest proposal”

An excerpt from George Boardman’s column this week:

“If we’re going to permit just about anybody to buy assault rifles and 30-round magazines, we can expect more mass shooting. And as Sutherland Spring and Rancho Tehama show, any place can be turned into a killing field. Even Grass Valley and Nevada City.

“Which leads me to this modest proposal: As a public service, everybody in the western county with a concealed weapon permit should post his or her social schedule where everybody can read it: What restaurant they’re planning to patronize, what movie they’re going to see, or perhaps a family outing to Western Gateway Park or a concert at Music in the Mountains.

“That way, the rest of us will know what venues will be populated by good men with guns. You know, just in case …

There, don’t you feel safer already?”

Readers skewer Todd Juvinall’s latest column: “Pure idiocy”

We’ve been hanging out in Livermore this weekend where our son has a  volleyball tournament against teams from the Bay Area and Central Valley. We like to expose him to the “outside world” whenever possible.

The Op-Ed page of The Union is a “living, breathing” example why it’s important to expose western Nevada County youth to the  outside world. It often is filled with myopic, provincial, insular, hermit-like voices — and lo and behold, one from Todd “You can’t make this stuff up” Juvinall graced the pages this weekend. When you read The Union’s Op-Ed page from out of town, our little community seems even further away — like Brigadoon for wing nuts.

“I would like to see unicorns and sweet blueberries too, but let’s get real,” provincial Todd writes, framing politics as a simplistic “winner take all” blood sport, sort of like cage fighting. That’s all he knows.

And as predicted, here’s the reader response:

• “Perhaps it is best that your 1992 Assembly bid was unsuccessful. If your view of our laws is that they are designed to ‘hobble Americans,’ then you have no business in our Assembly.” (Todd, believe it or not, was once a county supervisor. His political views are a little to the right of Atilla the Hun. Predictably, he was a one-term supervisor, even back in the heyday of local wing nut politics).

• “Mr. Juvinall’s world view seems to be driven by a ‘winner takes all’ mentality. As humans, driven at our basic level toward survival, we all have an innate need to conquer. But as humans, we also have an innate need to cooperate.”

• “Our founding fathers, despite their passionate differences, found a path that led them to compromise. Today’s winner take all attitude is the result of the extreme wings of political parties having too much power.”

• “Your comment indicates an intolerance for any view that contradicts your own. That is the crux of the problem, partner. By the way, I am not an ilk of any kind. I’m an individual speaking my mind the same as you, Todd. Or, do you see yourself as simply an ilk with opinions that are of no consequence?”

• “His letter is wrought with misinformation and pure idiocy. His comments on abortion are a good example of one individual trying to generalize a belief.”

• “Todd what I read is your rants and lies and your inability to ascertain the difference between what is good for our nation and what is only good for the GOP. True to form you insult when you have no argument. My reading comprehension is fine, but what about your ability to spell and use proper grammar?”

• “Todd you are the epitome of embarrassment.”

As Todd puts it, “You can’t make this stuff up”!