When Is TJ Simers Going to Tell Readers He's Suing His Former Bosses at the LA Times?
Let me start by declaring what I always declare when writing about TJ Simers: big fan. (Coker, on the other hand, can't stand him). So that means I actually read Simers, as opposed to the rest of the Orange County Register, because he's actually a good writer (and he remains away from their damned paywall). So I know that Simers has yet to disclose to his readers he's suing his former bosses at the Los Angeles Times, alleging all sorts of discriminatory fun.
Of course, there's no reason for Simers to mention any personal litigation when he's harassing Dwight Howard or trashing Arte Moreno, and his lawyer would probably advise him to stay silent when engaged in a lawsuit (trust us: we know). But Simers hasn't been able to resist bucking conventional legal knowledge and journalistic ethics, trashing Times editor-in-chief Davan Maharaj in two separate columns managing editor Marc Duvoisin--never by name, of course--without mentioning his legal case against the two.
The first column was printed on October 26, in which Simers tried to justify his unapologetic friendship with UCLA football head coach Jim Mora. There, he laid out his case against the Times by claiming they had a problem with his reporting style, which Simers described as old-school. No mention of litigation there. Far more bizarre is today's column, in which he uses the Miami Dolphins bullying scandal to dish further about his days with the Times by calling a sports editor at the Times (head guy Mike James? Presumably so), a "pathetic figure" who Simers claimed was bullied around by his superiors (Maharaj? Presumably so.).
"I thought the sports editor was spineless because he never stood up to his bully boss," Simers wrote. "All he had to do was punch the bully boss in the nose. One punch; and the bully boss would have never bothered the sports editor again."
Any mention of his lawsuit against that "bully boss"? Nope.
The closest Simers has come to mention his lawsuit in his column occurred the beginning of Simers' Oct. 31 column, which begins thusly: "For some reason I just love people who file lawsuits. And win later."
Can't imagine Simers' lawyer is happy this morning after his client's trainwreck of a column. And I'm surprised Simers' new bosses have allowed him to air his grievances against Maharaj and Duvoisin, no matter how thinly veiled, without disclosing his vested interest in making the Times seem like a wreck. Then again, when the owner is busy breaking all those pesky conflict-of-interest rules us semi-serious reporters once took as gospel, are we really surprised?
And now, my own full disclosure: I know Maharaj informally. And I'm a big Simers fan.