When the story appeared in the Sunday arts section, the negative response was immediate. Not only the administration, but several members of the orchestra were outraged. On November 22, the newspaper published a letter to the editor from a violist that contradicted Rosenberg’s assessment of Welser-Möst.

The public at large had plenty to say as well—both supporting and attacking Rosenberg’s position. One reader wrote to Goldberg inveighing against what he considered the critic’s inappropriate and biased reviews: “What is striking about Mr. Rosenberg’s reviews is their complete lack of objectivity and fairness.” [1] The reader acknowledged that he, too, disagreed with some of Welser-Möst’s interpretations and found that at times the orchestra did not appear well rehearsed. But Rosenberg’s reviews, he charged, were “mean-spirited, personal attacks.” Goldberg showed the letters to Van Tassel, who shared them with Rosenberg.

MAA reaction . The orchestra administration also weighed in. Nikki Scandalios, public relations director for the MAA, contacted Arts Editor Kappes. After previous tours, Scandalios pointed out, the newspaper had published a roundup of overseas reviews. Why did it not this time? Kappes explained that he had been on vacation and that publishing a roundup now would be too late. Besides, he added, Rosenberg had written positive reviews of most of this tour.

When he got off the phone with Scandalios, Kappes went to Van Tassel. The column bothered Kappes, who felt it echoed the one Editor Clifton had killed a few years before. Kappes reminded Van Tassel that, before leaving for vacation, he had briefed her on the plan: Rosenberg would, as usual, compile tour reviews for the November 11 edition. The column that appeared was not the one they had agreed upon. “Well, I guess I forgot what the plan was while you were on vacation,” Van Tassel said. “I was slammed. I was doing your work as well as mine.” [2]

Later, Van Tassel summarized the discussion for Goldberg, who agreed that too much time had elapsed since the European tour for the newspaper to do a roundup column. Moreover, as an editor and journalist, Goldberg believed that a newspaper should not be beholden to the institutions that it covered. If an organization or a reader had a complaint about coverage, she would hear them out. But she would never let the paper become a mouthpiece. “Our job is not to cover institutions from their perspective,” she said. “Our job is to cover institutions on behalf of the readers.”

Rosenberg defense . On December 4, Goldberg received an email from Rosenberg with the subject heading: “Talk?” He wrote, “I’m sorry if my passionate devotion to the subject is causing you angst.” [3] In his email, he included another email from Richard Solis, a French horn player with the orchestra, which backed Rosenberg. “If you ever find your job in jeopardy as a result of the FWM [Franz Welser-Möst] crap, please, if I can be of any help, let me know,” Solis wrote. He added that he did not “want to see the orchestra go downhill with musical ignoramuses chasing the almighty dollar.”

Goldberg agreed to meet Rosenberg on a Tuesday in mid-December to discuss the outcry, but a schedule conflict obliged her to cancel. The next time they saw each other was at a Plain Dealer holiday party at her house. The matter was not mentioned.

The MAA was also trying to get her ear. At another holiday event, she mingled with prominent members of the Cleveland community, including MAA administrators. “I was trying to meet people at this party, and [MAA President] Jamie Ireland is yapping in my ear about unfair coverage [by] Don Rosenberg,” said Goldberg. “I kind of thought, I didn’t want to hear it right then. It was not a long conversation.”

But in January 2008, she brought up the subject herself. The occasion was a dinner at her house, on the first weekend of the new year, for four former journalism colleagues she had known for more than 20 years. All were nationally known journalists “who in their own careers have tackled every kind of ethical issue, journalistic issue, personal issue, dealing with the community kind of issue,” said Goldberg. They were Clark Hoyt, public editor for the New York Times , his wife, Linda Cohen, features editor with USA Today , Tom McNamara, a top editor for the Philadelphia Enquirer , and Marcia Bullard, CEO and publisher of USA Weekend .

Goldberg asked for their counsel. “I had this strong sense that our credibility in the community was being undermined,” Goldberg said. She felt Rosenberg’s reviews had become predictable and, after the November 11 column, she thought he might in fact be incurably biased against Welser-Möst. At the same time, Goldberg didn’t want to be seen to submit to community pressure. She was considering her options. Should she reassign Rosenberg to another beat? What kind of message would that send to other critics on her staff? The group discussed the situation into the late hours of the night. Goldberg returned to work after the weekend still unsure of what action to take.