McGuigan, who called Ed Meese the finest attorney general of his lifetime, casts a wrathful eye on government intrusion into our private lives, unless, of course, we are engaged in sin. In June 1997, Oklahoma City police, at the instigation of a local anti-porn brigade that McGuigan fancies, went to the home of an ACLU executive to seize a video of the Oscar-winning German film, The Tin Drum, which he had rented from the city's library and which the local D.A., an Oklahoman endorsee, believed to be obscene. Dismissing howls of local protest and ignoring the national embarrassment to Oklahoma City after what a federal judge later ruled was an unconstitutional seizure of the film, the Oklahoman, mocking "alleged guardians of free speech," found the local cops and D.A. blameless in the whole affair.

But this all seems rational compared with the editorial page's treatment of gays. Former congressional candidate Paul Barby, a sixty-three-year-old rancher who is gay, tells the story of when he and a lesbian activist came to the Oklahoman to discuss the "hateful tone" of an editorial with editorial writer J.E. McReynolds. After a brief hello in a conference room, Barby says, McReynolds excused himself and returned with two members of First Stone Ministries, an Oklahoma-based group that wants to "save" homosexuals by converting them to heterosexuals. "I'd like you to talk with these people," Barby quotes McReynolds as saying. "I'll just listen."

McReynolds defends his handling of the meeting, which preceded an editorial that printed First Stone Ministries's phone number and urged people to attend its rallies.

But, for countless readers, the editorial page's scripture-based scoldings and McReynolds's valiant effort to save homosexuals reflects their own values. Leonard Sullivan, a Republican state representative from an upper middle class district, speaks for many: "Most of my life I've read The Daily Oklahoman. I can hardly think of an instance where I would disagree with them. I like the articles that attack Clinton and the liberals. Without Rush Limbaugh, it'd be about the only place I could get any news at all. [As for the religious tone of the editorial page], it reflects the mood of Oklahoma. I don't think they're extremist. McGuigan just happens to be a very religious person. I would think all the people of The Daily Oklahoman are very religious, highly moral people."

Many reporters and editors say they enjoy working there. Twenty-year veterans abound. Several note that Oklahoma is a marvelous place to raise children, and that their modest salaries (averaging $30,000 to $40,000) go a long way in the state ranked forty-second in per capita income. Some are embarrassed by the editorial page, while others, much like stockyard workers, no longer notice the smell.

Quite a few reporters say the paper has flown them around the country to valuable seminars, and that editors are working especially hard to improve the staff's writing, which generally lacks the style, depth, and maturity you'd expect in a major market. The paper has done worthy investigations over the years, including a courageous series in the seventies about abuses in the University of Oklahoma football program, which cost the newspaper 17,000 subscribers.

Is there hope for change at the Oklahoman? Being a fat, incurious monopoly has bred both a management and newsroom culture that ridicules critics and rewards mediocrity. There are, however, some talented journalists at the Oklahoman, not the least of whom is Ed Kelley. Every critic I interviewed said Kelley was capable of turning the Oklahoman into a respectable newspaper. "I have nothing but the highest respect for Ed," says former Oklahoman staffer Rieger. "I think he honestly wants to make a great paper."

All that stands in his way is one grumpy publisher.

"The paper is exactly how Mr. Gaylord wants it," says one insider. "It will not change as long as he is alive."

That's a shame, for under Ed Gaylord's watchful eye the Oklahoman has effectively become a newspaper in reverse -- a virulent, compromised beast that sucks intelligence from its readers and replaces it with intolerance, triviality, and false scandal. So inured to "The Daily Disappointment" are many Oklahomans that they simply ignore it, having long ago abandoned hope that the newspaper could ever make them proud.

"In many parts of Oklahoma," says Rev. Meyers, "The Daily Oklahoman is the window to the world, yet it tries to keep us fearful and bigoted. You hear a lot about that Oklahoma pride and spirit, but actually this state has a deep inferiority complex. Still, there is nothing wrong with Oklahoma that a great newspaper couldn't solve."

And nowhere in America is one more desperately needed.

part 1: The Worst Newspaper in America
part 2: By design or neglect
part 3: But Oklahoma City isn't
part 4: Democrats claim
part 5: ...sucking intelligence from its readers

cjr  |  archive  |  resources  |  contact  |  search  |  subscribe