Koerber-Audette: Economic success must reach all parts of state

By Holly Koerber-Audette

The Daily Advance

82 Comments | Leave a Comment

Northeast North Carolina faces some unique challenges for successful economic development. As the legislature looks to find innovative ways to attract new business, grow existing businesses and create more jobs, it must find a formula that allows for success in all the regions encompassing the State, and that is certainly no small task.

Dear Reader,
This content is only available to subscribers of The Daily Advance print and/or e-edition. If you are a current subscriber and have established a user name and password, you can log in. If you have not established your user name and passwords, click here to set up your information.
To become a subscriber, click here.



As incredible as it may sound, the TDA staff person after seeing me personally attacked by fairnessinmedia shared with me who the person actually is. I cannot divulge who the person is and will not. I am not offended if you do not believe it. It is your prerogative. Thank you for questioning it. I do think we need to refrain from personally attacking others who differ from us politically. I am guilty as well.

Our policy

In response to questions on our website, The Daily Advance does not release the names of subscribers or the pseudonyms they use to comment on dailyadvance.com. A commenter on our website states that one of our staff members had revealed the identity of a subscriber whose pseudonym was used to comment on our website. The staff member, who has no access to the subscription records that would provide that information, was stating what he assumed from unofficial conversations as to who the identity behind the pseudonym may be. Nevertheless, employees at The Daily Advance are not allowed to release subscription information regarding identities for print and/or online accounts and should not be venturing assumptions to the public on these matters. We apologize for the actions of our employee who is facing disciplinary action. — Mike Goodman, Interim-Publisher/Editor, The Daily Advance

TDA must share with us the

TDA must share with us the criteria they use when divulging the names of people that elect to be anonymous. Can anyone just wander in and ask "who is sparatus?" and be told? .....

dorsey harris said the TDA gave him names

TDA, you might want to address this statement. Maybe I am naïve but, I find this hard to believe.

Like anyone

Like anyone DIDN'T know Holly was "fairnessinmedia" and she still is. I'm done with this. You guys have at it.

I fail to see the concern of someone's name.

Does using a pen name mean you don't hold true to what you say? No, it does not. The saying "a rose by any other name smells as sweet" is applicable in this situation. Is Mark Twain any less who he is because he was born Samuel Clemens? This name obsession is silly. If threats or intimidation were involved that would create a problem. Voicing opinions, come on? Even if I told you I was an Obama follower (which I certainly am not) would it matter?

Holly, keep those thoughts coming. Mr. Audette, I am glad you came into Holly's life.

Thank you.

I appreciate your input. I am very glad as well. She makes me want to be a better man. I see her passion for her community, her faith, her obligation to be involved. I watch her disappointment when people are ugly to her because they simply disagree with her politics. I watch people take great joy in trying to discourage her and wish bad things for her. I see how she lives her life and so enjoys hearing others views. I see her sense of responsibility when she rites. The time, the research. I see her personal accountability when she has done wrong. I am so disappointed in the course of today. But, this to shall pass as they say and you my friend, whoever you are, are a welcome relief.

was absolute

FYI: I tried and found that you CAN change your name to post. It was earlier posted that you could not change from an anonymous to your real name. I changed mine from absolute to a name of raregem. Will go back to absolute tomorrow.

You CANNOT change your name using the same account

and have two names. You can only have one name per account. Straight from the Daily Advance this morning when I called and made the request. The only way I am posting in two names is by buying a second subscription.


You are absolutely correct. Tried to edit/add that to my previous comment but I am having computer problems with this site. But though we can change names we can only comment under one name at a time if using one subscription.

I know the feeling.

I have had plenty of the same problems.

I'd like to bring this

to its base. We can argue most of when and what and why for the forseeable future. But for me, it comes down to this: Holly took the consultant's position with Womble's campaign WITHOUT notifying TDA. It doesn't matter when, or how much money she is being paid. What matters is that she DID NOT notify TDA of her position; they had to learn it in the course of an unrelated story. That, my friends, is unethical.


You just keep changing and changing what it is that offends you. The supposed conflict, now the disclosure.The lack of journalistic integrity. Do you have knowledge of the terms of my wife's employment with the Daily Advance? Was it required she tell them she took any other work, particularly a job it was already established previously she could not write about? It was in a public document. Unethical? You sure have no problem making claims and accusations about people. Was it unethical when you publically stated Mr. Womble had violated the law, an accusation against the sitting District Attorney made publically and published? That he had broken the law by not living where you later admitted was simply something you wanted to be the law and it really was not the law? Was that the kind of unethical conduct you speak of? Or is something else you simply want to claim is what you say it is that is the only "unethical" that matters to you. My wife's obligations to her employer under the terms of her employment even though you might want those terms to be what you wish they were, like what you want the law to be, are what she is obligated to. If you have factual evidence she had the requirement you claim she unethically violated, please present it.


I believe I fully admitted my mistake and I believe I called it an "ASSumption" on my part. In other words, I owned my mistake. Would that you could do the same . . . Sometimes ethical conduct requires only common sense.

Common sense

would be an attorney recognizing the very, very serious nature of accusing a sitting District Attorney of violating the law in public, published. That isn't a little oops, oh I am sorry, I am an ass, simple lapse in ethics. It is very very significant. Especially in an election year. Totally reckless. My wife could have chosen to really blast you but you may recall, she was very gracious to you. She also fully disclosed in the discussion she was helping DA Womble's campaign. Interesting, you did not say one single word about that in the discussion. You could have asked her in your private message conversation or expressed your outrage about all the ways working for the Womble campaign was "wrong" because she writes a column for the DA in your posts. If this is all so clear, common sense and serious enough to warrant not allowing my wife to continue to write a column, why wasn't it all those things on that day when you spent all that time in a Facebook discussion with her about DA Womble and how you claimed he broke the law? Interesting she posted that publicly, knowing people read facebook all the time. Doesn't sound like a person who believed she was violating any terms of her employment or ethics, or financial conflict or was sneaking around not disclosing what she should. She posted in a discussion related to a post Mr. Harris made about DA Womble. One of those innuendo type posts that you happily fell right in to and took the innuendo to a claim of breaking the law. She posted knowing all kinds of Lamb supporters were reading and would know she was helping the DA. Would you do this if you were hiding the fact, if you were violating any obligations, etc.? Ethical conduct and common sense? And you want to be the arbiter of such things? Yes, I was there, listening to my wife's distress that in todays age, accusations that are baseless and untrue get published and so many go unresponded to. That it ruins the lives of good, innocent people. That is discourages so many from considering public service and other activities that have a public spotlight. That we should be able to discuss ideas, views and candidates in a reasoned and kind way. I listened as she read me the original post and yours and other's comments and claims and accusations. This is a sad day we have come to in this Country. Forgive me if I think you are the one with no credibility in this discussion.

The funny thing about this is

The funny thing about this is that Ms. Audette's column did not change anybody's mind about how they are going to vote! It is obvious that the political divide is too great for anyone to change their mind.

Holly has a part-time job

Holly has a part-time job with TDA (paying $35 a week). Many, many people have multiple part time jobs. Where is the requirement to inform a part time employer that you've taken another part time job? As I mentioned before - both Holly and Womble were fully aware that Womble's campaign expenditures would be scrutinized by TDA and others. I'm sure TDA scrutinizes all records of all candidates (especially Republicans). As detailed in earlier posts, the agreement between Holly and TDA was an informal, oral agreement - perhaps TDA should have drawn up some kind of contract specifying what could be written about and that should Holly take another part time job she was to inform TDA. Apparently, none of this was done. Subsequently, she has been informed not to write about this one race (Womble - Lamb). Why just this one race? It must be really important to TDA to limit anything negative (even by insinuation) about Lamb ---- and limit anything promoting Womble. Just my take.

TDA staff person informed me who she is.

TDA staff person informed me who she is.


Really!? The Daily Advance allows employees to discuss with people who is registered behind a name used on this paper's website? That is amazing. Ethics anyone!!!!!!Does that make anyone else besides me drop my mouth open! I am flabbergasted! When I called because I could not change my name on line, I was told names are registered to household addresses and emails based on a subscription. If there is more than one person in the household and they wish separate identities to post, you have to have more than one subscription. Same is true if you want to post both anonymously and with your real name.


Why, exactly, do you wish to post anonymously? Serious question.

Why did Clyde Dorsey Harris post under someone elses name,

and lie about it when he was caught?

Here it is.

"What you did in your last post is show exactly why people choose to post anonymously. Anything I wrote under my actual name you did not like you likely would have claimed it was my wife because you disagree with her politically. At least posting anonymously the speculation who is who is just that and much more of a stretch to claim something like you have just done. You believe, you know, it is apparant. Aren't you amazing with all your knowledge. Such crap! I try very hard not to cause that kind of problem for my wife. She takes enough flak for being willing to write about things here. As do others who agree to write a column. She is as considerate of me and it is honestly a difficult balance when anyone is in the public eye".

You must have missed the

earlier post when I told you exactly why and that your responses today were a perfect example of why.


Copy and paste his insulting remarks and share with respectable GOP like our Governor and Andrew Womble.

Name Calling is Very Juvenile!

The person we are referring to is very juvenile with his name calling. I have been encouraged not to directly respond to him as he tears others down and contributes nothing positive. I have also been informed that he, well let me stop there. I have notified Mr. Womble to be careful of whose name is associated with his in the TDA and will continue to copy and paste his insults and derogatory remarks.


Just a comment and not attempting to get into the political arguments taking place, but perhaps the columnist should take a hard look at the current employee/employer relationship. It does not appear that the columnist has shared with her friends and family that she is satisfied or happy with a decision made by her employer -- this is based on comments from her friends and family. If the dissatisfaction is great enough, why would someone that is only making $35 a week want to continue the relationship.

I can see your point

and I have asked her repeatedly the same thing. However others have encouraged her to stand her ground because they see this as an attempt to discourage her by carefully wording things so as to make it sound like she has done wrong. She hasn't so there would be no grounds other than merely political disagreement to fire her. But, if you beat on someone by putting only some facts out to the public and get enough people questioning their integrity, many people would simply say the heck with this and walk away. Then those with the motive to discourage her would point and say that is the evidence she did wrong. My wife defends the newspaper constantly to people and tells them the paper has largely been fair and generous to her. The exception seems to be when it comes to just this race, the DA's race.It appears to be completely off limits and no debate allowed. You can decide whether you think that is true and what motivates it. I only know that my wife loves it here, believes in the bright future here and wants to contrbute in a positive way. She is very strong and doesn't often back down to wrong-doing or unfairness. She in fact personally likes Nancy Lamb and often says so. The public should be allowed to see varying opinions about all races. It is sad the paper wants the only opinions about which candidate is right to come from their editorial. Columns are opinions pieces. readers are big people. They are capable of knowing it is opinion, recognizing the description of a columnist on their own column as political activist and deciding for themselves how much weight should be given to the opinion.

Pardon Me

But it is painfully apparent at this point that "fairnessinmedia" is, in fact Holly Koerber-Audette, and this post quite blatantly violates the rules of TDA. You guys can switch off ids all day and all night and I will believe that every post comes from Holly. BTW, I have been SAVAGED on this forum and I NEVER asked (and would have resisted) my husband to step in and defend me. Face it. She works for one of the candidates -- not just as a volunteer, but as a paid consultant. The very idea of her continuing to write a political column for the TDA is an ethical lapse that is so extreme as to be funny.


Really. Again, what you believe is true does not matter with regards to anyone's rules. Spouses have every right to have opinions and express them. We are not each half a person. We are two legally separate people. Who you believe I am is irrelevant. What would you do to RESIST your husband's desire to defend you. What? Tie him up? My wife never asked me to defend her nor would she. However, she respects me enough to maybe make a request that I refrain but if I feel strongly, she respects me as my own person. Maybe you tell your husband what he can or can't do, that isn't how our marriage works. If your husband does not feel strongly enough to defend you, that is between you two. I do not have a lot of sympathy for your claim you have been SAVAGED in light of all the posts I have read of yours and how you treat people. What you did in your last post is show exactly why people choose to post anonymously. Anything I wrote under my actual name you did not like you likely would have claimed it was my wife because you disagree with her politically. At least posting anonymously the speculation who is who is just that and much more of a stretch to claim something like you have just done. You believe, you know, it is apparant. Aren't you amazing with all your knowledge. Such crap! I try very hard not to cause that kind of problem for my wife. She takes enough flak for being willing to write about things here. As do others who agree to write a column. She is as considerate of me and it is honestly a difficult balance when anyone is in the public eye. Now as to your ridiculous indignation. When someone is in public office, they do not vote on an issue where there is a conflict of interest with them personally. They abstain. They are not disqualified from serving in office simply because in their other life they are engaged in activities that could have come before government. My wife's part-time employer does not allow her to write about her preferences in local elections. So taking a position with a campaign is not a conflict since she is not allowed to write about it. Your standards are ridiculous in my view. You want someone skilled in politics to write about politics but you want them not to work in politics if they are writing a $35 per week column, even if they aren't allowed to write anything about their other job! Tell Rebecca Cross she shouldn't write promoting downtown because that is like a paid advertisement for the downtown businesses that could be buying paid ads in the paper AND she earns her living making downtown successful. That her other paid job helping downtown succeed discredits her opinions about why downtown should be supported by readers. Again, ridiculous in my opinion. This is an issue simply because it is politics and she is not on the paper's side on the issue. Again, my opinion. If her paid position is truly the issue and some imagined conflict, explain Rebecca Cross, Kelly-goss and Bud Wright's columns that have been published? Explain why her article on the DA's race was rejected a month BEFORE she took any campaign position? How can conflict be the objection when there wasn't any and the column on the DA was still rejected-the only piece ever? With all the columns she wrote, my wife sure did a great job not violating any rules if only this ONE was rejected! Rejected before any campaign hired her. This is so obvious when the chronology and facts are looked at it isn't even funny.But, I do not expect you for a single minute to consider it given your own indication of support for Ms. Lamb. I give educators credit for at least looking at the other side. In a household, your newspaper subscription only allows for one name to post on-line. That is the Daily Advance's policy, not mine. I think spouses should be given separate access as should others residing in the household. It is ridiculous in my view you have to buy multiple subscriptions per household. But it is the way it is.

Perhaps this explanation will help

Holly's response to questions from friends: Thank you for asking about this. As you know, the paper does not allow me to respond . Here are the additional facts omitted thus far. I was hired to take Bob Steinburg’s column space. Of course the paper knew I was Conservative. It was an oral agreement for $35 a week. I was specifically told after I asked, there were no restrictions to the subjects I wrote about but I was subject to editor’s discretion. Private business, their right, no issue. I wrote many columns about politics, candidates, races, particularly City Council. All published. I submitted a piece in May about the DA race, a piece about how difficult it is as residents in small communities to personally know and like candidates for office and objectively evaluate who is best for the job. I cited the DA’s race as an example of this and talked about what factors I used to make my personal choice. For the first time, my column was outright rejected and for the first time I was told I could not write about specific races or preferences in a race. I was very surprised to learn of this as a political column but of course, it is their right not to publish anything I submit. In June I accepted a paid political position with DA Womble based on my long-standing history since the 1990’s as a paid political consultant. I told Mr. Womble of my column restrictions which he understood. He was interested in my lengthy experience and track record with campaigns. He included me in his last financial disclosure as required and we both understood clearly that was public record. The newspaper reported on his disclosure, including me on the list as they did Ms. Lambs. If I was trying to hide my role knowing it was a violation of newspaper policy, ask yourself whether I would have ignored this would happen. They never contacted me about the story or my role until Friday, the deadline for my new column that was published today when Mike Goodman e-mailed me and asked me questions like when, where, who etc. If I had violated a policy made known to me, I am sure I would have been taken to task at the time it was discovered when the paper was researching its financial disclosure article. Based on my responses Mr. Goodman reiterated to me that I would not be able to write about the Womble race but we would move forward with my column. If I had violated a policy I was made aware of in advance and underhandedly ignored such a policy, I feel confident Mr. Goodman would not have let me continue writing. Submitted by Betsy Meads

Add comment

Login or register to post comments