You can't read everything you believe in the paper

State Sen. Mark Mallory listens to Councilman David Pepper answer a question at Tuesday's mayoral debate on WCET. (Photo by Tony Tribble/The Cincinnati Enquirer)

At one point in Tuesday's Cincinnati mayoral debate on WCET, Councilman David Pepper criticized state Sen. Mark Mallory's failure to lay out detailed plans, and accused him of changing positions on key subjects.

PEPPER: "Just today I read that my opponent wants to abolish the city manager system, have an executive mayor. I hadn't seen that before. With a week to go, that's an issue in the campaign. You have to lay out exactly what you're going to do if you want to change the city."

MALLORY: "Thank you very much. First of all, let me address something that my opponent said, and you're probably not aware of this but the information that was in The Cincinnati Enquirer this morning on my position regarding the city manager was not correct. We're not certain -- I've talked to the Enquirer, we're not certain where the error occurred, but let me be real clear: I am not in support of changing the city manager form of government, and will not support any effort to do so. I have been very clear, on record, that the mayor of Cincinnati has quite enough legislative power to get the job done. The issue is about leadership. So ignore anything you've heard here today, if you please...."

PEPPER: "I guess you can't read everything you believe in the paper." (The audience laughs at his malapropism.) "That's probably a good lesson, though. I almost fell out of my chair when I read that in the paper this morning as well."

So what happened? The Enquirer accurately reported Mallory's answer to a written candidate questionnaire:

Should Cincinnati adopt an executive mayor system, abolishing the position of city manager?

Yes. It would lead to more direct accountability.

Mallory's answer appeared -- along with those of his six primary opponents -- in a chart published Sept. 11.

The Enquirer asked new questions of the finalists on Oct. 11, and gave each campaign the opportunity to modify their answers to the old questions. Neither campaign asked to change their answers, which were published again in a Tuesday election guide. Just before the Tuesday debate, Mallory told the Enquirer that his published answer was inaccurate.

"Every now and then, a campaign makes a mistake," Mallory said, surmising that someone on his staff cut-and-pasted the answer to a different question posed on another questionnaire. "We made one here. ... The only thing I want to change about city government is to make it work."

But Pepper tried to attach a greater significance to the gaffe. "You can't keep passing the buck on these major questions facing our city," he said. "You can't build consensus if your message is screwed up."