McGraw-Hill stays silent...

It's now been seven days since McGraw-Hill left their comment on my blog and many other blogs that were discussing the Patricia Polacco "disinvitation" story. After that, Ms. Polacco updated her statement as well, totally taking the teeth out of most points in the McGraw-Hill statement.

A few times since their initial visit, I have asked public questions of McGraw-Hill. They haven't answered. I don't think this surprises anyone. I don't think they view blogs as a place to discuss the facts, but rather to try and bury the story. Of course, they COULD have said "boy, we shouldn't have hired Ms. Polacco to do two speeches that she is well known for since we didn't know that those speeches were critical of NCLB. Since we're paying for the gig, we'd rather that not hear that, so we'll cancel." They COULD have done that and been totally within their rights, and the story woulda been done. But no. As far as I can tell, they chose the path of blame and spin. It's disheartening.

Maybe I'm misjudging, of course. Maybe they can provide facts that would change my mind. So far, though, they've chosen to speak once then disappear... although I would bet that they visit this blog every day (and probably visit other blogs that have and/or still do speak of this story, as well). What a shame they merely waste their time bopping around the Web, but not participating other than their one try. I can't say if their blog-tactics created more conversation or, as they intended, put an end to the story. Perhaps they know if it was a success... but they remain silent instead.