Is Star Tribune purposely burying lawsuits implicating Norm Coleman?

On Wednesday, the Pioneer Press reported that Norm Coleman canceled a campaign event after being confronted about a recent lawsuit accusing Coleman friend Nasser Kazeminy of funneling money to Coleman's wife Laurie through a business he owns.

The questioning, initiated by investigative journalists Paul McEnroe and Tony Kennedy of the Star Tribune, broke the story on the internet as the Minnesota Independent and others quickly figured the basic facts out. The Star and Tribune, although breaking the story, have generally buried in it their newsprint and online versions, as well as inaccurately titling the pieces to reflect Coleman's perspective rather than the news, and shutting down the comment boards. All this while Politico and other national news sources were overflowing with interest in the story.

Could the editor's approach have anything to do with the Star and Tribune's endorsement of Coleman last week, which they really hyped with graphics and a prominent place in both newsprint and online?

Friday I opened the paper expecting the Coleman news to have made front page, only to find it in the lower right side of the Metro section. Online, the headline was changed from "Suit alleges ally funneled $75,000 to Colemans" to "Coleman calls lawsuit sleazy politics," according to the Daily Kos.

The next day, it was the same deal, in the same weird location, with the second article being titled "Coleman calls on foes to 'stop attacking my family.'" To use a quote for a headline, wouldn't it have to be the basis of the story? The new story is actually about a second suit that was filed for the same reasons.

Neither article was given A spots on the website, the only way to find the first one for awhile was to look at the 'most viewed' box. The second article is represented only as a link under a story about Obama and McCain.

According to other bloggers, the Star Tribune first erased, and then began reviewing the comments to the article, many wondering why it was being given such short shrift.

"Due to the sensitive nature of this story, comments will be reviewed before being published."

As of now, no comments have been updated since early 4 p.m. on Friday.

As a side note, the footage of McEnroe confronting Coleman was made into an ad by the Franken campaign and the Star Tribune felt the need to explain that it didn't approve of the ad in a sidebar, both in the paper and online versions of the second story.

"The Democratic Senate Campaign Committee is running TV ads featuring a Star Tribune reporter questioning Sen. Norm Coleman about a lawsuit noted in this report. The video in the ad was filmed without the knowledge or consent of the Star Tribune."

Why the quibbling by Strib editors on such a big story with so many documents?