When I was writing Monday's column about the ongoing Saga of Thomas Manning and the City Council, I knew there was a chance I would get some angry phone calls when it hit the paper. That's part of the game when you're a journalist, but especially a columnist. People are going to call to offer up their opinions. I thought the odds would double since Manning himself didn't return my calls.

But I don't think I ever figured on getting a phone call from his mother.

I'm still trying to figure out what just happened, but the gist of it is this: Someone claiming to be Thomas Manning's mother called me and was very upset about my "malicious" attack on her son in my column.

I hope she doesn't read the reader comments.

I've fielded plenty of calls on stories and columns I've written over the years, but I think this is the first time someone's mom has called up to defend them. Mrs. Manning (or the woman claiming to be) said she simply wanted to know if I knew her son personally, otherwise how could I write such malicious things about him and his business. Her son, she continued, is a good man with a family who loves him and employees who need him.

Mrs. Manning (again, or the woman claiming to be) said that the city does not have the right to tell business owners how to run their shop, and that if her son chooses to babysit drunks then that is his decision.

Not only that, but this is just further proof that there is an agenda in this city to shut down her son's businesses, from the council, the police and the media.

Needless to say, I was thrown off my game.

Rule No. 1 of dealing with calls from readers is to always maintain your composure, no matter what they call you or have to say about your work. I told Mrs. Manning (again, or the woman claiming to be) that while I did not know her son personally, I made repeated attempts to call him for comment and get his side of the story over two days. "Even if he had left me a message saying he's too busy to talk because of work and dealing with the city, that would have been fine," I said.

Sure, I may have described her son as a "sinister, shadowy figure who stalks Wharf Street, enticing young children to sip tequila and luring wholesome and unsuspecting girls to dance on tables for tips," but that was just a little bit of the artistic license...or as I told the caller "just being a little cheeky."

Still, jokes aside, it's hard to deny the fact that this is only the latest development in Manning's public history of run-ins with the city council over how he operates his business. And that, as I pointed out, can create a public perception - right or wrong - about Manning's character.

I'm still trying to figure out what just happened. I've taken a lot of calls about my work, and especially my columns over the years, ranging from the glowing to the profanity-laced. But I do know this one is certainly a first: The first time the subject of a column's mother - allegedly - calls me up to complain about the treatment of her son.

In the meantime, sound off on the column: Fair or Foul?

E-mail this entry to a friend