Media Monday – February 16, 2009

Can You Believe What You Read? – Part I

Can you believe what you read in your local paper?  How about the blogs?  What about the stuff you hear on the radio or watch on TV?  Unfortunately, the answer is probably no.

What’s worse?  Most of us simply don’t care.

Let’s start off with two examples from that bastion of no facts and biased coverage, Salisbury’s own Daily Times:

In “We Get the Government We Vote For“, reporter Laura D’Alessandro (known far and wide for her detailed research and balanced coverage) tells us why turnout in the last two Salisbury municipal elections is so low.

A study performed by the Salisbury University Institute for Public Affairs and Civic Engagement last year suggested Salisbury make some changes to its election process to bring out more voters, but city government has yet to decide on any major changes.

What isn’t mentioned in D’Alessandro’s piece is that the low turnout in the last two city elections coincidentally came AFTER Mayor Barrie Tilghman and her “Dream Team” of Mike Dunn, Gary Comegys and Lynn Cathcart changed the city voting schedule.  No longer held in November, city elections are now held in April, following a WINTER campaign.

Given that many people are motivated to vote by a combination of media and grassroots involvement (neighbors knocking on your door and asking for your vote), moving a campaign to the dead of winter has a tendancy to drive down turnout.

Instead, Ms. D’Alessandro posits this argument:

Harry Basehart, co-founder of PACE and Salisbury University political science professor emeritus, said in Salisbury it could be the combination of lackluster candidates and a generally satisfied voter population keeping numbers low. He said when residents are satisfied with the delivery of services by local agencies they may not feel voting is necessary.

Sure Laura, that’s it.  Salisbury has become one of the most dangerous cities (per capita) in the nation.  Wicomico County Administrator Ted Shea was gunned down on city streets just a couple of days ago (thank goodness he’s recovering).  Salisbury’s property tax rate now exceeds that of Wicomico County thanks to the grand stewardship of Tilghman and her crew.  People aren’t voting because they think that their city government is doing such a great job!  While totally missing the mark on election turnout, Prof. Basehart manages to provide a superb argument against tenure in our nation’s colleges and universities.

What is also not mentioned in this fictional account of “Life with the Larsons” is that many voters simply beleive that their vote doesn’t matter.  Granted, this year’s city election may well be an indicator as to whether the Obama campaign was a true paradigm-shift in the electorate or merely a reaction against GOP failures nationally.  We won’t know until AFTER the election.

Another great example comes from last week.  In “Letter Pushes Rental Issues In Election Year” D’Alessandro manages to print known lies and ignore facts that were easily checked by two minutes worth of research:

Insley’s letter is not tied to the Salisbury Area Property Owners Association.

“The letter is a political letter, and SAPOA is not political,” Insley said. “This is my letter. I am a political person, so I speak up.”

Really?  Let’s look at Insley’s letter from the last city election.  Insley composed a letter for his tenants and then sent that letter to all SAPOA members encouraging them to send that same letter (or something similar) to their tenants.  While it’s possible (but doubtful) that Insley isn’t doing this during this election campaign, it’s also evident that D’Alessandro didn’t bother checking either.  Google goes a long way Laura.

What about SAPOA not being “political”?  This is from SAPOA’s own website:

The Salisbury Area Property Owners Association has been working for property owners for almost a quarter of a century. Throughout those years there have been many obstacles to overcome (ie; proposals for landlord licensing, increases in property taxes, proposed regulations to address lead paint laws, etc.) and there’s no way to know what we’ll be faced with in the future. That’s why the most important goal I have for this year is to make every effort to strengthen our association through an increase in membership and member involvement. (my emphasis)

Translation – SAPOA is the lobbying arm of the city’s landlords.  Again Laura, try Google.  It’s a marvelous tool.

So far we have given examples that can be explained away by mere incompetence.  Is there proof of overt bias in the print media?  Honestly, it’s tough to prove.  One man’s bias is another’s fact.  It’s not often that you will find someone (like myself) who readily admits to bias.  I make no claim to objectivity.  I merely state that what I represent as fact has evidence to back it up.  My opinions are my own.

However, if we again look at the Daily Times it’s pretty easy to find.  In fact, if we look at the same article, it’s pretty evident:

Ireton and Caldwell are said to buy into Campbell’s alleged tirade to oust renters from residential neighborhoods. Caldwell shares Campbell’s disapproval for Insley’s letter.

First of all, what tirade?  Tirade is defined by Webster’s as:

a protracted speech usually marked by intemperate, vituperative, or harshly censorious language

Even Richard Insley, whom we have already provided evidence that he (to put it kindly) misrepresents facts, does not accuse Councilwoman Campbell of delivering a tirade.  Ms. D’Alessandro has admitted that she put the term in “for humor”.  I can only assume that since D’Alessandro used the word “alleged” to modify the misused noun she is somehow absolved of responsibility.  Sorry Laura.

For starters, if your bosses at the Daily Times cannot afford to provide you with a decent dictionary I can provide you with several decent online versions or I could lend you one of mine.  Second, are you claiming to report news or are you auditioning for Conan O’Brien?  An admitted insertion of a volatile term (without cause) is ample evidence of bias.

D’Alessandro’s claim that mayoral candidates Jim Ireton and Bob Caldwell “are said to buy into Campbell’s alleged tirade”, when looked at from the point of views of both Ireton and Caldwell, are additonal evidence of that bias.  Who said, Laura?  You could have reported that Ireton or Caldwell had taken X or Y position on this issue.  Instead, they “are said to buy into Campbell’s alleged tirade”.

More importantly, to the best of my knowledge neither Campbell, Caldwell, nor Ireton have EVER advocated ousting renters from ANY neighborhood.  I don’t believe that anyone reporting for the Daily Times is so obtuse as to not understand the difference between enforcing zoning regulations and calling for people
to be thrown into the street.  We should ask the paper’s publisher:

Are your reporters that stupid or are they (you?) merely injecting overt bias into supposed news pieces?

Granted, it would be unfair to compare all print media to the abysmal standard set by Gannett and the Daily Times.  No fact checking, no research, and a bizarre belief that simply wrapping a statement in quotes absolves reporters and their editors of all responsibility are not found everywhere.

So what should you, as a consumer of news, do?  You are basically left with two choices.  You can continue to blindly absorb fiction packaged as news.  or … You can try to think critically.  Read more than one account, if possible.  Unfortunately, you don’t have much choice with a lot of local news.  In that event, you can analyze what you read.  Does it make sense?  Is it primarily a series of quotes without the reporter injecting facts on his or her own?  Is more than one point of view offered on an issue that obviously has more than one potential answer?

Whether you read the Wall Street Journal or are forced to read something like the Daily Times, you owe it to yourself not to take one point of view as fact. … unless you happen to believe that most of what you read in the Daily Times and the National Enquirer is true.

Next week we’ll look at the blogosphere.  Part III will cover TV and radio.

Sphere: Related Content