What's Really Important Three 49er Comments The Paradise Post Refused To Print
September 16, 2008: “Why do Republicans embrace lies? The McCain/Palin False-Talk Express lies, lies, lies! Palin did NOT say “thanks, but no thanks” to Congress, and asked for and received huge earmarks for Alaska! She’s NOT a fiscal reformer! While mayor of Wasilla, seven times smaller than Paradise, she created a $20 million-plus deficit, building a $13 million sport’s arena! Doh! Wall Street is in danger (as is your retirement), the dollar is dropping. We DO need REAL change! At least give the other party a “chance,” before we lose it all!”September 2, 2008: “Apparently Maria Schulte, you don't know the difference between caring for women and using them. Sarah Palin is a very transparent attempt to pander for female and social conservative votes. When the Democrats didn’t nominate a woman, the GOP backroom boys obviously drooled over each other to nominate just ANY woman so as to appear “progressive.” Shameless pandering is clearly McCain’s strongest political trait! You trust him to be president? Which promises to which group will he honor?”
August 31, 2008: ‘”As you sow so shall you reap.” -- Sound familiar? Recently a James Dobson minion and employee of “Focus on the Family,” Stuart Shepard, asked politically conservative Christians to pray for rain at Invesco Park in time for Barack Obama’s DNC acceptance speech, calling it “boyish humor.” Apparently God didn’t appreciate the humor, as hurricane Gustav approaches Louisiana in time to threaten or alter the Republican National Convention. Prayer isn’t meant for selfish purposes, or as a political weapon!’
The Paradise Post refused to print these three 49er comments between September 2 and September 18. The comment submitted on September 2 was actually submitted twice, and refused both times. The September 16 comment, instead of being printed in the 49er section in the newspaper, was instead exiled for some strange reason to the 49er online version, a place where it was guaranteed to go unnoticed by the vast majority of Post readers. I hadn’t even known the online 49er included comments that didn’t appear in the regular paper. Did anyone?
After having the first two comments ignored, I did query the Post as to why this was so. I was informed that the paper had decided to print only one comment from regulars per week. This sounded plausible, but I have to wonder why I was unable to get any comments posted for more than two weeks, even when there appeared to be space in the paper. At the same time, I noticed some of the other “regulars” appearing in print, including consecutive “letters to the editor” by right wing extremist Brad Jenks. While I couldn’t get one 49er printed, he had back-to-back “letters" appear in the paper.
The paper seems to believe it is comparable to post a 49er on the online version instead of printing it in the 49er column in the paper. This of course makes little sense. Relatively few read the online version, either because they are not on computers, or subscribe to the paper, and read the hard copy, and obviously have no reason to go online to read it again. I sent an email to the editor stating, “... I write comments for the 49er Speakeasy because I wish the whole readership of the paper to see them, and I assume that is why others participate as well. I thought the deal has always been that one is given a limited space to comment, but in turn, one was pretty much guaranteed a space in the paper. I do not carefully craft my comments only to have them consigned to an online version that few read.”
Is it mere coincidence that my comments were either ignored or exiled to online oblivion (as of this moment, a week later, not one comment was posted on any of the 49er comments for that day), especially considering they were all strong criticisms of present day Republican thinking? It is noteworthy this transpired with the rapid approach of perhaps the most important election of our lifetimes.
To sidetrack for a moment, it’s interesting that whereas it appears I was inhibited from voicing my opinion to the press, the McCain campaign is accomplishing the reverse, successfully avoiding the press altogether. McCain has had no recent press conferences, and there is a concerted effort to disallow the press from having any real access to his running mate, Sarah Palin. There might even be a bogus attempt mounting to cancel the vice presidential debate between Palin and Biden, using the present economic crisis as a pretext.McCain claims he has to rush to Washington DC to solve an economic crisis that he assured the nation didn’t exist just one week ago; you’ll recall his remark, “the economy is fundamentally sound.” So of course he feels the need to “maybe” delay Friday’s presidential debate, and “maybe” put it in the vice presidential debate slot instead.
How very convenient that would be; killing two birds with one stone. He can avoid having to debate Obama now, and successfully keep Palin from debating at all, and thus avoid exposing her to the press and the American people! It pretty much sounds like an attempt by the Republican Party to censor what the American public might learn about its candidates for president. Why would they want to do that? It appears that many on the right wing in general want communications stifled during this election cycle!
Meanwhile, back at the ranch… Do I suspect the Paradise Post has a right wing bias, based on the incidences I’ve mentioned, and the inclusion of blatant right wing articles appearing on a fairly regular basis in the newspaper, including that nonsensical column by Floyd and Mary Beth Brown, and a strongly biased article by Michael Reagan? Hmmm! I had also emailed the editor after the Floyd and Mary Beth Brown column appeared, recommending he print a September 3 column entitled, “Attacks, praise stretch truth at GOP convention.” by Associated Press writer Jim Kuhnhenn, which appeared to rather impartially state just a few facts voters need to know. I mentioned it would present some balance to the Post. I received no reply.
It’s one thing to have regular columnists, representing both sides of the political spectrum, appear weekly to voice their own opinions and biases, and quite another if outside articles appear, with any consistency, that are heavily weighted to one side. Do I suspect there is sometimes a tendency to ignore some articles and pieces coming from the left? I couldn't honestly say. Media bias is not unusual these days, and unfortunately has become all to acceptable. I only know that my three 49er pieces didn't make it to print.
I don't know exactly what happened because I never received an answer to my email. From my perspective, the Post seems to be becoming less balanced, while the demographics of the Ridge are steadily changing. Wouldn't it be beneficial for the local newspaper to consider this, and try to represent the views of a wider audience? Isn't that the purpose of the 49er Speakeasy?
Comments
Stephen, I too have noticed the bent-to-the-right change in the Post. I have always been aware that the Editor was conservative but for the most part he kept the paper balanced.
Not so in recent weeks. The conservative articles are more numerous and more Rove-ish in nature. When there is a guest article that leans left is a silly one.
Also, either the people who subscribe to the Post and write in have changed, or the letters and comments are being chosen differently. There is definitely a change in what and who gets printed. So whether the bias is admitted or not, the proof is there to be seen in print.
Posted by: Trish | September 25, 2008 03:02 PM
That is the way I've perceived it Trish. I didn't post this blog lightly. The nation is now in deep doo-doo on many levels. Right now they are frantically meeting in Wash DC in a last ditch effort to salvage our economy. There is no more excuse for not getting everyone's opinions expressed, and hopefully, the real truth, to all the voters. If we don't correct the disastrous direction the nation has taken in the past several years, we may forever lose the country we knew.
This BS partisanship must end, and quickly. We have become a nation governed by politicians being led by their collective noses by both corporations and Wall Street; they are not real leaders at all, and certainly no longer represent "the People."..."United we stand, divided we fall." Never have truer words been spoken, or been more appropriate than at the present moment in our history. The nation is divided, and falling, and had better get united sooner than later. This must begin with honesty in both government and the MEDIA!
Posted by: Stephen Rose | September 25, 2008 03:23 PM
It seems to me that honesty in the media helps to preserve honesty in government. Over the years we closed our eyes to the progressive consolidation of media which in essence destroyed the free press. A corporate owned press is not a free press. It serves the interests of its owners and shareholders rather than the public interest. It cannot do that and be honest at the same time. The dissemination of misinformation, half-truths and falsehoods justified by achieving a desired end is a poor substitute for honest reporting.
Posted by: Trish | September 25, 2008 05:00 PM
A democracy depends upon a well-informed public. Without that, the chances of losing that democracy looms large.
Any paper that tries to make the news by selecting which stories they will and will not print based on political bias is definitely not fulfilling their duty to inform the public.
Shame on them.
Posted by: Marcia | September 25, 2008 09:38 PM
Why didn't you post my comment Stephen? That would have been yesterday, with an attempt at a link. Is there a filter between me and your comments?
doug
Posted by: doug | September 26, 2008 10:38 AM
Sorry Doug, I didn't receive a comment from you yesterday. It must have gotten lost in cyber space somewhere. Why not post it again?
Posted by: Stephen Rose | September 26, 2008 12:57 PM
I too have noticed a decided lean to the right in the Post. For one thing, there seems to be an increasing number of articles on the "letters to the editor" page that come from outside our own community. I always thought a "letters to the editor" page should be entirely made up of letters from those who actually read the paper. I sincerely doubt that Michael Reagan reads the Paradise Post.
I wonder if this slant is something that is coming down from above the Post itself. It's been quite some time since the Post was taken over by a larger corporation. Perhaps they just wait a while before they start turning the screws.
Who knows?
Posted by: Renee G | September 26, 2008 09:28 PM
Hey Stephen, this is Trevor, I’ve been meaning to get back to you. I frequently edit the 49er and I cut the comments if I see your name. It has nothing to do with your political bias or any perceived bias from my superiors. I can assure you I am not a conservative, or a liberal for that matter.
If we are running short on 49er comments then I will run yours. There are others who frequently contribute that I treat the same way. I usually don’t even read the comment. If I see the name of a frequent contributor it’s often cut simply because we want to get as many other people in the section we can. Secondly, you also have a blog on the Post Web site, and while that doesn’t mean you can’t have a comment in the 49er, it does play into my editing decisions. While I try to limit the other “regulars,” the 49er or letters to the editor is their only outlet. You have a blog where you can write at length about anything you want.
As far as the Brown and Reagan and other editor for a day-type columns, those are usually chosen because they fit the space and used when we don’t have any local letters. I don’t really care if they are left or right, if they fit the space they go in. But local is always our preference. As far as your Kuhnhenn submission, we have wire services that we use and don’t take outside submissions. AP is too expensive so we don’t use AP. There’s no bias there. Only economics.
In my opinion the Post, once perceived as a left-leaning paper, has become more balanced. I would like to suggest that our effort to become more balanced is being observed through your left-leaning eyes, giving you a perception that we are pandering to the right. You have to remember that there are right-wing people on the Ridge that view the Post as a liberal rag. So the left sees right-wing bias and the right sees left-wing bias. Sounds like balance to me.
Posted by: Trevor Warner | October 8, 2008 12:34 PM
Trevor, I’m not sure how to interpret, “I frequently edit the 49er and I cut the comments if I see your name.” My household subscribes to the paper, and should be treated as all others. The fact that I have a blog on the Post site should be irrelevant as far as 49er comments are concerned. I spent quite some time in this particular blog explaining why I take the time to comment in the 49er, namely because blog readership is almost zippo, and the only way to be heard by the Post readership is in either the 49er or letters to the editor sections. I understand there must be some deference to “non-regular” comments, but to also be excluded because I write a blog is unjust.
I was disappointed this blog did not appear in either of the last two Thursday issues in the Sport’s Section. It would appear those 49er comments will remain forever unread. Perhaps you wanted to respond to me first? I wish someone had responded in a more timely fashion. I had made several queries to the paper over a few weeks period, and received no response from anyone in authority until now.
I’m sorry to hear the paper merely fills in empty space with any columns that happen to fit; that alone is an opening for unbalanced coverage. Also, the Brown column didn’t appear in the letter’s section, but on the editorial page, in place of a regular column. It was not chosen for content as well?
Trevor, my major object in writing is to share my research and opinions with others. Though I appreciate having been given the blog space, it’s disheartening only a very small audience reads them. Any chance I can write a column to fill in some of that empty space?
Posted by: Stephen Rose | October 9, 2008 08:29 PM
Hey, Stephen, Trevor again. Here’s how it works when I edit the 49er: I go down the list and cut names I recognize to make room for those I don’t. If there aren’t a lot of 49er comments for the upcoming issue I add the ones I cut to fill it out. Simple. No bias. Nothing personal. You get treated just like anyone else. Furthermore, you get treated the same as I treat myself. I used to have a column in the paper for about a year. When I got my blog I kept my opinions out of the paper because I had an opportunity to write whatever I wanted about whatever I wanted. That’s hardly unjust.
Also, I know people read the blogs because I’ll bump into people who say, “Hey, Trevor, I read your column on this or that” then they’ll proceed to tell me they agree or disagree. I’m sure more people read your blog than you think. The tide is turning from print to online. We get quite a bit of web traffic for everything from breaking news, sports, entertainment, classified and, yes, even blogs. Just because you don’t get a comment from everyone who reads your blog doesn’t mean the blogs aren’t being read. Heck, yours generates more comments than the others.
Regarding the opinion page, if one of our columnists doesn’t have a column ready by deadline we get one from the wire. If it’s one of our liberal columnists, we try to get a liberal wire columnist and the same with the conservatives. The conservative Brown wire column that drew so much ire replaced Rick Silva’s usual spot. Of course you know Silva is a conservative.
Personally, I think it would be a great idea for you to write a column to keep things local. It kills me to see outside articles and columns in our local paper. Of course, things are never that easy. There’s always “steps.” But I talked to Silva and he isn’t opposed to the idea. Silva, by the way, won’t cut you just because you are a liberal. He is very much a free speech advocate and cares very much about making sure both sides are represented, regardless of his personal opinions.
Lastly, I don’t recall getting any queries from you regarding this issue. I try to be prompt in my response, but it doesn’t always happen. Especially in these last few weeks as the economy has hit the Post, just as it has hit every other business. Your concerns may have been lost in the shuffle. My email is twarner@paradisepost.com in case you or anyone reading this may have questions or concerns.
One final note: If you want more of your comments in the 49er, submit more often. Or write a letter to the editor (as Trish Purcell has). Some will make it in, some won’t - just like everybody else. No one is guaranteed a spot in the paper, but the more you submit the better chances you have of being printed. And if you get cut, please don’t blame it on right-wing bias. That’s just silly.
Posted by: Trevor Warner | October 10, 2008 07:38 PM