In an editorial Sunday, the News-Gazette shows an amazing disconnect from the reality of what is happening with the Mass Transit District.
It is obvious that they are not following the debate on this website. It is even more clear that they haven't followed the problems of the MTD as covered and not covered by their paper.
They criticize the opponents of annexation with the same canards used by the MTD. But they don't seem to want to get answers to any of the questions that opponents are asking. Why do we need to expand service to areas that don't want it? Why has the MTD doubled their tax rate in the last decade? Why won't the MTD promise to drop their tax rate after the annexations? Why should we be paying for empty buses and big contracts for Volk?
One would think that any of the above questions might merit a little attention from a newspaper. In this town, one would be wrong. The News-Gazette has largely turned into a lap dog for area governments, with a critical eye rarely turned to the business of government.
In the end, the News-Gazette suggests that a mediator be brought in to orchestrate some kind of sit down to get the two sides of the annexation issue to agree. Maybe it's time for us to invite some investigative journalists to town to sit down with the News-Gazette and retrain them on investigative journalism. Then, the News-Gazette can do an editorial explaining why Scott Tapley has to do Freedom of Information Act requests to get information that should be revealed by our local paper.
In an editorial Sunday, the News-Gazette shows an amazing disconnect from the reality of what is happening with the Mass Transit District.
You mean YOUR version of reality.
It is obvious that they are not following the debate on this website.
What hubris you have. This blog might get a lot of readers but so does the NG. This blog is more akin to the letters -to-the-editor. Some good, but it's mostly flakes and nuts ranting and raving.
It is even more clear that they haven't followed the problems of the MTD as covered and not covered by their paper.
Right. The people who write the NG don't read it.
One would think that any of the above questions might merit a little attention from a newspaper. In this town, one would be wrong. The News-Gazette has largely turned into a lap dog for area governments, with a critical eye rarely turned to the business of government.
Lapdog? Pretty charged word.
In the end, the News-Gazette suggests that a mediator be brought in to orchestrate some kind of sit down to get the two sides of the annexation issue to agree. Maybe it's time for us to invite some investigative journalists to town to sit down with the News-Gazette and retrain them on investigative journalism. Again, what hubris. Retrain the NG? Who's going to retrain the NG, your buddies at The Onion? http://www.theonion.com/
Then, the News-Gazette can do an editorial explaining why Scott Tapley has to do Freedom of Information Act requests to get information that should be revealed by our local paper.
FOI requests are standard. The NG doesn't file FOIs and report the results, and that upsets you? That shows the same lack of understanding about FOIs that Phyllis Clark showed when she served an FOI request on the NG itself.
I love reading this blog for the same reason I love reading letters to the editor. Nuttty people entertaining me under the guise of some intellectual or moral authority, but really, just nutty people saying nutty things about stuff they think they know, but are as clueless as small children.
Keep up the good work, you are a real hoot!
OK, please tell me why the NG can't just query the MTD on one item. If this is really about sharing, why won't the MTD use the increased revenues to lower property tax rates throughout the MTD district?
Obviously you missed some of the sarcasm. But, many of us who follow local government are just a little disappointed in a newspaper that can always find space to print a press release from Naomi Jakobsson touting a coffee, but doesn't want to take the time to investigate the practices of our local government.
You may believe that the NG casts a critical eye locally. You would be one of the few.
I don't care a whit about the NG. I pay 50 cents, and read some news. The NG is supposed to be what you want it to be? Then buy a printing press, print your own paper, and circulate it. Until then, you might get a lot of hits on this blog, but most of your comments, and commenters, are just "letter-to-the-editor" types; flakes and nuts.
I can't wait until you start discussing the scientific principles of intelligent design.
"Nuttty people entertaining me under the guise of some intellectual or moral authority, but really, just nutty people saying nutty things about stuff they think they know, but are as clueless as small children."
- Oh look, another self-righteous condescending media elitist. How quaint. Thanks for taking time away from the NYT Lifestyle section to visit!
Of course the NG is a sackless wonder, liberals in this town have known that for years. But don't forget about WDWS and it's complete lack of relevance to anyone beyond the sports fan world.
I worked at a newspaper in suburban Chicago for several years, and one of my good friends used to produce at DWS. These are profit-making businesses. It is not in their best interest to take a controversial stand on any issue of major importance. If anyone in their employment starts stirring the pot too much, they usually refuse to run the pieces or (eventually) fire the individual.
The mentality is geared away from controversy. At some point I was under the impression that the newspapers, or the call-in radio shows were supposed to the centers of heated debate. You know, the sponsors, if you will. Not that the paper or dj had to take a side, but that the debate should be played out in the public forum. For the better of democracy, and all that.
If those days ever existed in this country they are now long gone. Investigative journalism is on life support. It took an independent reporter from the New Yorker (not exactly MSM) to break the prison abuse scandals. It takes a mom with a dead son to stir the War on Iraq debate. The media is absent, or standing on the sidelines calling the plays. It's sad.
It's why you see full page spreads on how to make a pumpkin pie, and small AP clips about the death toll in Iraq. It's why most people flip right to the classifieds. It's a joke.
The blogosphere may be a bunch of "flakes and nuts" writing letters to the editor, but at least we are discussing the issues. That's more than you can say for the NG, DI, Buzz or Hub on any given Thursday.
I'm really wowed by this post. Scott Tapley had his say last week, and now another point of view has been offered. With that, RoW posts this rant going off on the News-Gazette for... what? Presenting two different points of view? Goodness gracious me, the sky is falling.
Mr. Foley,
There hasn't been a competing daily newspaper since the Courier went under in 1979. That's why the News-Gazette is stale, boring, and non-controversial.
It's as simple as that. No need to go nutty and flakey:
"These are profit-making businesses. It is not in their best interest to take a controversial stand on any issue of major importance."
No, when you're competing against another newspaper, that's exactly what you'd want.
You can make a case about media consolidation hurting local debate, but the capitalist system is not to blame.
How can you one one hand promote the business model for anti-smoking, ie, the tavern/bar business should make the choice, not an outside entity, in that case the government, and on the other hand complain that the newspaper isn't investigating and printing what you want?
It's a business. If they want to print fluff, or want to let their employees smoke in the building, or print hard hitting investigative journalism and make their workplace smokefree, what business is it of yours? None, because it's not your business, it is a business owned and operated for a profit, not to assuage your feelings of righteous indignation.
The NG is a small town rag, no doubt about it, but your complaints that the NG doesn't investigate and report what you want is just plain silly.
If you don't like the NG, or the Hub or Buzz, or whatever, don't buy it, and don't patronize the businesses that advertise. Just quit whining about what they, as businesses, decide to print or not print.
Unless you believe in outside control of the media. Who else, or what other nations, believes in that?
"Our liberty depends on the freedom of the press, and that cannot be limited without being lost." Thomas Jefferson
Limiters on the freedom of press to print whatever the press wants to print (or not print) include, imho, Castro. Putin. Kim Il Jung, and...?
So RofW can print whatever RoW wants to print. And so can the NG. Without interference, such as Maybe it's time for us to invite some investigative journalists to town to sit down with the News-Gazette and retrain them on investigative journalism.
Anonymous 9:05 says "I don't care a whit about the NG." Fine. But the NG is the only game in town and those of us who care about this community can't hide our heads in a "buy a printing press" rant.
RoW is accurate in his/her assessment of the editorial. It's like they haven't listened to a single argument. Imagine if ANY other official on a public body spent over $ 41,000 on travel in ONE year alone?
The disturbing part is the NG has been given plenty of information from many sources to investigate MTD on a variety of issues. They have not (or the reporters have have not been allowed) followed up.
The friendships of some at the NG and MTD have been a stumbling block to making this public taxing body accountable, to making it BETTER. Most people want MTD to function but to spend OUR tax dollars wisely. That is not asking too much.
For all the pro-MTD types reading, stop the knee-jerking defense of MTD and look at the budget, the costs, the bloated spending.
N-G said, "Champaign County's version of the Boston Tea Party..."
Remember, the patriots were RIGHT!
I don't have available John Foreman's column wherein he talks about the News-Gazette's responsibility to hold government officials accountable. It does exist however, probably many times over. The News-Gazette can take a fluff approach to local government, but they claim that they aren't doing that.
Matthew, my criticism is not of the News-Gazette's position on this issue. My criticism is that they didn't take a position. They basically opined that we should all get along. I would hope that we would have a paper that would search out the truth and do the reporting necessary to get facts to the public. Asking everyone to just get along is gutless and lazy.
Reasonable people can disagree about the MTD annexation issue. However, no reasonable person (and certainly no reasonable newspaper) should be willfully ignorant of the facts of the issue.
I agree that the News-Gazette has a disconnect. For example, the village of Savoy has a negotiation meeting with MTD (Sept 7 I think). They don't get any credit for calling that meeting.
The paper brought up the tired argument about picking and choosing services like library, park, city, schools, etc. Just how many times do we have to explain that these bodies are accountable to VOTERS? And that MTD is not a life/safety service, like police, sewers.
I loved the part in the op-ed piece that mentioned the MTD "APPEARING to run roughshod" and "PERCEIVED threat".
Even pro-MTDers acknowledge the horrible PR and arrogant comments of Volk, Costello, and Friedman.
Hint to the MTD: if you want a cease fire........cease fire.
Life will go on as we know it without SW Champaign and Savoy's tax grab. Cool off and try again when it isn't so hot.
RoW,
Ok, maybe I'm not understanding the situation. Are we simply talking about an editorial which was in the N-G, akin to the kind that was done when Scott Tapley's guest editorial was published?
If that's the case, then I just see this as giving equal time to two different points of view on the same subject.
It's possible to be in posession of the of the facts of a situation, and still have two parties see the situation differently.
I just find your reaction (and that of others') on here to be over-the-top, if it's simply a case of an alternate point-of-view to your own being presented. Especially when your own opinion was presented previously by Tapley.
"The MTD is a solid system..."
I think the point is the editorial is pro MTD and the only problem MTD has is bad PR.
I mean, "scream in indignation"... "every ill-advised statement or PERCEIVED threat" (I guess it's not a real threat). Those are pejorative comments to the "detractors" (another pejorative).
The newspaper doesn't seem to be looking into the concerns/charges that have come up, regardless of the issue of annexation. That's not over-the-top. That's keeping public bodies accountable.
If that's the case, then I just see this as giving equal time to two different points of view on the same subject.
Matthew: Technically, I believe that the "equal time rule" doesn't apply to print publications from a legal perspective. I could be wrong though, so don't quote me on that.
Also, I after reading the editorial, it was very middle of the road and "let's find a solution" in tone from my perspective. Take that as you will.
Foleyma, please name one local journalist who was fired for investigative reporting
Matthew--
Sunday's piece was an unsigned editorial, meant to reflect the opinion of the NG's editorial board. The Tapley column was a signed guest opinion column. Two very different things on an op/ed page. Were it a pro-MTDster writing a column, one could see it as the paper providing equal time for two sides of a debate. This was the newspaper weighing in on the debated issue itself.
"Mommy, the News Gazette won't tell my side of the story! It's not even printing ANYTHING I like about this! They must be biased there, and IT'S NOT FAIR!"
"Then we'll just march down there and make them!"
Go start your own for-profit newspaper. Until then, if you don't like it, don't read it, or better yet, come up with your own opinions and try to persuade others, but don't try to tell some business what to do, unless you want to start making bars go smoke-free, and you are THAT kind of person.
What do you think, that a newspaper is some kind of public trust? Wrong. It's for-profit, and the marketplace shakes out winners and losers. Or don't you believe that?
Kiyoshi and Left In the Middle,
Thank you for clarifying. I understand RoW's reaction a little better now.
At least the N-G printed Tapley's guest editorial.
hey anon 3:30, the News-Gazette is the community's daily newspaper. You can be as cynical as you like. For us that live in the real world of Champaign County, we should criticize and challenge when necessary.
The News Gazette HAS told sides of the MTD story. But RoW has legitimate complaints about the newspaper's editorial view and whether they are doing enough to investigate problems and budgets. It's one thing to write "he said, she said" articles. Now, how about the NG doing some independent investigation on potential problems, like they often do on other stories?
Hey "another anon",
Listen. Carefully. The N-G prints what it wants, and too bad if you don't like it.
If the NG wants to investigate, fine, and if it doesn't want to, fine.
how about the N-G doing some independent investigation on potential problems, like they often do on other stories?
Get a job there. or buy the N-G. Then you can investigate and write what you want.
Until then, join the protesters who are for/against whatever cause you want. Carry signs, picket, whatever. But stop whining about what a for-profit business does or doesn't do.
Pick up tonight's NG and you will see in the letters-to-the-editor the perfect example of regular citizens with legitimate questions and complaints about the MTD. These are not public officials Joan Dykstra or Scott Tapley, but regular, articulate taxpayers. The MTD throws fuzzy math stats and people want real answers. The point of RoW's post, as I see it, is where is the News-Gazette holding MTD's feet to the fire on straight answers besides "everyone should pay?"
Tolono and Mahomet, this means you're next.
to various anons,
Yes we could start our own paper. yes we could get a job at the NG. Yes it is for profit. However, here are some realities.
People in this community believe that when something is in the paper its a BIG thing. If it isn't in the paper, it's a little thing. The lack of coverage of the MTD feeds into the public perception that everything is going all right.
The purpose of my post was to remind people of a couple things. First, the News-Gazette has never really done any critical examination of the MTD. Second, that their editorial which asked everyone to get along was basically a product of their hands off approach to local government. The NG wants everyone to be nice and get along. There are others out here, on both the right and left, who want government to be held accountable. To the extent that the NG wants to continue their mamby pamby attitude they are welcome to do so. And I, as a blogger, am free to expose them.
Anon 3:30--
A newspaper is not a public trust. But if every third column by John Foreman is going to explain to us why his publication deserves the public's trust and why journalism is a sacred undertaking, he better be able to withstand some criticism, from both sides, of his staff's uninspired reporting and of the wishy-washy stand his edit board is taking.
Your red baiting is antique and lost on me. People have expectations of the media that are divorced from their status as private businesses, and the media play up those expectations at every turn. To complain about the quality of a private business' product has nothing to do with complaining about the existence of private businesses.
Speaking of getting along, it appears that many of our liberal readers LITM and foleyma agree on the quality of the NG reporting. "uninspired reporting" from litm seems to sum up my complaint best.
From my point of view, in my humble opinion, RoW finally understands, and his last post is correct in that vein. He, as a blogger, has every right to criticize. But not to criticize the NG for what it doesn't do, as in the NG's failing to print what RoW, or anyone, thinks it ought to investigate and print.
It prints papers to make money, pure and simple. If its circulation drops because it is so wishy washy, it will realize that, and become more aggressive. Until then, it makes money, and that is what it is supposed to do. And that is all it is supposed to do.
I hope Foreman, or Kachich, or Dey has been reading this., A lot of people want more from the NG, myself included, but I criticize with my pocketbook, not by calling on a business to change its business practices.
I believe (so what what I believe) in the marketplace. If shoe store "A" doesn't carry what I want, I don't shop there. If newspaper "A" doesn't print what I want, I don't buy newspaper "A". What I don't do is criticize the business, whether it is the only shoe store or the only newspaper in town, because they won't carry my shoes, or investigate and print what I want in a way I want.
Again, the NG is a business, not a public trust. And if you think for a second the NG prints every letter to the editor, or prints them when received instead of holding them to print when it wants to, such as when a story gets hot, or when there are countervailing opinions, and if you think the NG prints letters without editing them, you are a little naive.
Liberals in this town have long complained that The News-Gazette is biased and doesn't do any real reporting. That's usually because they side with Republicans on most issues.
Now that they aren't joining you in this particular crusade, Republicans think the Gazette is biased and doesn't do any real reporting. Welcome to the club, I guess.
I'm sure that's right where John Foreman wants his paper positioned -- right in the middle, with nuts on both extremes angry at him.
RoW--Indeed. The NG hasn't told me anything about the quality, or lack thereof, of the MTD's financial management, its policy decisions, or its operational efficiency. And those things, in my opinion, have as much to do with the current state of affairs as the annexations do. We're all still flinging around the same supposition about empty buses and wasted money that we were when this stink started. On-the-one-hand-on-the-other quote mongering and let's-have-a-meeting editorials aren't advancing the debate.
anon 4:42
It is John Foreman and company who have tried to lay claim to the mantle of holding public officials accountable. If he wants to give that up he can do it any time he wants.
Just to clarify: the News-Gazette deserves our criticism and complaints when necessary. Yes, it is a privately held business but that does not make it somehow exempt from criticism of what it does or does not cover. To suggest otherwise is silly. If we don't like what the local paper is printing, we have every right (even a responsibility) to criticize it, and loudly! They can feel free to ignore us, and we can feel free to, uh, buy the DI?
Also, to answer anon's question: I did not claim that anyone had been fired for investigative reporting, but I do know of one case from DWS where an individual was fired because he asked Tod Satterthwaite some uncomfortable questions during the mayoral race. When Tod blew up the guy had it on tape, wanted to run it, was turned down and then it got messy. He was fired (on direct orders from Foreman, I believe).
Competition has nothing to do with moderation on controversial issues. Circulation drives advertising revenues and taking a controversial stand will usually decrease circulation. The editors have elected officials to think of, advertising dollars to consider, and it's readership to keep in mind when it writes editorials.
Which doesn't stop some papers from taking controversial stands, or launching investigative reports into local government. The Tribune is a good example of a paper that realizes it's circulation will increase when it does quality investigative work (see recent Daley scandals). It does not seem to be afraid of tackling City Hall. Though, of course, it usually soft balls cubs management issues.
But that is another story all together. :)
Anon 4:42: Sure the NG holds LTE and edits. So what else is new? That is so much different than Foreman assigning reporters to dig for information. We have the TV coverage for current events and a scratch-the-surface reporting. Supposedly, newspapers can do more in-depth reporting, and should. That's what RoW challenges us on.
True Blue: this MTD thing is not Republican anti, Democrat pro. Not by a long shot.
What's with all these anonymous postings? Or the anonymity of IP, for that matter? Why don't you people have the courage to ascribe your names to your views? If you don't even have that much confidence in your opinions, maybe you should keep them to yourselves.
What's with all these anonymous postings? Or the anonymity of IP, for that matter? Why don't you people have the courage to ascribe your names to your views? If you don't even have that much confidence in your opinions, maybe you should keep them to yourselves.
Mr. Lewis,
If my anonymity bothers you, I apologize. But I'm very comfortable with the accountabilty that we have to our readers, and I don't think my anonymity damages that - in fact, I think just the opposite.
IP
The tone of this thread is really combative, beginning with the first comment. Is anyone really out of line for criticizing the reporting of the NG? I don't think so, and in fact we've been doing so for quite some time. But we're also in the business of making constructive suggestions, which RoW does in his original post and in subsequent comments.
I don't care a whit about the NG. I pay 50 cents, and read some news. The NG is supposed to be what you want it to be? Then buy a printing press, print your own paper, and circulate it. Until then, you might get a lot of hits on this blog, but most of your comments, and commenters, are just “letter-to-the-editor” types; flakes and nuts.
This post, in particular, bothers me. I don't mind if you want to insult me, but to compare the commenters on here (many of whom are among the most astute participants in local politics) to "flakes and nuts" is just unacceptable and downright rude.
Many blogs are, after all, media watchdogs, and I think that's tremendously healthy for our political discourse.
As for the suggestion that we should "go buy our own printing press" - we already have, and you're reading it right now.
Hubris? Maybe, but also reflective of the changing reality of media and the tremendous amount of time and effort we put into this little site. And while we're never going to directly compete with the NG, we're certainly reading each other, and though we're much more opinion- and analysis-focused here, I think we complement the NG's coverage very well, especially regarding local politics.
And since you were so dismissive of this blog and blogs in general, I'd love some suggestions from you on how to improve it.
Thanks,
IP
I have yet to hear a moderate review of the consequences of establishing two new taxing units, Savoy and SW Champaign trnasit districts. Are these two minidistricts the best solution to a real lproblem with the MTD?
Hey, we're getting somewhere! I appreciate Ralph acknowledging a real problem with the MTD. Help the community to identify and solve the problems of MTD and SW Champaign and Savoy won't have to take these drastic steps.
And Ralph will be a hero.
Some good points here. Yes, the News-Gazette absolutely loves the status quo. And yes, Foreman needs to back up his rhetoric with some real journalism. And no, you can't just start up a newspaper and make a profit. That's why it's absolutely imperative to get the current crop of newspapers to do what they are supposed to be doing. That doesn't mean running full pages about pumpkin pie.
And as always, you can't spell wrong without N-G.