BlogaBarbara

Santa Barbara Politics, Media & Culture

Wednesday, January 10, 2007

Indy Coverage of NLRB Hearing Continues...

The Indy coverage of today's NLRB hearing continued today -- replete with what everyone was wearing and FDS saying that he/she was Sara de la Guerra in the Comments Section at the end of the article. Reminds me of that movie where everyone takes responsibility so that no one gets blamed -- "no, I am SDLG!". In any event, I believe strongly that I have a right to anonymity, free speech and to express my opinion (and to give you a venue to share yours too). It coming in the form of a blog does not change the intent of the Constitution. Blogs can also be likened to freedom of assembly -- another important part of that document.

It sounds like everyone on the News-Press team knows about BlogaBarbara from other people and have not participated on the blog -- Nipper even said that he's never read a post here. Hard to believe but that's fine with me as whether he reads it or not is his business. Tom Schultz sounds like he did a good job at explaining how blogs work and I am glad he pointed out that Nelville and Big Fat Fan of Travis get plenty of play herein. Please do not offer posts about Nelville's or anyone else's blogging identity if it names someone -- it's really something I do not want to have on the blog.

Thanks to Matt Kettman for providing the article tonight!

Update: Craig Smith's account can be found here -- why was Scott Steepleton covering a story that he was involved in? Where's the bias being uncovered in the newsroom?!?

25 Comments:

Anonymous SDLG said...

I think you mean "Spartacus."

1/10/2007 8:30 PM  
Blogger Sara De la Guerra said...

Thanks for jarring my memory -- great movie.

1/10/2007 9:34 PM  
Anonymous max height said...

Here's an article about Wendy McMess in the LA Weekly:
http://www.laweekly.com/news/news/wendys-posse/15388/

1/10/2007 9:46 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Great coverage by Matt Kettman - thanks for the link to it. Nice, too, to see the pictures of these people, Apodaca, Steepleton, etc. As for anonymity, that's what makes the blog - and what makes it worthwhile, imo, both to read and to participate in so that the ideas, opinions can be there without the luster of the ego.

1/10/2007 10:08 PM  
Blogger passing-by said...

SDLG for President!

1/10/2007 10:22 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Matt did a great job and love the pictures.
Interesting to find out who reads and who claims not to read your Blog Sara..... but then it is "local" so some might not be interested in its coverage.
Sara you do a great job with this blog and allowing people to post comments and editing those if need be.
Thanks Sara for all your hard and time consuming work.

1/10/2007 11:32 PM  
Anonymous dd said...

Way to go Sara! Glad to see a judge that understands and acknowledges First Amendment rights. dd

1/11/2007 7:16 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Looks like the American Journalism Review's lawyers have responded to the N-P regarding their complaint against Susan Paterno. Truly entertaining reading...

http://www.ajr.org/documents/response.pdf

1/11/2007 8:07 AM  
Anonymous Poster child said...

So glad you are here, Sara. Long live free speech and right to anonymity.

1/11/2007 9:28 AM  
Anonymous reader said...

The lack of captions on the photos show the level of cronyism in this whole story. Who's who? Only the insider journalists who have created and inflamed this stupid mess know the insider's faces.

Duct tape ribbon? Give me a break! People are DYING of aids, DYING in war, DYING of breast cancer. The duct tape ribbon is a perfect example of how far this thing is blown out of proportion.

1/11/2007 9:48 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Yes, Scott Steeptleton wrote a story about a hearing in which he himself testified. This I'm in a position to know. After firing a reporter for alleged "bias." And anyone reading the story can see that it broke basic standards of fairness in reporting and was otherwise a poor and blatantly biased record of the hearing.
And on the stand he misrepresented his position at the time of the July exodus. He was not then assistant news editor; he'd been demoted from that position some years before. He was a reporter until his promotion after all the editors had left. Look at a transcript of the hearing on what he said under oath.

1/11/2007 10:05 AM  
Anonymous worker ant said...

Scott Simpleton knows ethics? Give me a break!

The News-Press is in need of a real editor, someone with strongly developed journalistic principles and not merely a hatchet man for the owner. McCaw had promised to hire a high-caliber editor but apparently the search isn't going anywhere. She should have hired Dean Baquet after he was fired from the L.A. Times. He is a principled and skilled editor who would have quickly moved to restore the tarnished credibility of the News-Press.

1/11/2007 11:38 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

These proceedings would be highly amusing except for the fact that they, and the events leading up to them, have so adversely affected many current and former News-Press staffers. Wendy's side has so thoroughly bungled their case that the judge should have absolutely no trouble making a ruling in favor of the union, and that would lay the groundwork for other grievance cases against News-Press management to go forward unimpeded.

1/11/2007 12:24 PM  
Anonymous harping said...

"Reader" (1/11/2007 9:48 AM) wrote: "The lack of captions on the photos show the level of cronyism in this whole story. Who's who?" Guess you didn't read the article--within the text there were photo references (fyi, that's what "pictured" means). That's good enough for most people, especially those of us who appreciate the speed at which the coverage was delivered. But I do agree the duct tape ribbon seems a bit much.

1/11/2007 2:34 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Reader at 9:48 said that as the photos lacked captions, an example, s/he said, of "cronyism" since only "insider journalists" would know who is pictured. I suggest that "Reader" read: Each photo was clearly identified in the story.

I am no insider journalist - neither insider nor journalist - and was curious what Steepleton looked like, Apodaca, too, also Judge Schmidt - people not usually pictured. Others I had already seen pictures of. The clearly identified Indy pictures shook and altered my mental pictures. And that's good (or maybe bad.) Whatever, they were helpful.

1/11/2007 5:55 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Duct tape ribbon? Give me a break! People are DYING of aids, DYING in war, DYING of breast cancer. The duct tape ribbon is a perfect example of how far this thing is blown out of proportion.

Who cares...

The NP story is important!

1/11/2007 5:57 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

You are right 5:57pm, the NP story is important. Freedom of the press is a guaranteed right under the constitution. I don't think that those who drafted the constitution meant that the owners of the newspapers had the right to censure the news either. It is extremely important that journalists have the ability to do their jobs without intimidation and censure for the good of all of us. It is important to make a stand here and now and nip this thing before it spreads elsewhere.

1/12/2007 5:32 AM  
Anonymous Michelle DuNoire said...

The constant bandying about of the term "free speech" regarding both the News-Press situation and the blogosphere needs to be grounded in reality.

The First Amendment prohibits the federal government from interfering with the free speech rights of persons under its control: "Congress shall make no law … abridging the freedom of speech … ." Those prohibitions apply to state and local governments as well, via incorporation of the rights guaranteed under the First Amendment by the Fourteenth Amendment.

Nowhere in the text of the amendments, or in subsequent judicial interpretations of them, are individuals guaranteed protection against interference with their speech by non-governmental actors, i.e. other persons, including legal persons such as corporations, unless those persons conspire with public officials to effect the interference.

The Supreme Court, in a case pitting the NCAA against UNLV coach Jerry Tarkanian, held: "Embedded in our Fourteenth Amendment jurisprudence is a dichotomy between state action, which is subject to scrutiny under the Amendment's Due Process Clause, and private conduct, against which the Amendment affords no shield, no matter how unfair that conduct may be."

Thus, the dearly departed editors and reporters of the News-Press have no legitimate claim of a First Amendment violation by anyone at the paper or its corporate alter ego.

Similarly, anyone blogging may speak freely, but absent even the slightest hint of governmental interference, perhaps the use of the term of art "free speech" should be reserved to its proper usage.

1/12/2007 7:27 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Very interesting who does not claim to read the posts on this blog.

1/12/2007 8:48 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Reader 9:48, Tom Schultz who wore the duct tape ribbon was the paper's health care reporter for years. And that was just one of his beats at the paper. He's written dozens of stories in Santa Barbara and elsewhere, distributed far and wide, to educate the public about each of the issues you mention.

1/12/2007 9:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

You are right 5:57pm, the NP story is important. Freedom of the press is a guaranteed right under the constitution. I don't think that those who drafted the constitution meant that the owners of the newspapers had the right to censure the news either. It is extremely important that journalists have the ability to do their jobs without intimidation and censure for the good of all of us. It is important to make a stand here and now and nip this thing before it spreads elsewhere.

Two things ridiculous about this. One that it implies that censuring the news has not and is not happening elsewhere. Secondly, that the censuring of a second article on Travis's DUI and Rob Lowe's address were something other than snooty employees wanting to rub someone's nose in something. Yes, quite the lightning rods to rile up a nation.

1/12/2007 2:16 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Michelle, the California Constitution's free speech clause extends a bit further than the federal one. One important point is that much of the way the freedom plays out, especially in this context, is someone trying to punish another for speech it doesn't like, and when the courts get involved, the First Amendment (or Article 1, Section 2 of the Cal Constitution) kicks in. In other words, if Cappello ever did sue a shopkeeper for posting a "McCaw, Obey the Law" sign, he would face a First Amendment defense, because the government compulsion of the courts is enough to put free speech rights into play. The News-Press has now told its reporters they can't wear "McCaw, Obey the Law" buttons, or place those signs in their vehicles' windows. Would the NP also tell them they can't place such signs on their apartment windows, or wear the buttons to parties? I wouldn't put it past the NP to try that. But the National Labor Relations Act protects the wearing of union insignia, and has protected specific buttons arguably much more personally insulting than the ones that have Wendy and her minions in a tizzy.

1/13/2007 12:18 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The duct tape was used by the journalists to protest a gag order issued by management. So, yes, it was free speech they were demanding. Their own free speech, not that of the newspaper.

1/13/2007 12:14 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I did read it when the post was fresh. And I looked for references to who the photos were. There were none. I believe that the words "(pictured)" were added later. Maybe Kettman took the tip. That's fine with me.

1/13/2007 4:49 PM  
Anonymous harping said...

Hey Anon 1/13/2007 4:49 PM: I read it when the post was fresh too-- the "(pictured)" references were there. Maybe you just skimmed through so fast you missed them.

1/13/2007 11:39 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home