Santa Barbara Politics, Media & Culture

Tuesday, January 01, 2008

Virtual Betting Pool

I bet $100 virtual that the NLRB story listed below won't show up in the News-Press on either the front or interior pages of the newspaper tomorrow. Even given the holiday, I'll put my virtual money where my mouth is and suggest that we maybe (and I'd be surprised) see a few lines in a couple of days but definitely nothing of substance. Any takers?



Anonymous Anonymous said...

Darn, Sara. If I did not love Travis, I'd take the bet. It's going to continue to be fun being an embarrassment (SB) and the battle will continue here on BlogaB. Wonder what all of us did before you offered such a great place to vent, etc?

Hope 2008 keeps this Blog busy and fun.

1/01/2008 12:38 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Well, the online edition does have a couple of paragraphs stating the case was ruled in favor of union and government lawyers. There is mention of a few recommnendations the government has given the NP, but the NP will fight to the bitter end for truth, justice, and the American way.

More amusing is Wendy's annual message (with the same photo of Wendy in her little black dress and pearls), where she chirps about all the many exciting developments that happened in 2007, and how the NP became the go-to source for comprehensive news. Yep.

We just love trainwrecks,don't we? Lindsay, Britney, and now Wendy.

1/01/2008 8:08 AM  
Anonymous city watcher said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

1/01/2008 8:17 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Well, it ran on Tuesday ... sort of.

About a 4-5 inch story on A-4 with the innocuos headline "Judge issues ruling in labor practice suit." That's like saying "Lakers play game against Celtics."

There were quotes from News-Press attorney Michael Zinser expressing extreme "disappointment" and the promise that the "News-Press will exhaust all possible appeals." Yeah, big surprise.

Any normal, rational business person would want this to go away so she could begin rebuilding her business. But Wendy prefers to waste more time just feeding the blogs with an endless plotline, not to mention her attorney's pockets, by fighting what is now, obviously, a lost cause (you don't win an appeal unless something was done wrong procedurally — the Court of Appeals won't overturn the opinion of a judge who has studied the case for the last half-year).

So what we will continue to get is a thread-bare newspaper that doesn't have the resources (reporters or editorial budget) to cover even half the town. Wendy ain't going waste her millions on that!

The most laughable thing in today's News-Press was Wendy's New Year's note to the public, complete with a photo that was taken about 20 years ago, lauding the newspaper's great coverage of such things as the Zaca Fire. Yeah, those were some pretty good Associated Press reports that I read.

The paper is a joke. The owner and her alleged baron/boyfriend/co-publisher are both jokes. They should just turn the whole thing into a comics page.

1/01/2008 8:37 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

maybe u could buy the whole town a cup of coffee.
ps Sara stay away from the race track betting on "sure" bets can get expensive.

Wishing u a very Happy New Year.

1/01/2008 9:20 AM  
Anonymous City Watcher said...

Sorry City Watcher -- I can only publish snippets. Thanks.

For some mysterious reason, I have online access:

"The News-Press will exhaust all possible appeals, and fully expects to achieve justice through that appellate process," Mr. Zinser said.

1/01/2008 9:26 AM  
Blogger Sara De la Guerra said...

I meant to include a bit more!
In a statement, News-Press attorney Michael Zinser said the matter is in its infancy.

"The Santa Barbara News-Press is extremely disappointed with the ALJ opinion as it believes it acted lawfully in all respects. The ALJ opinion is merely a 'recommended' decision and order, and is not enforceable in its own right," Mr. Zinser said.

The next step in the process is a decision of the NLRB in Washington, D.C. That decision is enforceable only upon the order of the U.S. Court of Appeals.

"The News-Press will exhaust all possible appeals, and fully expects to achieve justice through that appellate process," Mr. Zinser said.

1/01/2008 9:27 AM  
Anonymous Ron said...


I'm not a betting man. I figure her lawyers would tell her to do something they can call "reporting".

It's her paper and she can do what she wants. What a clarion call. It sounds like a child's whine. They put all their money into law firms. Not employees or the town.

She wants to violate the law and spend her cash on smooth talkers like Barry Cappello. She's no better than any lowlife punk gangster.

Any well adjusted adult with genuine good tidings in Wendy's position would be sitting down to talk by now. She has the money to pay goons to try and sell her mental aberrations. No one is surprised by appeals. She needs new threats, the old is ineffective.

She feels above the law.

Prozac won't cure anything, she'll continue her web.

The News-Press and Wendy are the bad jokes that will keep giving. Her fools can only communicate from their gutter, no one will listen or care. They're over. I hate to watch them run or squirm. All things Wendy Ampersand have lost anything of value, such as respect and trust. We're stuck with a hollow show of the "outlaw" insane.

1/01/2008 1:09 PM  
Anonymous David Pritchett said...

Boitnott Watch:

Former fun KEYT red-haired reporter John Boitnott steps into the "News-Press-Mess" through his better job at KNTV in SF Bay Area

1/01/2008 1:13 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

12:38 is back:

Holy Cow. The comments are so bad and it is not a good sign for Blog. Old wives tale is whatever you do on January 1st is what you will be doing for the entire year.

The Wendy haters are out in force this morning. Comments are redundant... It's all been said including the 'old' photo. Rarely does a columnist change his/her photo. Just LOOK!!! Wendy and NP comments are now lame; not one newsworthy clip to pass on to pals at lunch. I come here for 'material' and have found none.

Finally, just shut up about Wendy and her money. To me, it makes total sense to just throw up her hands and choose to give money to lawyers so she can say "Screw y'all as I am going to have the last word, not the people in this burg!" THEN, what I wish she would and could do is just shut the paper down and walk away. I have NO problem writing this January 1st and will be happy to continue this mantra for the rest of 2008.

P.S. I did some work for NY Times owned paper back in the day and it was no walk in the park then either. But the CITY could not take on the NY Times because they were "a-skeer'd."

1/01/2008 3:23 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

A fool and his money are soon parted.

Those thinking that the disguntled, and terminated, employees have won are fools.

1/01/2008 3:35 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Lowlife punk gangster...

Great name for a rock band!!

1/01/2008 4:39 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Wendy is obeying the law.

And no law is final until the court of last jurisdiction. You on the other hand claiming Wendy is not obeying the law and your desire to punish her, is the one advocating lawlessness.

Ron, your bias is showing and it stinks. Thank goodness stupid rulings like this one have an appeals process so hacks like this judge cannot ruin it for everyone.

1/01/2008 5:09 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I want my virtual $100. The NewsPress article had a heck of a lot more content in it than that biased hit piece in the Independent.

Wendy, if you lose this one, please just pack up the tent because no one should have to put up with the garbage thrown at you these past years.

1/01/2008 5:11 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Allegedly the ruling calls Steepleton a liar on multiple occasions. Methinks it is just skinny, anal retentive Judge CaCa showing his deep bias against fat people that is truly at issue here.

I am not kidding. Judges are people and anyone who looks like death warmed over has a bias about life that is not natural and a prejudice against those who have more fluid body types.

This is a common Calvinist prejudice and the judge is a human being, or at least a bio-mort at last pulse count.

1/01/2008 5:20 PM  
Anonymous Huey Chapla said...

Wish I had taken that bet but I would've been on the wrong side. Not sure what would be a fitting loss given how much has already been squandered.

'Every time a bell rings, an angel gets his wings.' The bells have been tolling for so many angels in SB who stand together to fight injustice in the face of enormous pressure. That is the beautiful SB I know.

Happy New Year!

1/01/2008 7:57 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Here's wishing Wendy the best of luck in the new year!

We love you Wendy.

1/01/2008 10:02 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Okay, I actually slogged through at least up to page 23 of the actual opinion and I sure hope no one discusses this opinion without actually reading and understanding what is at stake here.

I gag at the junk this judge concluded and I have legal training so I can follow where he is trying to go. And he never goes anywhere far. I have not finished this.

His ruling up to this point is a heinous beauty contest deciding unequivocally not on the facts presented but on the demeanor of the participants.

He holds up his own bias about each participant in demeaning and may I add smirking, detail as if how a person testifies should undermine their entire testimony.

Sure, if there is independent corrorobation of genuinely facts in controversy but so far the Judge says he does not like Travis, Scott and Wendy as human beings and therefore refuses to even weigh or evaluate their testimony.

Yet at the same time, this judge turns the NP turn-coats into fallen heros and gives away Wendy's farm over to their hands. No sales price involved here, just that the Judge concludes he does not like the owners or the management and idolizes the staff and that is good enough for him.

This is outrageous. And he swallows the crap the NP flunkies were trying to restore journalistic integrity to the paper totally overlooking the fact most readers found these flunkies to not have journalistic integrity. What facts did the Judge base his conclusion upon? None. Just his own personal conclusions that based upon his perceptions of demeanor he liked the flunkies and did not like the owners.

Nothing so far puts Wendy in a bad light at all. Nothing presented so far shows Wendy was injecting any bias into any reporter's integrity. All the memos and facts the Judge presents show Wendy was the one asking for more balance in the stories and she had very good reason and justification clearly spelled out exactly what was missing. And it was. So the Judge's first material error was to not build his own case factually and to rely on his clear bias and prejudice based upon emotional and subjective personal qualities to weight some testimony over others, absent any controversy.

This ruling so far ( I still have more pages to slog through) is total junk. This judge is a biased hack. Trust me. I know I am saying this badly here, but this is a junk decision. And Wendy still looks like the winner here and the Judge stretches all credulity to force and twist a decision to support his pro-employee bias. Yup, there are judges like this. And that is why they are judges because all they ever could aspire to was to be a court employee. They carry inherent biases against management because they could not cut it on their own.

Go get 'em Wendy. This ruling makes no sense at all and he reaches conclusions totally unsupported by facts and expresses personal bias at every pivotal decisions making point.

Okay, I'll keep reading. But if one does not read the entire ruling, I hope you will just shut up about the sound bites you hear totally out of context. This ruling is an embarassment. (As much as my badly written critique is as well. But just wanted to raise the alarm before those who have not tried to read the actual ruling go dancing in the streets.

1/01/2008 10:10 PM  
Anonymous Show me the BIAS said...

Once again, the defenders of the News-Mess keep on keeping on because they like the editorials that support their political views.

Show me and the rest of the readers here what are the false findings and rulings by the Judge, and the bias by the Independent.

Cite your facts and show examples.
Put up or shut up.
Come to the Teamsters news conference and tell everyone.

1/02/2008 12:25 AM  
Anonymous Ron said...

5:09 You're here for my amusement? Like, your bias don't stink?

You love the appeals process? I can see you advocating for longer, better death penalty appeals. There are many in prison waiting the appeals process, are they all innocent like you dream for Wendy?

This nations history is full of blood and suffering to give workers dignity, rights and laws. Wendy spits on history and stoic heroes. Where would she be without labor? She's flippant and insane to bury her head in the sand and ignore a big part of what makes this country great. She buys off some of the dimmest bulbs in town because she can, not for any lofty ideals. She's the worst of the criminal world, her inhumanity will be written in stone. Her crimes are made more egregious because she sways others to lie and harm good people. Her stench from the plaza De La Guerra isn't a little neighborhood fracas. She and her minions stink world wide. Wendy called game on when she said it's a war for her. There's no shortage of blogs, no one is stuck here.

I have no crystal ball, I doubt it, but Wendy could buy off the Supreme Ct and win an appeal. However, it comes down she's just another criminal type. Do you stand up for O.J.'s innocence? Wendy didn't win her round. The Judge found her testimony ineffective at best. More like she was a real kook. Cappello used her for his show, he doesn't have anything else but bluster and miles of boxes. Wendy's being taken for a fool and she has no true friends to tell her a few facts of life.

Judge William G. Kocol gave his ruling. As it stands now, Wendy McCaw Ampersand is a serial law breaker. It's not about the opinions of Cappello types on the Judge. It is the ruling, Wendy violates laws against workers. Too bad she won't be locked up as she deserves.

1/02/2008 1:54 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Wow, the paid Wendy-bloggers are out in force on this one! The judge's decision must have really hurt.

1/02/2008 10:06 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

1/02/2008 1:02 PM  
Anonymous I like wendy said...

I admire Wendy.

1/02/2008 5:34 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Finally made it into the library to read the News-Press article on the ruling, on page A4 upper left corner of the Jan. 1, 2008 edition.

(YABBA DABBA'd as republishing an entire article from the News-Press is against my guidelines -- sorry about that)

Well, here is my list of observations:

1)The article is longer and more informative than either Craig Smith indicated or Sara bet on.

2)The byline and first sentence are accurate and informative. However, note that the N-P article says the ruling is in favor of `government and union lawyers,' which combines perjoratives. I think it would be more accurate to say the ruling is in favor of the reporters, and would match the later usage with regard to the News-Press. That is, the later sentence does not say `News-Press lawyers will exhaust all possible appeals...'.

3)In the second paragraph of the N-P article the decision suddenly becomes merely a recommendation. According to the NLRB website it is a decision... click on `ALJ decisions' and you can see the decision, currently seventh on the page. What is recommended is not the factual findings, as the News-Press article wrongly indicates, but the actions that must be taken to compensate the victims, according to the paragraph on the top of the page of ALJ Decisions.

4)Note that Judge William G. Kocol is referred to merely as `William Kocol'.

5)The softening to a recommendation does reduce the harshness of the later clause that states `the paper violated labor law'. As far as I can tell, it is not a matter of dispute any more whether or not the paper violated labor law; the decision of the judge is that the paper violated labor law. The appealable portion is not the decision, but the sanctions.

6)The `recommended remedies' paragraph is accurate.

7)In the next paragraph, note that Zinser is not a lawyer (perjorative) but an attorney (less perjorative or neutral).

8)As for Zinser's statement, who or what believed it acted lawfully, the News-Press or the ALC `opinion' (which is really a decision, not an opinion)?

9)The second sentence of Zinser's statement again misrepresents the decision as an opinion; more accurate wording would be `decision and recommended order'.

10)As for enforceability, actually, the ALJ recommended order is fully enforceable, and it only becomes unenforceable if the News-Press appeals. This omission is a bit glaring.

11)The last sentence implies that justice has not been achieved via the process so far, but of course since it is merely a quote from an attorney, they may say what they wish. Adding a quote from a union or government attorney would have balanced the article, however. Indeed, the omission of any quotes from the other side is quite glaring.

1/02/2008 5:43 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Sara... I missed that in your guidelines... can you point out or quote where posting an entire article is forbidden? Lots of non-News-Press articles have been copied in verbatim over the last year or 2.

You know, it does have the appearance (although not necessarily the fact) that you are not allowing the article to be posted because the content of the article contradicts your initial posting of this thread.


1/02/2008 5:52 PM  
Anonymous such fun said...

Damn it's fun to see the News Press supporters out in force kicking the News Press haters ass.

From the comments I'd say it was News Press supporters 7 and loser moron slopehead News Press haters 3.

1/02/2008 7:31 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

No lower court ruling is final or as you claim "the law" until all appeals have been exhausted. And that means going to the United States Supreme Court if the appellent is willing.

You err if you claim Wendy is violating "the law" by not following this ruling, because she is still clearly operating within her well established legal rights.

If you want the lower courts to be the court of final jurisdiction so they are the final word about "the law", please get the Constitution amended and throw out 250 years of US legal tradition.

So just shut up about Wendy being a lawbreaker, because at this lower court ruling she has no obligation to follow the findings of this thoroughly incompetent, mean-spirited and biased ruling.

The ruling is junk. It cannot stand because it undermines all sense of private property rights and fair play.

Employees are never allowed to unilaterally run a business against the wishes of the owner, unless the owner allows this to happen.

No "law" can take away private property rights to that extent. And if that is the interpretation of this ruling, then clearly there are constitutional rights at stake.

Regulating commerce (aka federal labor laws) under the US Constitution cannot abrogate personal property rights and each citizen's equal protections under the law.

So get ready for an interesting legal ride.

And stop relying on junk journalism from the likes of the Independent and Craig Smith to pre-digest this for you because they have stumbled very badly on this so far.

1/02/2008 7:38 PM  
Blogger Sara De la Guerra said...

5:43 through :52 ANON -- I probably didn't print that in the guidelines but should. The News-Press, at least, has a history of protecting their stories and the need to subscribe to see their web site. Other news sites aren't so worried...I would rather not see a subpoena fest over the republishing of an article.

1/02/2008 7:43 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Sara at 7:43 pm: your explanation for not republishing the entire NP article makes sense ...except that in the NLRB post at 1:02 pm, I think, near the end of it, there is the entire NP article reposted.

These threads certainly have brought out the crazies!

1/02/2008 8:02 PM  
Anonymous Slopehead for Truth and Justice said...

Now it is amateur lawyer time, eh?

US Supreme Court only hears a case if they want to. No right exists to "go" to the Supremes except to ask them to take the case.

Some slopeheads still think that more than 100 years of American labor law applies here, not just the Fundamentalist view that a business can do anything to its employees.

And keep writing that the Independent and Smith are junk journalism. Hold your breath and turn purple and then it will become true, because after all, real truth is determined by counting the number of anonymous blog comments entered here.

1/02/2008 8:51 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Happy New Year Sara!
What "news" to start the new year off on your blog.
I enjoy your blog and appreciate the time and energy that it must take to host this blog.
I find it so funny that some people are so upset about the ruling and are taking it out on you and my other favorite blog host craigsmith (he is a crack up).
Sorry people are taking the news so badly and vent their anger at you and the people who post their feeling about what has become of theNewsPress.
Keep up the good work Sara.

1/02/2008 8:53 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I'm wondering what that fount of wisdom, Dr. Laura, will have to say about the ruling. She'll probably do one better than the socialists here and call the Wendy haters "Commies."

Of course, Dr. Laura has nothing to say about Wendy and her shack-up-stud, except that once she took all the prosciutto out of Wendy's salad.

Dr. Laura was mentioned in the 78-page document, so I am sure she'll be flattered.

1/02/2008 9:08 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The judge's ruling is the law until over-ruled by a higher court. That's why criminals are put in jail until their appeals come through (if they appeal).

Of course the Ampersand/News-Press/McCaw side will try to confuse the issue. And they are free to appeal as long as they want.

Unless and until an appeal comes through in their favor, they are law-breakers.

Sara... hmm... didn't Wendy change the rules on addresses after the fact? However, you are not taking my job away. :)

1/02/2008 9:09 PM  
Blogger Sara De la Guerra said...

8:02 PM -- that one is deleted, the NEW Blogger won't let me cut and paste before moderating :(

8:53 PM -- thanks! I appreciate the kudos when I can get them!

9:09 PM: Not sure about that...but she would have to at some point. I don't think they were thinking forward on that one.

1/02/2008 9:43 PM  
Anonymous Don Jose de la Guerra y Noreiga said...

Hey: I am having a hard time getting into this Joe Hill against the capitalists scenario.

I am not particularly a Wendy hater but interested in having a good community newspaper.

The problem is what the Newspress was and worse what it was becoming and how Wendy cut the Gordian knot of employee relations. She made a mistake. But I can understand she made it. She has no journalistic background.

Business people are OK. Unions can be OK too. Let's not make this a big class war issue. It's just about how good the newspaper is and how its owner kind of blew her management responsibilities.

The verdict is in. She can fight. Or take her medicine and improve. Or leave town. Or yes, she can leave total devestation in her wake.

Just give me a better newspaper. This is not David and Goliath or Joe Hill lives again. Or class war either.

Let's keep the focus on the newspaper. Clearly Travis isn't very good at his job. Scott Stepleton is nothing. And Wendy made some mistakes.

For me the journalistic bias case is best revealed in thinking about the Santa Cruz Island restoration issue and how that eventually blew up the Newspress. Wendy went nuts and felt sorry for rats and pigs who were devastating the Island. Someone who thinks like that, has money and power, and owns a newspaper, can be embarrassing for us all.

1/02/2008 9:44 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

slope head, before you insult, please read more carefully. Any case can go all the way up to the US Supreme Court.

No one said the Supreme Court has to hear them all. They obviously cannot. They only pick ones with timely constitutional issues.

Rights of at-will union employees versus rights of private property owners has a nice constitutional controversy ring to me.

Good luck, Wendy. Please keep the paper going the way that it is lately with more hard hitting investigative reports and solid on point editorials by Travis who almost single-handedly is trying to save our special small town.

And no, the above statements are not a joke. If you read it lately, Travis has been hitting home run after home run on political issues.

1/02/2008 10:04 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Silly, of course Wendy is not "breaking the law" waiting until there is a final ruling on her case. Why do you keep saying things like that. The ruling stands until it is overturned. But it is not enforceable until ordered by the court of last jurisdiction on the matter.

And if there is a preliminary injuction forcing workers who hate their employer back on the job and/or get back wages, then that alos has to make it to the court of last juridiction, then that too becomes the final ruling.

How humiliating will it be for those workers to have to go back to work for Wendy when they know clearly they will not be able to run the show this time? What do they think they will do? They have to go back on Wendy's terms. Is this what they really want or are they just in it for the money?

1/02/2008 10:08 PM  
Blogger Sara De la Guerra said...

In it for the money? These folks have gone without real pay for months! That would be part of it for any of us.

They couldn't take other jobs and still come back to the News-Press. What on earth do you mean?

Really, the ultimate pay back would be to come back and then move on to bigger and better things -- which I bet most will.

1/02/2008 10:54 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Well, OK, let me paraphrase the actual News-Press article. This is certainly not copyrighted or copylefted!


Ruling in labor suit

Decision against the News-Press

A government judge who sat through a case involving multiple and unfair labor charges against the News-Press has come out in favor of the government and other lawyers.

The statement by a W. Kocol, released by the NLRB, states that the paper violated an anachronistic set of regulations known of labor law, including, among other things, the way some employee evaluations were conducted; the termination of some employees; alleged ``interrogation'' of employees while trying to determine who may have leaked material belonging to the paper to other media; and for insisting employees not wear buttons on the job disparaging co-publisher Wendy McCaw.

Remedies were recommended.

Two-time winner of the most honest attorney in New Jersey and renowned crime fighter Michael Zinser said that he doesn't hold the government responsible, because the government is full of unimaginative bureaucrats who have never run a business.

``The Santa Barbara News-Press always fights for the little guy and the courageous entrepeneur who sustain America's way of life. When a government bureaucrat tries to tangle up an entrepeneur with wasteful regulations, the News-Press will always step in,'' Mr. Zinser said.

The next step in the process is to appeal to the true entrepeneurs who oversee the bureaucrats.

``We will achieve justice upon appeal,'' Mr. Zinser said.

News-Press co-publisher Wendy McCaw initially declined comment, citing the need to allow for an unbiased process. She asked that everyone ask themselves, `Does labor law apply to coyotes? Why not? Is even one government bureaucrat a coyote? No wonder. What a sham.'

-Staff Report.

1/03/2008 7:49 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

10:04 p.m.

Well said.

I couldn't agree more with what you said.

Travis IS single-handedly saving our beautiful and special town.
What a fine man.

The slope head news press haters are vermin and slugs who should crawl back under their rocks.

1/03/2008 7:56 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

All the way to the supreme court sounds good to me.
That should be able to be accomplished in about 10 years or so.

In the meantime set up all reporting to be outsourced.

Such a move is 100% legal!!!! None of the slope head readers can prove other wise.

1/03/2008 7:58 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

If the fired employees have as you say "lost money", then you assume they have rights to be gainfully employed by the NewsPress.

They did not lose money because they are out loafing and whining and no one should be paying them for doing no work.

They have a duty to mitigate their own damages if they chose not to work during this self-imposed vacation they have been on.

Any back pay has to be balanced against what they were supposed to be making working during the interim. They don't just get a free paid vacation out of this.

Then everyone in similar situations would conive to get fired and then take a free ride. They have obligations to find employment during any interim time.

1/03/2008 8:00 AM  
Anonymous read it and weep said...

I got news for you Sara.

Its going to be a lot more months without pay. A whole lot mote. Well over 100 more! Read it and weep.

According to sources it's going to be a cold day in hell before she pays 1 cent of pay to these scum sucking vermin.

1/03/2008 8:01 AM  
Anonymous Show me the NEWS said...

Please cite specific examples of all those "hard hitting investigative reports and solid on point editorials"

Or, are such claims just more huff n puff?

We are waiting. Defend your idol.

1/03/2008 8:40 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

SDLG: What do you mean "they couldn't take jobs and come back to the NewsPress?" Says who?

1/03/2008 9:22 AM  
Anonymous Fran said...

7:31 PM such fun said...I'm no expert, but aren't the alleged "News Press supporters" actually her well paid workers? It is a holiday. Talk to the citizens on the street.


1/03/2008 12:17 PM  
Anonymous A.K.S. said...

Don Jose_

You are right about Wendy made some mistakes. Wendy picked Arthur von Wiesenberger. Travis and Scott are eloquent idiots next to the Ph D Laura. Have you tried to read her silly column?

1/03/2008 1:09 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Travis has been right in his editorials about city council and too many lawsuits,need for a city ethics panel, city Public Works dept running amok, Brian Barnwell, Dale Francisco, zoning code violations, too tall buildings, subsidized housing failures, density and growth excesses, not listening to the neighborhoods, misfeasance by individual council members, city staff out of control and city administration inadequate, need to more policing and bike patrols ........... you need to start reading him.

He has been right, right on all these issues and the voters validated him this last election.

This has been a long time coming but he did tap into the anger out there this last election as shown by so many abused neighborhoods soundly rejecting all the city council incumbents.

Remeber just a few months ago someone here soundly scoffed at the idea there would be serious opposition in this last city council election?

Travis knew what was going on and he wrote about it constantly.

And no one on the council listened. The two incumbents barely squeaked by and Das had to work really hard to prove he was "listening" (which he no longer is doing now that he won).

Travis and his editorials now are a force to be reckoned with .... as it should be for the Fourth Estate. The NewsPress has its game back.

But if you don't read it, you are just cutting off your nose to spite your face, as my old granny would always say.

Shoot, I even listen to loathsome Rush Limbaugh from time to time just to know where his unenlighted suckers are coming from.

You need to start reading the NewsPress again. And having been around the state of Calif lately reading other local papers, they too are big on adds and thin on local stuff. Ventura Star is solid, but others in the SF Bay Area are also looking a bit anemic, so this is not just a local phenom.

One must never overlook there are many of us who think the prior NewsPress reporting lacked ethics because they were so one-sided. So the fired reporters cannot cloak themselves in virtue because that is only a subjective designation and one wrongfully applied by this latest court ruling.

Labor boards can rule on labor law and legal working conditions violations, but they never can intrude on a personal version of subjective "ethics".

Particularly when this Judge in the very first pages of his ruling stated clearly how unhappy Wendy was with the one-sided reporting and the annimosity shown by the news staff against management and owner ..... long before any union activities took place.

Wend set out in this court ruling exactly how and why she was unhappy. There was nothing unethical at all in her requests. They are part of the court record. As owner, she had every right to ask for more balance and have it reflect her own perspectives.

She never once in her memos reproduced in the ruling directed unilaterally only a single opinion, or demand that only hers be the only one written about.

She asked for balance. Those are her exact quotes. And that is what is found in the court documents.

I don't know how the judge ended up ruling Wendy was breaching any "ethics" at all from what he chose to present for her side of things.

All I am hearing when one sees the behavior of the fired staff laid out so clearly is lots of sympathy for Wendy.

For that mouthy chick at the rally yesterday to brag about "taking down a tyrant" just brings chills to me thinking that Wendy could be forced by a court of law to have to work with someone like that. That is just plain scary.

1/03/2008 6:15 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

How come no "unbiased" news report on the fired NewsPress workers rally yesterday gave an estimate of the size of the crowd.

Looking at the edhat photos it looks like 20 or so "supporters" showed up and most of them were media reporters and camera people.

This is a picture worth a thousand words, but none of the unbiased reporters reported this.

Hating Wendy is so 2006.

1/03/2008 6:50 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Please allow me to add my two cents worth here.

I don't quite understand what all the fuss is about but I do know that the News Press is currently a fine paper and I don't miss those reporters who left.

Also I can clearly see how the News Press is trying to save our wonderful town from over development.

It appears to me that a small group of local socialists are quite upset at having lost some control of what and how things are reported in the news press. What happened hardly affects the lives of 99% of the residents and the news press is going about its business in a fine way.

So what's all the fuss. why not let this whole thing go and talk about something worthwhile instead of talking about something that none of us has any control over. The reality is that things are going to slowly develop in whatever way they are going to develop no matter what any of us think or say here on Bloga Barbara. Everyone who will ever discontinue the paper has already done so. All we are doing here is alienating each other in an unproductive way that will take 10 years to get over.

Think about it. We have much better things to discuss.

1/03/2008 6:52 PM  
Anonymous Primary Scum said...

"scum sucking vermin" ex used to call me that all the that you??

1/03/2008 7:09 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

to a.k.s 1:09 p.m.

Dr. Laura's column is a whole lot better than anything that the terminated journalists losers ever wrote.

If you don't like it don't read it you fool.

But mind your own business and let those of us who like it read it and enjoy it in peace without comments from the peanut gallery by slope-heads like you.

In other words shut the f--- up.

1/03/2008 10:02 PM  
Blogger Sara De la Guerra said...

Let's take it down a notch boys....

1/04/2008 6:38 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

6:50 p.m.

I'd say that 20 supporters for the terminated employees sounds about right. Pritchett and 19 more just like him.

Now that really means something........NOT

1/04/2008 7:26 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I saw Micky Flacks in the edhat photos at the rally, and Marty Blum and you say David Prittchard as there too ..... well, who were the other 17 besides John Palminteri and other media covering the non-event. Plus there was the 8 fired staff I assume. Do we have our 20 "supporters" yet?

1/04/2008 7:57 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The News-Press was crucial to the development of the Santa Barbara we know. Tom and Charles Storke were huge boosters of architectural guidelines, Lake Cachuma, the airport, UCSB, Earl Warren Showground, and anti-sprawl. They ran the News-Press from the time it came into existence from the merger of th News and Press in the 1930's until 1964 or so.

Wendy has peed all over their legacy. I read the paper once a week at the library, and it is less informative than a week of the Sound or 1 issue of the Independent.

The truth is Wendy is a laughingstock. I fully expect her and von Whatever to destroy all the archives of the News-Press in an attempt to remove the history of its legacy. Good thing there are lots of microfilms and also some old print copies at the state library.

1/04/2008 8:19 AM  
Anonymous allegro805 said...

Sara, really, these comment threads are getting a little silly.

"Scum sucking vermin" really drags this into the theater of the ridiculous (not to mention complete lack of courtesy -- what happened to guidelines?).

It's a shame. Once again, thanks for your efforts.

1/04/2008 11:28 AM  
Anonymous Honey said...

reply to primary scum 7;09 p.m.

Yes Honey, it's me.

If you had treated me better when we were together I wouldn't have had to resort to name calling.

Why did you have to wear that badge insulting me. Why did you hang that sign from the bridge expressing your disloyalty?

Why were you so biased in your stories.

Oh, if you had only behaved properly all this wouldn't have happened.

But it did. So, if the shoe fits wear it!

1/04/2008 11:59 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Why would there have been a huge crowd? It wasn't an advertised rally -- it was a press conference.
And for anybody who claims, whatever he or she thought of the quality of the paper pre-meltdown, that it's much of a newspaper now is just spinning. How could there be much in-depth news, when what you have is a very small staff of very young 'temps' hired through an agency with no benefits? All hires since last June are temps. Would a good experienced journalist apply here, to live in expensive Santa Barbara with no benefits such as medical or paid holidays? Of course such people aren't applying.
Temps -- I see it, and it's a fact acknowledged by the NP management, it's not a spin or an insult to anyone (and no, I don't like all this 'slopehead' nonsense that unfortunately was started by worker bee.)
And the very young staff is getting very little professional guidance.

1/04/2008 1:42 PM  
Anonymous A.K.S. said...

10:02 PM_

I respect your right to opinion and reading choice. I'd be interested in hearing more, like specifics as to what you like about the columnist as opposed to the journalists.

I asked Don Jose if he read the column, you don't need to make it your business. I have read the column and don't now, unless someone brings something to my attention. The writings on health & reproductive care, unions and war are far reaching in her arena. Her doctorate is in physiology. When incorrect or misleading there are those who would allow discussion. The last I knew the News-Press is like a black hole for differing opinions. I admit I'm not current on the paper, is the black hole over? I'd welcome someone pointing out improvements. I have rights, too, if I think someone is doing harm or is an air head I can say it or call them evil or slope-head like some do. I make a choice to read the angry or peanut gallery on blogs. I find it humorous at times, if it would drive me down, I'd take another road. I admire people who save their hate and anger for conditions that harm others, rights being violated, lack of affordable health care, bombs killing the old and young, homeless veterans and problems that need to be attacked.

I see columns as opinion. It's unfortunate when opinion is taken as fact. That's serious when a person has an appearance of fraud.

Don Jose was reasonable. He's not a Wendy hater but wants a good community newspaper and the focus on the paper.
He pointed out a few of Wendy's mistakes, mentioning only Travis and Scott. How do problems and mistakes get better? Not Wendy's way, she goes to court and leaves others out of all conversation. Wendy's paper has 10 more years on just one case. There are those who like Travis, Scott and all the others and those that don't like any of them. Both groups will get frustrated and have slope-head moments. Travis, Scott and all will be mentioned both good and bad. To censor or shut up others is a bad and/or illegal act. Ph D Laura has the most transparent life because people have experienced her over twenty years. When she lies it's personal for some. She alone is one of Wendy's biggest mistakes. I don't want to get into Arthur, but he is another. You can say why you like them all.

The columns I did read lacked integrity. It is my business and everyone else. I know people who read them to keep tabs on the misinformation, others might want advice. Who's the fool? That is opinion. I don't feel anger towards you and wouldn't tell you to shut up. I encourage you to express more and articulate in a way people with varied opinion can all have a say. It's positive this blog allows everyone to vent here.

You might consider a little honey with your advice.

1/04/2008 3:44 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Errr, it was a press conference ...

By the way, who's calling John Zant a "slopehead?"

No way. Have some respect. These people are not "losers."

1/04/2008 5:54 PM  
Anonymous not just for raw fish anymore said...

Here is perhaps the highest and best use of this newspaper.

The news conference at its peak time had about 80 people present, and it was announced through a few emails less than a day earlier. The intent was not a huge crowd, but to distribute the information, which was covered by at least 15 other news organizations. Except the one in the big building there at the same location.

Those are the facts, and lying about them will not change them no matter how many anonymous sock puppets comment here, as facts are quite stubborn as several federal judges have concluded several times on this issue.

1/04/2008 7:28 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Who cares how many people were at the press conference.

All that really matters here is that, at the end of the day, it is still Wendy's paper, and she is going to continue to run it in a way such that there is no more socialistic left wing bias in the reporting. So get used to it cause that ain't going to be changed by any piss ant's ruling, even if some of the reporters come back in 10 years. (if they can wait that long)

The other reality is that the left wing union is going to be bled dry for the next ten years and thats a fact that the left wing News Press haters are powerless to change.

Wendy is in total control of the time. And, according to inside sources, it's going to be a long time coming.

1/04/2008 8:08 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

well this tread has been going on for several days now and one thing is clear and that is somebody is having a real problem with what the judge ruled.
It's clear to most people he really had no choice but to make the decision he made by what was presented to the court.
perhaps they should be upset with the lawyer who presented their side and failed. But then maybe the lawyer did not have really much to work with.
The people who where put on for the NewsPress would have a hard time selling hot chocolate on a cold day.
Gotta feel sorry for wendy if those were the best she could come up with for her big day in court.
time to get a new posse wendy after all she should be able to do much better both personally and professionally i would think. There are people of quailty somewhere on earth .... she should see if she can find some.

1/04/2008 8:55 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

If the rally was supposed to be only a press conference, why hold it in an open plaza right in front of the NewsPress building?

What was that meant to show? It was not just to pass on information. It was calculated to stick it to Wendy and rub it in her face.

How biased is that? And to have that chick cry she brought the tyrant down is informational? Or is it combative and confrontational playing for applause from the mini-crowd?

Too bad Daily Sound headlined it as "supporters" for the fired NP workers as if it was intended to be a rally for them. They did not present it only as a press conference.

Wendy, I hope you never have to work with any of these people any more.

They are mean an classless in what they are doing and no one should be forced to have to take them back and work side by side with them, ever again. Yet, they continue to think Wendy is the spiteful one. They are losing sympathy every day with every negative, hateful action they keep taking.

These fired reporters are coming across as really awful people, who deserved to get fired. They are poisoned by their own bias this time and that is what former readers hated about them.

Please don't bring them back to the NewsPress.

1/04/2008 10:28 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I have a real problem with the way the judge ruled. Which is why we have an appeals process. It is the american way, and for a very good reason.

No judge is infallible. And plenty of decisions get overturned or remanded upon appeal. Which is why we have this three court system. Duh?

What is it about abitratry dictatorships that you like if you think just because one flawed man makes a decision based upon his own set of prejudices that it automatically becomes the law of the land.

I think you problem is you like the decision whether it is just or not.

Let an appeals court decide this issue by looking at new issues and new angles that this judge failed to see in his rush to support full-employment of incompetent and destructive employees.

Yes, there are plenty of labor law judges who always side with the employees. Duh?

It was stated here this judge made a similar ruling with another newspaper which was also appealed and then settled between the two parties. That indicates in fact the judge was wrong or else there would be no reason to later settle the case on different terms. Duh?

If Wendy sets out clearly in writing how she wants these fired writers to behave in the future, and they sign and promise they will and will accept immediate termination should they fail to honor these guidelines, that might be a settlement all parties can live with.

1/04/2008 10:45 PM  
Blogger Sara De la Guerra said...

allegro805 -- you are right, I shouldn't have let that pass.

I was also rejecting worse -- believe it or not -- as it seems we have a one person sock puppet peppering the blog by saying everyone is a socialist slopehead. Never heard that invective until now -- not sure I will allow it any longer.

1/04/2008 11:28 PM  
Anonymous Show me the Bias! said...

One more time, what is the "socialist bias" that was so bad to be purged?

Really, how are these repeated allegations to be believed without any credible examples?

You are entitled to you own opinions, but not you own facts.

1/04/2008 11:58 PM  
Anonymous No sock puppet said...


Please go look at the comment by "Worker Bee" on 9:19 a.m. 1/1 on your lower the boom blog.

He is the first one to use and coin the phrase slopehead. He was describing the News Press reporters as having sloping foreheads like monkeys. He also made reference to sex organs and ears. He later used the term slugs crawling out from under rocks to describde hews press supporters. So you have "Worker Bee" to thank for lowering the level of conversation to insuts.

So he started this! And more importantly YOU ALLOWED HIM TO SAY WHAT HE SAID!!

Turn about is fair play! They can dish it out but can't take it! Do unto others as you would have then do unto you.

All I did was try to teach him a lesson by turn around his comment on him by using his term to refer to slope head socialists. It was all, for his benefit. I promise you I did not do it with any intention of trying to ruin this blog.
It actually caught on as numerous peoiple started using that term. I assure you that I was not the only one to use that phrase.

The term slopehead (referring to a monkey) actually not that bad as there are a lot of much, much worse nasty terms being used on your blog than calling someone a monkey.

For you to not low the use of this term, while allowing all those other much more derogatory terms would mean that you are showing huge and significant bias in favor of socialists. And it also shows your significant bias against the News Press supporters to allow negative and insulting descriptions of the news press supporters but to not allow the same to occur against the left wing supporters.

Either you allow free speech or you censure. Either you show your bias or you don't! You can't have it both ways. I suggest you think about it very carefully, especially when the fired reporters are being accused of bias.
Maybe draw the line at the f--- word??

1/05/2008 7:06 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Criminals always wail `it was not my fault, it was the judge, I was framed, it was UNFAIR!' Wendy McCaw is no different than a speed-head or any other low-life who blames everyone except themselves.

The Law is the Law. Once we start selective enforcement, then I'd like the Government not to enforce tax law in my case so I don't have to pay taxes.

Wendy wants special treatment for billionaires and bottled-water tasters. I say let her wait in line for hours at the Courthouse like the poorest in our community.

Why do Santa Barbara advertisers support someone coercively interrogates and conducst surveillance on their employees:

Conclusions of Law

1. Respondent has engaged in unfair labor practices affecting commerce within the meaning of Section 8(a) (1) and Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act by:

(a) Threatening to discipline employees if they engage in union and protected concerted activity.

(b) Coercively interrogating employees concerning their union activities.

(c) Instructing employees to remove buttons from their clothing and signs from their vehicles reading “McCaw Obey the Law.”

(d) Terminating Robert Guiliano because he refused to commit an unfair labor practice.

(e) Engaging in surveillance of the union activities of employees.

2. Respondent has engaged in unfair labor practices affecting commerce within the meaning of Section 8(a)(3) and (1) and Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act by:

(a) Issuing letters of suspension to employees because those employees engaged in union and protected concerted activity.

(b) Canceling the column written by Starshine Roshell because she supported the Union.

(c) Giving lower evaluations to Anna Davision, Dawn Hobbs, Melissa Evans, and Karna Hughes because they engaged in union activity, thereby depriving them of annual performance bonuses.

(d) Discharging Melinda Burns, Anna Davison, Dawn Hobbs, Rob Kuznia, Barney McManigal, Tom Schultz, John Zant, and Melissa Evans because they engaged in union activity.


1/05/2008 7:14 AM  
Blogger Sara De la Guerra said...

"no sock puppet" -- thanks. The comment you point to passed me the same time I was not happy with how the word and words were used in subsequent comments. They were used in a mean fashion which made it more likely to not publish. Monkey, for instance, can have a racist meaning to it...

I am careful about not being biased but see your points...thanks again for pointing this out.

1/05/2008 9:54 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I once thought Wendy P. Mc Caw was a class act. The same for her friends. What happened? Her support group shrunk or is it the caliper of a new crop? Where is the gentleman that was once her champion? Is he disgusted with her?

1/05/2008 10:04 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I have to agree. You say they were "biased" reporters. Tell us how.

1/05/2008 10:33 AM  
Anonymous Hot for Sara said...

End zone dances can be crass and unsportsmanlike and Terrel Owens and Dawn Hobbs give vivid example to that fact.

It is time to get down to negotiating a contract and getting qualified workers in the newsroom and money pouring back in the paper's coffers.

Also, complaining that the unqualified of the temps (most of them) get no professional guidance is a bit odd. Some of these folks have no business working there, at this point in their careers or ever because no amount of guidance can make up for a lack of training and experience. They should get that at weeklies and sub-10k circulation papers, not here. If they don't like the fact that they have an opportunity they don't really deserve, they should do all a favor and move on.

And calling union-supporting workers who are still at the paper scabs is just unfair. If they cross the inevitable picket line, that is one thing. Which union represents columnists at the Independent? Sorry, which one?

There is no truly critical thinking expressed here, just the invective of true believers on either side of the issue.

Here is an attempt: Judge Kocol's ruling was so thoroughly one-sided it could portend that the full NLRB or the appeals court will temper it a bit, but let most of it stand.

To have one of the primary union negotiators tasked with hashing out a contact between the teamsters and the paper say, "We took down a tyrant," is just plain foolish and does a disservice to the union and its members, which she is supposed to represent, let alone a community that wishes to have a professionally-run, adequately staffed paper at its service.

Some much bigger and better papers have come back from open labor-management warfare by eventually reaching compromises and forging a contract. That's what needs to happen here. Taking down Wendy or busting the union are indefensible positions at this point and serve only to protract a damaging conflict.

The most trenchant on either side should be muzzled at this juncture of the dispute in favor of cooler heads.

Like far left liberal or right wing radicals on the national political front, they are fringe players — though with remarkably unfortunate wide-reaching influence — in a battle whose only hope of positive outcome rests with the moderate dwellers of more middle ground positions less steeped in raw emotion.

Self-righteousness is unsupportable, whether it comes from liberals, right-wing social conservatives, foamy-mouthed ex-cop reporters, recalcitrant newspaper owners or wrong-headed newspaper management types.

It is okay, though, when coming from smug middle of the road blog comment posters.

Now peace out white people and Anglicized Hispanics.

1/05/2008 12:11 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

reply to 10:33 a.m.

You keep asking for examples of bias.

The bias is the exact same general bias for the left as is prevalent in the vast majority of newspapers nationwide.

We all know that it exists. it is a well known and well accepted fact. I don't have to give you a specific example of this nationwide left leaning bias for it to exist just like i don't have to give you an example of the bias of the reporters who were fired for it to have existed.

What you don't seem to get is that every single human being is biased, including you, me, and Sara.
its normal and part of being human.

This bias is controlled by the owner of the various papers. The previous news press allowed such bias to the left to take place. When Wendy bought it she put a stop to all this bias and that what all this fuss is really all about.

So the whole point is that bias is not necessarily bad per se because it is normal and is everywhere around us. The whole point is whether or not the owner of a paper has a right to insist that the left leaning bias stop IN HER PAPER. There are plenty of left leaning papers ( including our own independent) for left leaning reporters to go to work for if they feel that they just have to be able to continue their bias to the left.

1/05/2008 1:17 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Put that "took down a tyrant" gal on such a short leash she will wish she never got her job back.

Living well is the best revenge, Wendy. Make them work for YOU.

These people are still employees and they still have to work for the boss and they should never forget this.

1/05/2008 1:46 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

12:11 Nice thoughts and I agree that more would be accomplished if people would move towards the center, compromise and negotiate. What you don't understand is that for those of us who worked under Wendy for several years, we know a deeper truth. It doesn't matter what you think or what facts you put in front of the lady. She won't listen and doesn't care what others think, so I am not sure what it will take to even have reasonable negotiations with Wendy and her management. I have seen good people burned by the lady because they thought they could reason with her but they ended up on her bad side and ultimately out the door because they disagreed with her. If Dawn and Melinda seem rabid about their positions, it might be due to the fact that they got pushed past the edge, as did Jerry and many others.

I also would like to think that there will be a peaceful end to all this, but considering Wendy's history, I think that will be impossible. She has proven over and over again that she takes everything personally and pursues vendettas to the bitter end. Too bad for the citizens of Santa Barbara. They end up the big losers.

1/05/2008 2:50 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

All you say about Wendy being petty and vindictive may well be true, but it still does not change the fact it is her paper and she alone will rise and fall on how she conducts her business.

No one reading the paper today miss those fired reporters. I don't even remember their names. Nor do I recognize what is missing in the paper now that they are not writing any more.

And their post-lawsuit conduct makes me hope I never have to hear from them again.

The cancellations have leveled off. New people to town are subscribing not knowing or caring about this past history. Advertisers remain. Editorials are well-received for the most part and the paper shows growing political clout as witnessed in the last city election. What is there not to like.

Even that ship guy's column is surprisingly interesting. At first I thought what a narrow topic, but he really writes good things. The TaTa for Now guy is gossipy enough to serve his own purpose. And Dr Laura stirs up values thinking, which is not a bad thing.

The syndicated columns show a nice variety which again cover a decent range of thinking, even if I don't agree with them.

I am glad I am getting exposed to new ways of thinking that show up in a lot more people than represented by our narrow progressive little island perspective here on the left coast.

Next time, we won't be so shocked when Red States elect another total idiot for our next President.

And maybe we will work harder to prevent this next time, rather than remain smug and ineffectual in our little Blue State cocoon here. Being spoon fed from a "progressive" echo chamber instead of truly being engaged in the diversity of opinion necessary for a healthy democracy.

Leave Wendy alone and recognize even if she is the personal witch you claim, she has a right to run her paper anyway she wants. You need to seriously start looking for another job.

1/05/2008 4:55 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Look, Wendy really is the soulmate of Squeaky Fromme, just with a different set of life situations.

It is not possible to imagine a sane newspaper under Wendy.

The Rob Lowe incident pretty much sums it up. He made a pornographic movie with a minor! People like him should have their addresses in the California sex offenders registry.

Instead, Wendy reprimanded a reporter for publishing the address of the empty lot where Lowe wanted to move his sex-with-minors legacy into a new mansion built under his specs that was way bigger than local standards suggested. That reporter should have been commended.

Getting Lowe's address out and publicly known is crucial for community safety!

So what if Wendy doesn't want sex offenders addresses published. She is wrong. She is just as loopy as Squeaky Fromme.

1/05/2008 5:28 PM  
Anonymous Show me the Bias! said...

Here is the response I am reading here:

They were biased because all those newspapers and the whole news media is biased, so no need to cite examples.

That actually is called Truthiness, not bias.

Keep trying, dude.

1/05/2008 5:52 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Using and abusing scabs is a disease not a business plan. In the end it's the collective memory of Wendy's life in the shadow of T.M. that she's purchasing.

1/05/2008 7:03 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

You know who loves the `unbiased' News-Press.


The top administration there loves the evisceration of the hard news reporters at the News-Press.

UCSB has been getting a free ride on all its high-density planning around campus... 3,000 new units in the next 15 years in their LRDP.

And the IV master plan went through like s--- through a goose.

No-one left a the News-Press even has the right phone number in their rolodex.

1/05/2008 7:04 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

If all newspapers and the whole news media is biased, then why the heck does the News-Press is unbiased when it just regurgitates wire service drivel?

1/05/2008 7:06 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Our community always needs to have the addresses of people like Rob Lowe public. Unbelievable that Wendy McCaw reprimanded a reporter for publishing Lowe's address.

Here are excerpts from the July, 1989 article on Lowe from the LA Times (an actual newspaper):

Actor Rob Lowe will perform community service in Los Angeles to avoid prosecution on charges that he videotaped a girl performing a sex act at an Atlanta hotel during the 1988 Democratic National Convention, the prosecutor in the Georgia city said Saturday.

Lowe had faced a possible criminal charge of sexual exploitation of a minor, with a maximum 20 years in prison and a $100,000 fine, said Dist. Atty. Lewis R. Slaton.

Lowe, 25, and his father met with Slaton on Friday, almost a year after he allegedly taped the sex scene between Jan Parsons, who was 16 at the time, and a female companion.

"I needed to talk to him to size him up to see if he was OK for the program," Slaton said. "I felt the young man fit in, but I had to be sure of his attitude."

Lowe will work 20 hours with disadvantaged youths in Los Angeles-area schools and "stay out of trouble," for two years, Slaton said, adding that terms of the program will be worked out in the next few weeks. The agreement was part of the state's pretrial intervention program, "a hybrid alternative" to prosecution for young, nonviolent first offenders, Slaton said.

Lowe, who is currently making a film in Los Angeles, remains the subject of a civil suit brought by Parsons' mother, who claims the actor seduced her daughter.

1/05/2008 7:36 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

You provide a good community service, Sara. Thank you.

The comments here, well, they are what they are. You can't really help that beyond basic moderation.

It's how we're living in 2008, I guess.

Santa Barbara, have you seen better days?

1/06/2008 1:05 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

What is Wendy doing shielding the address of Rob Lowe, who made a sex video with a minor?

Why isn't his address in the state database of sex offenders?

Does she think she has the freedom to aid and abet sex offenders and child molesters?

Is that the freedom that pro-Wendy people want?

1/06/2008 8:17 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

With all controversy going on about this no one has answered the questions regarding KZSB.

1. Who paid for the station?
2. Whose name is on the title?
3. From who, what or where did the money derive?

Maybe someone can get the answers and post so this matter can be cleared up.
It seemed that some people were very upset that some wanted to know this information.

1/06/2008 12:37 PM  
Anonymous MP said...

The Lowe managers made sure the details of his child sexual exploits are well buried. Parsons' mother possibly sold the child out for money. Lowe bought her silence like McCaw buys silence.

Lowe is not that big of a star. The address was already public. The hyper-reaction indicates the Lowe management may not only be to "protect the children".

It is easier to hide child sex for decades then it is to kill another mate, as in the Simpson case. It is not unique for Hollywood marriages to be arranged to conceal a celebrities actual preferences.

I've seen wealthy families who use foreign services to get cheap help. There is no telling what young people are getting into. The whole community needs to be aware and know how to report anything suspect.

Wendy must make good on her assertions that she wants to help victims of child porn. She could do an educational series around computer porn and the slave trades where children are a commodity.

1/06/2008 2:23 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

A 16 year old is not a minor but is a consenting adult.

A buxom and fully developed, willing and consenting 16 year old is a far cry from a child and a far cry from making one a pedophile! maybe poor judgement but certainly not a pedophile or child molestrer. .

Hell, 16 year olds got married all the time 100 years ago and still often do today.

A 10 year old would be a totally different story.
Lets not make something here that isn't. another fine example of left wing biased and sensational journalism. Where the goal here is not to report the news but to further a left wing agenda and to bash anyone from the right.

This is all so very transparent as to the motives and as to the bias. Just who do you think you are kidding.

this is but one more example of left wing biased journalism and writing. someone asked for an example. Well here it is right here on biased Bloga Barbara. Where everyone is biased and too dumb to see it. .

1/06/2008 3:25 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

To 2:23 p.m.

Wendy doesn't have a history of making good on her assertions, for example, the following:

"... I plan to leave the day-to-day management and editorial direction of our paper to the professionals who run it. An essential reason for buying the News-Press is to preserve its independence and integrity." 7-22-2000

"I respect the traditions of journalism and believe that the best way to run a paper is to hire good people and let them do their jobs, and that is exactly what I am doing." 7-19-2006

"We are in the process of hiring a new editor who is a strong journalist with impeccable credentials to be the buffer between the newsroom and the publisher." 7-25-2006

"While I don't believe that union representation is in the best interests of our employees, the paper or this community, I respect our employees' rights to make their own decisions." 7-25-2006

1/06/2008 4:47 PM  
Anonymous perverts comment for Low said...

That's the most disgusting comment so far, 3:25 PM. Manipulating cons should stay away from all ages and all sexes.

1/06/2008 6:41 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Why do you make excuses for Rob Lowe? When my son turned 18, the first thing I did was warn him about messing with girls under 18. I made it very clear that he could go to jail for that, so they were hands off. I won't disagree that there are sexually active, overly mature girls at 16, but the law says a girl isn't an adult until 18, period. Rob Lowe was a 25 year old adult and should have known better and could have chosen to not involve himself in that situation. It isn't bias, it is stating facts and the law. Regardless of age, men should be taught to think with their big head instead of their small head. There is no excuse for being sexually irresponsible and taking advantage of young girls.

As far as the present goes, he may have grown from the narrow escape he had, and has become a responsible parent. Chances are, his escapades were those of being a young, horny, and stupid party head, but his activities were nothing to dismiss or excuse. It also shows he had a great disrespect for women and one can only hope he has learned to respect them over the years.

1/06/2008 6:54 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

No excuses. The law is the law. Videotaping sex with a minor was illegal, and Lowe did it.

His address should always be publicly availaible. That the News-Press tried to shield his address means that the News-Press was aiding and abetting a child pornographer.

Left wing bias? Got that backwards. Lowe is a no-good Hollywood lowlife, the child of relative ethics and a godless empty materialistic culture.

No soft mollycoddling sex offenders like Lowe. Hard time would have been the best for him.

If you don't think sex with a 16 year-old is illegal and downright devasting to the young person, ask the police to release Peter Jeschke, the Santa Barbara High assistant tennis coach, now in jail for... sex with a 16-year old.

Rob Lowe never spent a second of time in jail, unlike Jeschke.

Folks like Wendy McCaw shield him from the consequences of his action.

The very least that Lowe could do is publish his address so that all parents can make sure their kids never go to his house.

1/06/2008 7:52 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hope is good but no guarantee of change. Rob Lowe may have learned to set up a good front. Did you see the video? He's narcissistic to put it nice, nice. Not likely to change.

1/06/2008 8:31 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

We're rid of the socialist, left-wing bias? Come off it. Anna Davision was fired for being allegedly "anti-coyote." Is that a socialist position? Right, I forgot that was in Ralph Nader's platform.

1/07/2008 8:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Wendy McCaw both a protects minors from illegal porn and protects child pornographers? Rob Lowe did solicit the 16 year old for sex and he scored. In Georgia that's legal.

If all that's not a red flag, what is? Can someone post the signs to spot child pornographers and child molesters? Men who do engage in those activities often have co-dependents. Those signs need to be posted.

In families where a man molests, often the mother is in denial or allows it to go on. The victims can blame both parties.

Dr. Laura has experience in this area. She can help explain this.

1/07/2008 12:54 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

12:54pm if it is legal than why did the Atlanta District Attorney bring up charges of with exploitation of a minor?

Here are excerpts from the July, 1989 article on Lowe from the LA Times (an actual newspaper):

Actor Rob Lowe will perform community service in Los Angeles to avoid prosecution on charges that he videotaped a girl performing a sex act at an Atlanta hotel during the 1988 Democratic National Convention, the prosecutor in the Georgia city said Saturday.

Lowe had faced a possible criminal charge of sexual exploitation of a minor, with a maximum 20 years in prison and a $100,000 fine, said Dist. Atty. Lewis R. Slaton.

Lowe, 25, and his father met with Slaton on Friday, almost a year after he allegedly taped the sex scene between Jan Parsons, who was 16 at the time, and a female companion.

"I needed to talk to him to size him up to see if he was OK for the program," Slaton said. "I felt the young man fit in, but I had to be sure of his attitude."

Lowe will work 20 hours with disadvantaged youths in Los Angeles-area schools and "stay out of trouble," for two years, Slaton said, adding that terms of the program will be worked out in the next few weeks. The agreement was part of the state's pretrial intervention program, "a hybrid alternative" to prosecution for young, nonviolent first offenders, Slaton said.

Lowe, who is currently making a film in Los Angeles, remains the subject of a civil suit brought by Parsons' mother, who claims the actor seduced her daughter.

1/07/2008 5:34 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Had he been a nobody, he would have gone to jail and register as a sex offender. There's justice for you.

1/08/2008 4:38 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Never forget: Wendy McCaw reprimanded a reporter for publishing the address of a sex offender.

Never forget that.

When her toadies and spinsters and lawyers and water tasters try to get you to look the other way.

Never forget.


She reprimanded a reporter for publishing the address of Rob Lowe, a sex offender.

When small business owners put signs up in their windows `McCaw, obey the law', she threatened them with legal action.

To protect her right to shield a sex offender.

Never forget. Never.

1/08/2008 8:21 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I will never forget, never!

But what it is that I will never forget is the loser reporters who got fired for good cause and who tried to put a spin on it.

Never forget, never!

And I will never forget the great pleasure that so many of us got from watching the disgruntled reporters wait frustrated for 10 years while their frivolous and ridiculous case is appealed.

And I will never forget the satisfaction that comes from watching the socialist union being bled dry.

Never forget, never!

1/08/2008 10:26 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Never forget in America, when someone is convicted and punished their status as a criminal is over.

Never forget those with a relentless punitive nature in the interest of personal spite can never be neutral professional journalists.

1/08/2008 2:14 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Wow, I did not know Rob Lowe was a convicted sex offender. It is awful to have him in our community and to have Wendy all whigged out about people knowing his address!

1/08/2008 7:31 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Never forget OJ is free and will never be over anything. Never forget professional journalists are NOT who are relentlessly of punitive nature. Try reading what the relentlessly punitive Wendys say and never forget. Never forget PARENTS never forget the slime that gets away with disgusting crimes and live like priests who harm children.

1/08/2008 8:24 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Just because you get out of prison, doesn't mean that a felon goes scott free. Sexual predators are limited to where they can live and must register where they live. Convicted felons may not own guns or vote either so there are consequences that follow most through life even once they have served their time.

I also find it very interesting that the same people who are pushing to convict Jerry Roberts who hasn't been proven to do anything wrong, are defending Rob Lowe who was convicted of sexual exploitation. Talk about double standards and bias.

1/08/2008 8:55 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Had Rob Roberts been caught as Lowe was in Atlanta, his 20 years would be up in 2008. He'd register for life and parents would have a chance to protect children. Wendy doesn't care and is careless. Who was responsible to secure the News-Press computers?

1/08/2008 10:47 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

You disgusting people who keep bashing Rob Lowe are nothing but low life slime.

Quit trying to make a big deal out of nothing.
a couple pictures for a privatre collection of a couple of consenting teen age tramps. Big deal. As if they were hurt in the slightest.

A minor indiscression and you hold it over him forever.
If it were not for the connection to Wendy you would not even be mentioning it.

Just how many of you virgins has sex or ever looked at a playboy magazine under the age of 18? over half of you. of course. It's part of being a normal human. Big deal!


1/09/2008 8:15 AM  
Anonymous end socialist drivel said...

The sex tape thing is about Rob Lowes love of anatomy, his anatomy. The girl wasnt much. Stop going on about it. You wish you had what he has thats all.

1/09/2008 10:49 AM  
Anonymous the timekeeper said...

11 days have gone by since the judge decision.

Only 3639 more days to go until the appeals are exhausted, and the fired reporters get their job back.

I will report daily on the progress.
Is anyone out there still holding their breath?

1/09/2008 1:15 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

A federal administration brought this case on behalf of the people. The reporters gave factual statements during an investigation and truthful testimony in court.

You allege "a relentless punitive nature in the interest of personal spite ... "

What a load. Try this: "A predictable prosecution in the interest of the U.S. Constitution."

1/09/2008 2:08 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Never forget it is still far better to let a guilty man free, than wrongfully officially condemn and punish an innocent.

Karma takes care of the guilty who escape legal punishment. Never forget that too.

1/09/2008 4:28 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I'll never forget that Wendy McCaw punished a reporter who put the address of sex offender Rob Lowe in a story.

1/09/2008 8:21 PM  
Anonymous Seek Justice said...


Go on enjoying your pride in a limp legal system. Be anti-justice all you'd like, if it floats your paper boat.

Be proud of a legal system in which the person with the most dough can prolong the process until the other side must yell uncle.

Or, join us who wish our country had a greater interest in Justice For All.

1/09/2008 9:33 PM  
Anonymous the timekeeper said...

12 days have gone by since the judge decision.

Only 3638 more days to go until the appeals are exhausted, and the fired reporters get their job back.

I will report daily on the progress.
Is anyone out there still holding his or her breath?

1/09/2008 9:58 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Wendy McCaw has achieved the impossible: she has made me respect the Teamsters.

And she's brought the Teamsters to town... what business will they seek to unionize next.

Thanks, Wendy.

1/09/2008 10:07 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Considering the rants of the reactionary right on this blog, I am afraid there could be more unions coming to town. I am not a union supporter but if that is what it takes to prevent employers from taking advantage of and abusing employees, then I guess the unions will become popular once again. Management by intimidation has never worked. It is not taught in the business schools. We have a new class of power hungry tyrants, who get their kicks out of taking advantage of the people who make them rich and then whine because these same people don't respect them and are "disloyal". Then these same employers cry foul when the employees organize to protect themselves. I guess these people never read their history of the industrial revolution. If they did, they would realize that this is how unions came about in the first place. There was a good reason the NYT was respectful and treated their employees well. It is how they kept the union out. No company is perfect, but for the most part it worked. It also had the added benefit of creating a very loyal and essentially happy workforce. Wendy could learn a lot from them.

1/10/2008 6:11 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Craig Smith said today: I wouldn't expect the Teamsters to walk away from this fight anytime soon, or ever for that matter.

Ding ding ding!

Never gonna happen.

1/10/2008 8:06 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Unions are ineffective. Lets face it.

1/10/2008 12:57 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Most businesses know that it is more profitable to treat employees well and thus keep unions out... the Indy and Sound, for example.

Businesses where unions take an interest (like the News-Press) usually are smart enough to adhere to the law in their employee relations, so as to avoid the News-Press's dilemma. You can still pretty much do whatever you want, you just have to follow the stations of the cross of labor law.

The News-Press is so incompetently run they didn't know how to outwit the labor relations laws, and they took the Teamsters on head-on. And the News-Press will eventually be mowed down (in slow motion), much to the detriment of all other businesses. The News-Press will become a poster child for why labor laws need to be strengthened.

All due to the idiocy of Wendy and her cohort.

1/10/2008 6:01 PM  
Blogger Sara De la Guerra said...

6:01 PM -- this post is ten days old and I have trouble with your and others' wording...can we move on?

1/10/2008 7:17 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

where would you like to move on to?

1/10/2008 7:21 PM  
Anonymous the timekeeper said...

13 days have gone by since the judge decision.

Only 3637 more days to go until the appeals are exhausted, and the fired reporters get their job back.

I will report daily on the progress.
Is anyone out there still holding his or her breath?

1/11/2008 11:20 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It's time to move on to any subject other than the boring and yesterdays news subject of the News Press.

Some people just don't get that the News Press is simply not going to change and is going to be around for the next 10 years with the same management and the same policies.

I would like for someone, anyone, to tell me exactly what is going to be accomplished by crying about it in the blogs of Bloga Barbara, where none of the readers have any power whatsoever to change how the news press is being run. Not one iota.
The more you bash Wendy the more determined she becomes to come out on top. So, in reality, all this bashing accomplishes is to make things worse instead of better. Why can't everyone see that. To me it's so very obvious. Unless some get their kicks out of talking bad about someone. What a waste of time and energy.

1/11/2008 4:17 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Does Wendy talk bad about people? You bet, ask Jerry Roberts or any of the organized fired.

Wendy also publishes biased junk every day in her birdcage bottom cover.

The only way to get the rest of the story out is in blogs like this.

I had know idea about Rob Lowe's sex crime until reading it here.

Move on? Yes, to the enforcement of the criminal actions of the News-Press.

Wendy threatens legal action against anyone who displeases her, by, say, posting `Obey the Law' signs in their shop. We need blogs to have discussions about her weird behavior.

1/11/2008 5:50 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Billionaires get to be weird and can even afford not to be liked. Gawd love her.

1/11/2008 11:57 PM  
Anonymous the timekeeper said...

14 days have gone by since the judge decision.

Only 3636 more days to go until the appeals are exhausted, and the fired reporters get their job back.

I will report daily on the progress.
Is anyone out there still holding his or her breath?

1/12/2008 10:39 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

And weird billionaires can pay $10 million in eventual restitution and perhaps even spend time in jail cells when they break the law.

Is that famous Nobel Laureate from UCSB (Shriefer or something) still in the state pen?

I just hope none of the food preparation workers in our chi-chi restaurants recognize the billionaires when they come to eat. Ewwwww!

1/12/2008 12:08 PM  
Anonymous the timekeeper said...

15 days have gone by since the judge decision.

Only 365 more days to go until the appeals are exhausted, and the fired reporters get their job back.

I will report daily on the progress.
Is anyone out there still holding his or her breath?

1/13/2008 11:23 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Who cares is Wendy spends $10,000,000 or spends time in jail.

all that really matters here is 3 things;

1. The nasty union is bled dry on the order of $10,000,000 over the next 10 years

2. That this dispute is drug out over 10 years and thus keeping these socialistic and biased reporters out of the News Press for the next 10 years.

3. To keep the socialist News Press haters "frustrated" for the next ten years

I can assure you that there are a whole lot of us who are getting great pleasure in watching this 10 year time delay. Ha Ha!

1/13/2008 11:31 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Why 10 years?

What makes you think this will take this long?

1/13/2008 6:52 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

10 or 100 years, they speak in empty veiled threat. Do what she wants because Wendy power will win, she has all the money.

1/13/2008 8:23 PM  
Anonymous the timekeeper said...

16 days have gone by since the judge decision.

Only 3634 more days to go until the appeals are exhausted, and the fired reporters get their job back.

I will report daily on the progress.
Is anyone out there still holding his or her breath?

1/14/2008 11:21 AM  
Anonymous the timekeeper said...

reply to 6:52 p.m.

It is going to take 10 years because Wendy is purposely going to drag it out for 10 years with various appeals and even take it all the way to the supreme court.

Dragging it out for 10 years is a form of winning, and getting the better of both the union and the biased fired reporters. With the desirable side benefits of bleeding the union dry and also in being able to keep the fired reporters our of the news press for 10 years. A most enjoyable prospect, and a lot of fun to watch the frustration of the news press haters.

Go Wendy. We support you. You have God behind you and they have the Devil behind them. May they rot.

1/14/2008 4:49 PM  
Anonymous the timekeeper said...

17 days have gone by since the judge decision.

Only 3633 more days to go until the appeals are exhausted, and the fired reporters get their job back.

I will report daily on the progress.
Is anyone out there still holding his or her breath?

1/15/2008 10:55 AM  
Anonymous the timekeeper said...

18 days have now gone by since the judge decision.

Only 3632 more days to go until the appeals are exhausted, and the fired reporters get their job back.

I will report daily on the progress.
Is anyone out there still holding his or her breath?

1/16/2008 10:33 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

'Dragging it out for 10 years is a form of winning'

You've been to the joint. They all think the same. Sitting in those cells, like Wendy, they all think they won.

Study Unions, they aren't being bled. It's Wendy who is being taken by her fake supporters. Go Wendy. Support them.

1/16/2008 11:46 AM  
Anonymous Nick said...

Listen, I really hate what Wendy has done as much as the next guy, but don't be chickenshits and not attach at least your first name. Call her out, but don't be as gutless as she is.

1/23/2008 7:45 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home