Comment to Post: Today's Editorial in the SBNP

John San Roque didn't know where to put this but I think it would be useful for discussion -- especially in relationship to Craig's post today.

==============
I realize this completely disregards Citizen Stringer’s post, but I actually have something interesting to discuss.

Editorials in the News-Press yesterday and today, I believe, show a significant turning point. Up until now, Armstrong and the rest have taken the position that they’re right and everybody else is wrong--cabals, etc. The two recent editorials attempt to explain the position the News-Press has taken and the reasons for it. Things are going badly enough now that the NP feels the need to explain—something they’ve not condescended to do before.

For those of you who haven’t read the editorials, there’s some amazing turnabouts and comparisons. The idea that the owner “never interfere(s) with the news judgments of reporters or editors” is rejected absolutely. That wall of separation, evidently, has been torn down. Armstrong (with a straight face, I assume) draws a favorable comparison between McCaw’s current role and that of the owner of the Washington Post during the Watergate scandal. If you’re going to cite some newspaper lore and legend, might as well go big. He also throws in the example of the NY Times publication of the Pentagon Papers, giving credit to the owner for allowing it to be published. Evidently, Armstrong sees analogies between Watergate and the address of Rob Lowe’s vacant lot, or between the Pentagon Papers and a DUI arrest.

He also reveals more about his often-quoted “bias study”, saying that it was done in 2005, before any of the current acrimony. The study showed, according to Armstrong, that 2/3 of the respondents thought the “news articles were biased”. No one polled me, but I would have been in that majority because even back then I thought that the owner and editor definitely biased the news articles. As a matter of fact, I complained several times in writing about just that. Too bad the NP has never printed that study.

Anyway, I think the NP people have realized they are losing this battle for the hearts and minds of Santa Barbarans, so a change of tactics is in order. The role of the paper is being redefined, or perhaps, explained, to those of us who misunderstood what its function should be in this community. I think this is a last gasp. I could be wrong, but I think they’re ready to fold.

Hotchkiss 1, Incumbents 0

Nice letter to the editor in the News-Press today -- when's the last time Williams, Barnwell or Schneider got a positive letter in the News-Press.....just asking :)

Community Post: TKA Bias in Not Checking Council Candidate Facts?

Got this from an avid reader and found it interesting considering our discussions on bias of late...

=====Community Post============
In an editorial this morning, Travis Armstrong urged voters to support the challengers to the City Council incumbents and lists the names of eight challengers at the end of his editorial. Indeed, his list includes all who took out papers and filed to run, but he apparently didn’t check his facts! Two of those he listed are not viable and official candidates because their petitions lacked enough signatures to qualify for the ballot (Cruzito Herrera Cruz and Nicholas M. Sebastian).

While editorial writers are entitled to their bias (and he sure has some strong feelings about the three incumbents), he still has an obligation to get his facts straight. His bias against all things related to the City prevented him from checking with the City Clerk’s office on who would be listed on the ballot. They had this information by Tuesday or Wednesday.

Mother's Day Effort Really a Retraction?

Craig Smith went to Las Vegas on Earth Day weekend and the News-Press printed their non-bylined article which smeared Jerry Roberts. I spent time relaxing with my family this weekend and honoring my mother and today the News-Press printed a retraction which may be really a very weak clarification on the smear article. Of couse, it was printed on a day which not many will read the newspaper -- which is pretty typical of McCaw and Company's damage control public relations game.

Interestingly, the News-Press denies that the article could represent an accusation of Jerry Roberts even though no other former users or people who could have had access to the computer were named in the article. Circular in logic, the retraction states that "persons" had access but does not name who those "persons" are. Why then name Roberts? Doesn't this "retraction" really just continue their smear campaign against him? If you are going to name one, who you happen to be in litigation with, you better name them all in some effort of fairness and integrity.

The piece goes on to quote Roberts' attorney in clarifying Raul Gil's declaration that at least two other editors and possibly an ex-business editor had access. No statement affirming or denying this quote was made in the piece. They are basically saying it is true by how it was written but how is a reader to know that for sure without their direct confirmation? Weak. Look for whether this was a statement verifying this point in court someday.

Finally, without mentioning their failure to interview Roberts for the article in question, they point to a police report that says Roberts "criminal attorney" (was that intentional?) told the SBPD that his client had no knowledge of the pornography. So, is the message he must be guilty if he speaks through his "criminal attorney"?

Strangely, the piece ends with an invitation to publish Mr. Robert's counsel's comments....um, why would his counsel jeopardize their arbitration by doing so? By putting the ball in Roberts' court, the News-Press first fails to acknowledge that they did not do a good job at reporting the issue in the first place and, second; that to actually publish Roberts' opinion could jeopardize his case. Where's the bias?

Roberts said he would sue for libel if there was not a retraction within thirty days -- does this suffice? I think not, you may think not -- but would it suffice in court?

So, What Happened?

Last week, an editorial didn't make it to the print edition and was only online for maybe 8.5 hours. In what was perhaps the News-Press's first online only publication, a Travis Armstrong editorial was clearly pulled. I think we can speculate that after legal review, the piece was pulled by 8:28 am the next morning.

So, what happened? Is there a content management system that published the story online and that story was pulled before it made it into the print edition? Was there no one to take it down until 8:28 the next morning because TKA didn't know how?

Whatever the case, his un-digg-able piece about "White Washing Child Pornography" hasn't seen print and he hasn't had anything published since.

Perhaps we will see it tomorrow in Sunday's paper...in the meantime, let's follow Craig Smith's lead and post The Santa Barbara Independent's cover on our window like Mulder in the X-Files. I'm getting my duct tape out now....

News-Press Continues to Digg Hole

Travis Armstrong seems to have written an editorial that appeared last night on the News-Press web site and was then taken down in favor of an editorial about schools. Un-Digg-able....is he purposely taking things they print and not putting them on the web site as he figures many of us have our ways?

The editorial, entitled "White Washing Child Pornography", was time-stamped at midnight last night and laid into child pornographers -- all well and good, but as usual failed to tell the whole story. Without even commenting about the perhaps unconscious racism exhibited in the title (turn about is fair play), Armstrong made a point of saying Jerry Roberts was the last person to have the computer and failed to mention that it was a used computer, had several users before Roberts and the fact that News-Press management held the computer for a week before sending it to DriveSavers. Why is he afraid to tell the truth to his readers?

Surprisingly, he even went after the Police Department for "blowing it" but failed to mention that both they and the District Attorney's Office chose not to prosecute the matter. His inability to tell the whole story and then go after former newsroom employees for bias borders on perhaps the criminal and at least the delusional...why can't he tell the whole truth? That is all we want. Tell us what really happened and let us decide for ourselves -- stop trying to poison our perception with your reality of the truth!

In the meantime, he tries to make the victims to be the children from the images. Yes, this is true in that the very existence of these images should make us all shudder. But the victim at the forefront of this charade is Jerry Roberts -- a victim of a sinking ship called the News-Press that thinks the only way they can swim to shore is to attack innocent former employees that they used to trust implicitly. What kind of person would make such accusations and not tell us the whole truth?

The question Travis needs to answer is WHO had the computer before Roberts? Be a real journalist rather than an opportunist! Are you in so deep that you can't get out? Do you wonder if you can ever get a job in journalism again? Exactly who had the computer before Jerry Roberts and WHO had the computer before that? Inquiring minds want to know...

After Hours "Journalism"

Craig Smith reports today that the Roberts story on Sunday was snuck in after hours and after all but one copy editor had gone home for the night.

The story was literally stuck into the paper after everyone else had been sent home. Yep, the copy editors, except for one, were allowed to go home on Saturday evening, while the other was told to stay behind because there would be one more story coming. That was the Robert's smear piece. It made it into the paper virtually unchecked by any editors, which also explains why it did not make it onto the News-Press website until very late on Sunday.

Clearly, this 'staff report' was more of a 'management report' -- and is yet another example of there being no wall between the newsroom, editorial and management.

For someone whose editor goes on and on about eliminating 'bias in the newsroom', McCaw's hand print is certainly all over the front page. What was their motivation? Do they think this is a political campaign and smear tactics will work? Unfortunately for Jerry Roberts, as with negative political campaigns, the label will be associated with him because it was in the newspaper. This kind of vindictiveness at the cost of journalistic integrity will eventually come home to roost. The question is when...

A Black Day in Santa Barbara

For full video of ex-News-Press editor Jerry Roberts' press conference, see The Santa Barbara Newsroom article. Robert's wife, Linda Kiefer, should be his permanent spokesperson. In the video, the non-bylined Sunday article is described as "a black day in Santa Barbara".

As many of you probably guessed, the comment yesterday from a DriveSaver's employee was not real -- according to management at DriveSavers, who sent me an email. This is exactly why I said to take it with a grain or two of salt. Also, an anonymous commenter has been trying to push another local Blog as having the story first. Whether you are an imposter for DriveSavers or marketing another local "big-B" Blog -- put aside your quest and whatever your intentions may be...this story is too important to try to drive hits to your Blog or catch me in a liable position for your own or corporate benefit.

Ethics and morals are far more important than the story of the day -- especially when a clearly honorable man is being maligned with impunity. Take a deep breath and think about what it would be like if you were in the same position.

If you had any doubts as to Robert's role in this matter, see the video linked to above. After that, study up on what it takes to recover data from a used hard drive that is not protected by secure login, a locked door or a week at the News-Press in the hands of management. Make your own conclusions...and talk amongst yourselves.

Late Time Stamp on Roberts Story

For those of you wondering about the missing story on the online version of the News-Press -- I've been sent the following from a faithful reader:

News-Press seeks exam of computer used by ex-editor Roberts containing child porn
NEWS-PRESS STAFF REPORT
April 22, 2007 1:12 PM

This is the latest posting of a story in recent memory....

The Glove Doesn't Fit!

With all due respect to the famous lawyer, wouldn't Johnny Cochrane say that from the grave? Today we saw a non by-lined story on the front page of the News-Press seeking ex-editor Jerry Robert's hard drive which (not even alledgedly in their report) contains 15,000 images of pornography. Here are the facts thus far:

1) The article actually admits that the District Attorney's Office was unable to prosecute this matter because it would be impossible to tell who put the images on the drive.

2) Roberts passed a lie detector test on the matter.

3) The suspect Macintosh G4 hard drive was a from a used computer used by other editors before Roberts.

4) The News-Press did not contact Roberts for a comment. Bias in the newsroom? At the very least, it is what The Indpendent Media Blog is calling "the biggest no-no in journalism".

5) As Roberts attorney pointed out, "You'd have to be working at it for three years to accumulate this much info". What he really means is who has that much hard drive space on a used G4?

Let's do the math. 15,000 images at let's say a megabyte each....that's 15 gigabytes of images on a used G4. A G4 that is maybe 6 years old shipped with a 27 gigabyte hard drive. A little more recent G4 powerbook would have shipped with a 60 gigabyte hard drive. Why would someone have more than half to a just under a third of their hard drive in images like this and think they could get away with it on a company computer? It would also severely affect performance....

Yes -- let's see what they come up with at Ampersand. But they better come up with a whole lot more. A few months ago I questioned whether they could get any lower. They have. There are no longer any journalists that are also management at De La Guerra Plaza. They've been trying to push this story for months even here at BlogaBarbara and I kept declining the comments. Are they doing this because no one else would? McCaw and Company should be ashamed of themselves....

SBNP Correction Begs Question

A recent article by Maria Zate on two firings of Circuit City employees who made too much money has been the subject of an interesting correction from The Santa Barbara News-Press:

Sunday's News-Press reported on two Circuit City workers who are no longer employed by the company. The News-Press, along with most reputable members of the media, has a policy of always attempting to speak to both sides of any story. We tried in this case, but were not successful. The story, however, did not reflect those efforts as it should have.

A citizen stringer who passed this along to me questions why the correction says the two employees are unemployed rather than what the original article was about -- that experienced salespeople there were paid too much. For all we know, the typical Circuit City 'declined to comment' was excised from the article. Was this correction generated by Circuit City management or by News-Press management? It's an important aspect of the correction that should have been made clear. Our citizen stringer wonders whether Zate's original article was edited and now she will be accussed of "newsroom bias" -- was she set up for failure? Why didn't the copy editor think about this before the article was published?

I guess the answer is so obvious that there is no reason to talk about it :)

Clergy Responds to TKA's 'Snarky' Hit

Over at Craig Smith's Blog, Rev. Teena Grant responds to Travis Armstrong's characterization that she wrote a "snarky" email...pointing out that Armstrong has never given her a call, attended one of their many meetings on youth or the service the other night.

A common complaint about Armstrong over the last five plus years is that he specializes in "hit and run" editorials -- failing to contact those he attacks for their side of the story. He and Ms. McCaw might buy ink by the barrel -- but what happens when our local newspaper goes after people of the cloth? I suppose religion is the last institution that Armstrong hasn't taken on -- Rev. Grant now joins a long list of other "cabalists" that will soon engulf our whole community because of their conspiracy with the Teamsters. Run away!

Update: See Reverend Donkin's Thin Places blog for more response from clergy.

TKA Kicks It Up Yet Another Notch

Yet another theme for employers at the SDLG Center for Union Busting Studies studies will have to be to be in a continual state of denial and blame others for your problems. This might have worked when Travis Armstrong tried to blame a public official here and there and maybe a big, bad union -- but what about extending the net?

In today's opinion, Armstrong take on Sara Miller McCune and her foundation (who joined with her Sage Publications in publishing Scott Hadly's Reinventing Newspapers), Mayor Blum and former Supervisor Susan Rose and a whole:

web of interconnections among the activists, the politicians, developers and certain nonprofit groups is tangled and deep. A common denominator of some of these folks is that they appear to abhor a press they can't bully.

If that wasn't enough, he also plans to take on non profit organizations:

In the months ahead, I plan to detail more about the political ties, financial entanglements and personal grudges of these individuals and anti-News-Press organizations, such as Hap Freund's Channel 17, the developer-backed Coastal Housing Partnership/Coalition, Fund for Santa Barbara and the Environmental Defense Center.

Travis' smackdown also now has a tag team partner. It's none other other than COLAB's Andy Coaldwell -- who doesn't even have a residence in our county. I can see it now -- "Are you ready to rumble! In this corner -- from the Fund for Santa Barbara - it's Geoff "Super Lib" Green and the EDC's very own Linda "The Bully" Krop in a battle royale, mano a mano 16 round fight against the Travis "Wrong Way" Armstrong and Andy "COLAB" Caldwell..."

Just about all of us will be touched by Travis' attempt to smoke out the evil forces that 'abhor a press they can't bully". We better make our "salsipuedes" plans now. By the way -- what does he mean by saying that he has a "diversity of staff"?

Cappello to NYT: The Meteor Has Hit

Senator John McCain told a New York Times reporter today that he was "stumped" as to whether contraceptives can stop the spread of HIV during a Boys on the Bus interview in Iowa. In reading this, I was amazed that a presidential candidate could say this in 2007. The real story here is that he must know the truth but was afraid to say it as the religious right might not look kindly to someone saying anything else but the word "abstinence".

Interestingly enough, Santa Barbara News-Press attorney Barry Cappello told the New York Times today that what we think we know about newspapers is so old school that journalists haven't caught up with the times. I was surprised a representative of a newspaper could say that in 2007 as well. Here's what Cappello really said:

Mr. Cappello said newspapers are anachronisms, and journalists have failed to realize this.

“The meteor has hit. We’re watching the end of the industry,” he said. “Journalists think they can write what they want when they want. I don’t know if that can survive in this age.”

An anachronist journalist then, kind-of according to the dictionary, is a person who "who seems to be displaced in time; who belongs to another age". So, they can't write about what they want? What about the news? Do they want to write about the basil harvest or the fate of meerkats at the Santa Barbara Zoo as an above-the-fold, above-the-banner story? Does a reporter have no choice but to hit delete when they start typing a celebrity address and then have second thoughts because he is their boss' friend? Does Travis Armstrong have no choice but to write about saving whales and his personal hatred for public officials because he, too, is an anachronism? Are journalists and editors merely marionettes of this new century's bias towards political correctness and those who happen to have money?

Under this logic, journalists should drink Kool-Aid, put on their Nikes and go to work each day. There has to be a wall between newspaper ownership, the newsroom itself and editorial...is Cappello repeating something his client has said? If so, do they think they are untouchable? The NLRB decision, by the way, is just a recommendation according to Capello...I think the "meteor" is made of hubris....pride, of course, comes before the fall.

Bias is a Bias Does...

My mama always said...bias is as bias does.

Through pass-along readership, I saw the full page ad today in the News-Press with the headline "The Truth behind the Words at the Santa Barbara News-Press" -- replete with a dictionary definition of the word "bias". In case you needed to look it up -- "To influence in a particular, typically unfair direction; prejudice". It went on to quote the oft-used 60% poll and then takes on the Teamsters. My favorite part was the authoritative quote from "Anon" which one must assume was part of the poll as there is no explanation or source included.

I'm not sure where this definition puts the News-Press considering the news stories over the last few days, let alone the last eight months or more....but I think they should be more careful about how they wage their war, pointing the finger means there are three more pointing back at yourself.

Cabalista Barnwell the New Blum?

Our newest cabalista, SB Council Member Brian Barnwell, got skewered today by Travis Armstrong who got so low as to bring up a personnel matter related to Barnwell's wife when she was working for the News-Press.

Interesting that on Wake Up Wendy Wednesday this "opinion" piece comes out which used the words "free press" and "independent editorial voice" like Ampersand is being criticized without cause. He made a very clear attempt to play Barnwell off of Council Member Williams like Brian doesn't play well with others. Also, yet again -- Armstrong does his bit of revisionism and tries to make Barnwell a friend of developers. Much like with Blum, if you make an unfounded accusation enough times, it must be true. Rather than show proof of his accusations, Armstrong plays the ad hominem game like a pro and simply says that his proof has been recorded already in the News-Press. "Independent editorial voice" must be the theme of the week over at the News-Press. How Karl Rovian of them...

At the risk of being accused of being "moody and impulsive" by Mr. Armstrong -- I don't care if he expresses his opinion but I'd be much more willing to hear him out and respect his writings as just opinion if he backed it up with facts rather than invective. As I've said before, if things start changing on these counts -- I will be the first to acknowledge it.

Conversations he has had with people like Barnwell are hearsay and shows a lack of professionalism on his part -- as I doubt Barnwell was told that the conversation would be saved for future use. The dog-bite episode Armstrong says "raised questions"....well, with whom? Now Barnwell is a friend of developers -- well, where's the beef? Break it down for us! Bringing up Camee Cohee -- who was an excellent reporter -- and revealing her personnel file was another act of betrayal to the newsroom and to his readers. Are the reporters who are left at the News-Press to assume that they will be the subject of his ridicule someday on the editorial page? Does he himself have no ill will toward her or Brian because of their history? -- if so, he should acknowledge his bias. Today's editorial shows that he is not committed to eliminating bias from the newspaper.