NLRB Files More Charges Against the News-Press

Craig Smith thinks his son may graduate college before the labor situation over at the News-Press is settled. I hate to say I agree. This week, the National Labor Relations Board filed more charges against the newspaper.

More Counts Against The News-Press by NLRB

From the Teamsters....Sara

The General Counsel of the National Labor Relations Board has determined after a lengthy investigation and deliberation that it will prosecute the SB News-Press for violating the National Labor Relations Act by hiring and deploying newsroom employees through an employment agency to perform the same work done by Union-represented employees in a putative "temporary" capacity, though they may have performed in that capacity for as many as 16 months. The General Counsel issued a complaint (attached) which says that the N-P violated the National Labor Relations Act by refusing to bargain over the temps' terms and conditions of employment, by paying them less than the people in the unit, and by transferring bargaining unit work outside the unit.

This ruse by the News-Press was central to its longstanding plan to devastate Union support among newsroom employees by dishonestly diminishing the numbers of people it contended were in the unit. With that transparent charade the News-Press has sought and continues to seek to unilaterally decrease the number of newsroom employees represented by the Union, while still having others it disingenuously claimed were outside the unit performing the same newsroom work, in unprecedented fashion. "With the curtain finally raised exposing this longstanding cynical maneuver by the News-Press, perhaps the newspaper will decide it must obey the law", said Ira L. Gottlieb, counsel to the Union. "We hope that management will treat all employees who work in the newsroom fairly and equitably and will no longer use this artifice to decimate the union-represented group for obvious and illegal anti-union reasons", Gottlieb added.

The General Counsel decided to move forward with this prosecution based on charges the Union filed last November. The General Counsel will also prosecute on a number of other labor law violations that have been accumulating since bargaining began almost a year ago, including:

1. Bad faith bargaining (announced in July);
2. Hiring and refusing to bargain over temps as described above;
3. Laying off one alleged temp without bargaining;
4. Failure/refusal to timely provide information about the temps;
5 Assigning a non-unit person (Robert Eringer) to perform bargaining unit work as an "investigative reporter";
6. Discontinuing annual raise policy for 2006 and 2007;
7. Suspending and firing Dennis Moran (and refusing to bargain over those decisions); That set of allegations is not included in the attached complaint because the General Counsel's Office of Advice in Washington, D.C. is deliberating on one further aspect of the Union's charge concerning him before issuing the agency's complaint challenging the News-Press' illegal firing of Moran.
8. Discontinuing annual evaluations policy.

The temps charge, the temp layoff charge, the annual raise charge, and of course the charge protesting Dennis Moran's suspension and firing - when the complaint on that last set of allegations issues as previously announced by the General Counsel - could mean compensation for people in the unit if successful.

The General Counsel is still investigating and/or deliberating on the Union's pending charges against the News-Press concerning failure and delay in providing information requested by the Union, interference with the NLRB's investigative process by Wendy McCaw, and refusal to bargain over mandatory subjects of bargaining.

The complaint sets a hearing date of February 23, 2009, which is subject to change.

PR: NLRB to Prosecute SBNP for Bargaining in Bad Faith

Well, it took nine months of effort and the SBNP continues to insist they are in the right. Like a petulant child, McCaw and Company refuse to budge despite 15 counts of labor law violations. Yes -- they will appeal again and McCaw's lawyers will be able to buy their second or third house and maybe even a new Porsche from the deal. How long can this go on? Yes, Wendy McCaw has every right to run her business into the ground -- but she doesn't have the right to continually ignore court rulings in the process. Most of us do not have that option. Here's the Teamster press release. -- Sara

The General Counsel of the National Labor Relations Board announced yesterday, after an investigation into the misconduct of the Santa Barbara News-Press at and away from the negotiating table over the last nine months, that it will prosecute the News-Press for failing and refusing to bargain in good faith with the Graphics Communications Conference of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, in violation of the National Labor Relations Act.

The GCC/IBT won a secret ballot election in September, 2006, winning the right to bargain collectively with the News-Press over terms and conditions of employment for news department employees. Since then the News-Press has committed and been found guilty by an Adminstrative Law Judge of no less than 15 labor law violations, including the unlawful firings of eight reporters. The News-Press has appealed that decision to the NLRB in Washington, D.C.

After the News-Press stalled the first day of bargaining for over a year through legal maneuvering, the parties first met to negotiate in November, 2007. The News-Press conducted itself at the table as if the Union had not won the right to bargain, seeking to maintain the pre-union status quo in its bargaining positions and to avoid agreement, while doing what it could, lawfully or otherwise, to frustrate the newsroom employees hoping for workplace improvement through negotiation of a contract. That misconduct and disinterest in bargaining was manifested, inter alia, in its outrageous and absurd proposals that, if agreed upon, would maintain its discretion to change economic terms even after an agreement was reached, provide for a grievance process ending with Wendy McCaw deciding whether her own management had violated the contract, perpetuate the arbitrary "at will" lack of employee protection that the News-Press has used to intimidate and coerce its employees over the last two years. That News-Press bad faith and disdain for the bargaining process was further demonstrated in the unprecedented hiring of employees it labeled "temporary" - though some have remained employed for over a year - to perform newsroom work, failing and refusing to provide information requested by the Union, its filing of bogus unfair labor practice charges against the Union (none of which have been found to have merit), agreeing to meet only sporadically, its publishing of scurrilous editorials about the bargaining sessions, its misrepresentation of the nature of accepted editorial practices that have been customary at the SBNP for years, and its circulation of employee communiqués rife with misinformation and vitriol.

The NLRB's investigation of the News-Press' bad faith bargaining came in response to a charge filed by the Union in May, and canvassed the totality of the parties' conduct from the beginning of the bargaining sessions.

"We would much prefer that the News-Press bargain in good faith and reach a satisfactory agreement, than have to go to the NLRB to once again force the newspaper to adhere to basic labor law requirements", said Teamster negotiator Nick Caruso. "We have been quite reasonable in our positions, and quite clear as to what it will take to get an agreement. We recognize these are tough times for newspapers, but the News-Press in turn has to recognize that the Union is here to stay, that the employees need and deserve some basic protection and stability, and that the best way to improve the paper and the atmosphere in the newsroom is to reach a fair employment contract.", added Caruso. Summarized Caruso, "Once we have a good agreement in place, the Union will be happy to help the News-Press gain back lost readership and advertising revenue."

This is not the first time that the NLRB has found the News-Press' lead negotiator, Nashville, Tennessee union buster Michael Zinser, to be worthy of prosecution for bad faith bargaining. In at least two other recent cases in Pennsylvania and Hawaii, the NLRB's General Counsel issued complaints against Zinser newspaper clients for bargaining in bad faith in violation of federal labor law. Both of those cases settled before trial.

The NLRB has not set a hearing date for prosecuting the News-Press on its forthcoming bad faith bargaining complaint. The NLRB also announced that it would prosecute the News-Press for failing to provide annual evaluations to a substantial number of employees for last year, and continues to delilberate on several other charges filed by the Union against the News-Press, including the hiring of "temporary" employees to undermine the bargaining unit, and the hiring of an investigative reporter outside of the unit.

NLRB Lowers the Boom on Wendy McCaw

Judge William Kocol ruled today that the illegally-fired News-Press reporters must be rehired and given back pay.

From The Santa Barbara Independent:

According to the order, in the next two weeks, the News-Press must re-hire Melinda Burns, Anna Davison, Dawn Hobbs, Rob Kuznia, Barney McManigal, Tom Schultz, John Zant, and Melissa Evans, must back-pay those fired employees as well as fired editor Bob Giuliano, and must retract any related negative performance reviews or letters of reprimand. The judge also issued a wide-ranging cease-and-desist order against management, protecting current and future employees against surveillance, threats, interrogation, firings, or any other actions related to their union involvement. And this order must be posted in the newsroom.

Their resolutions from last year finally met -- and karma finally coming to fruition -- what will be next for The Organized? Will they stay or will they go?

Another WWST? How much did it cost?

Craig Smith opines that the NLRB Hearing cum waiting game could cost Wendy McCaw half a million. What was she thinking?

Couldn't you bring back The Organized or even the Illegally Fired Journalists and make life hell for a few months and have them quit in disgust for a few hundred thousand less? I would be happy to take a commission equaling the difference but do not think I could live with myself. Then again, maybe she knows what Dawn Hobbes, Tom Schultz and the like are made of.

WWST? It Was Anti-Coyote!

I'm not sure what News-Press co-publisher Wendy McCaw was thinking when she took the stand and defined what bias was for the masses today. Contradictions flew left and right as she told the courtroom what it is in her world. She said she works more than 40 hours a week and 5 days a week in the office -- I wondered why the NLRB attorney's didn't ask for the sailing records for the Calixe as this statement seems to contradict public record.

My favorite misdirection from McCaw was the following quoted in The Independent:

When asked is (sic) she had a right to control the content of the news section, she replied, “I believe I have a right to that, but I don’t choose to exercise that.” Bias was a lingering problem for McCaw throughout her ownership because, as she explained, “We didn’t want the paper dictating what people should be believing.”

We didn’t want the paper dictating what people should be believing. Wow. That's rich considering the following also from The Independent about faxes she sent to her editors about articles printed in the newspaper:

...another asked why an article about a Hannah-Beth Jackson (she had written “HBJ”, though couldn’t recall on the stand why) press release did not cite the role of the Sperlings or the Wendy P. McCaw Foundation in saving the Ellwood Mesa; and a fourth said that “bad editing” was at fault for the front-page placement of a story about architect Brian Cearnal’s lawsuit against McCaw.

If WPM doesn't know who HBJ is or why lack of mention of her own foundation is showing bias, I am very surprised. I am not keeping count, but has every News-Press executive "contradicted their testimony" as of yet? Yet another article was biased, according to McCaw, because it was "anti-coyote" -- almost anthropomorphic in nature, is it because the meercats, coyotes and otters deserve to get more than the true story told? By no means are coyotes or other animals inanimate -- but this women makes sure they sit above the fold and above the banner, and then tells us she doesn't influence the newsroom.

There is likely more about this story very soon at Craig's Blog. I'm fascinated that we finally got a glimpse into -- WWST?

Before we see the typical "Let the market decide!" comments -- let me just ask those of you that want to write that whether you want to read front-page stories about the bastardized trickle-down effect McCaw talked about today? Reagonomics on animals as unbiased news -- isn't that taking laissez-faire a bit far?

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.

From Inside the Witness Box: Scoop on the NLRB Hearing

Community Post Written by Bob Guiliano

When the NLRB prosecution of the Santa Barbara News-Press resumes this week, courtroom observers should pay keen attention to the strategy pursued by labor board attorneys, in contrast with Barry Cappello & Co.

While NLRB attorney Steven Wyllie told me to simply tell the truth on the stand, Cappello took a more complicated route of twisting the facts and distorting the truth to build false premises leading to false conclusions in his cross-examination of me. He spewed out smokescreens to cloud the courtroom with a haze of confusion.

Example No. 1: After I filed my complaint in early February with the National Labor Relations Board that my firing occured after not giving one reporter an unmerited written reprimand, Wyllie called me to say that the News-Press responded that oh, yeah, Guiliano was really fired for falsely accusing another reporter of plagiarism.

Cappello's strategy to show that I was fired for poor performance fell apart when he learned that I had kept copies of the stories, proving that quotes were plagiarized from an Associated Press story that I had given the reporter for background information. With the News-Press caught in a lie, Cappello now had to twist the facts and distort the truth to show in court that I was guilty, instead, of not giving that reporter a written reprimand for plagiarizing. Cappello knew full well that I had e-mailed Scott Steepleton of my concerns, and Scott never asked me to issue this reporter a reprimand. Since this reporter was non-union and considered a loyal McCaw subject, I was given great leeway to work with her to resolve even such a serious reporting offense as plagiarizing.

Example No. 2: My being "caught in a lie" on the stand about being concerned of a possible sexual harassment claim that might be made against me. I was warned before my first day on the job to watch out for two non-union female reporters hired after the mass exodus. First, they were new to print journalism and their reporting needed lots of editing; second, the unionized reporters and copy editors were suspicious that they were planted in the newsroom to spy and to possibly testify in January that the union vote was coerced. And I was told that one of them filed a sexual harassment claim against an editor who had chastised her for a poorly written story, and that I should watch my back too.

Since my answer on the stand to Cappello's battery of questions had to be limited to yes or no, it was impossible, thus, to explain, that yes, I was concerned about a possible complaint, but no, I had not done anything to merit one.

Example No. 3: Reporter Leana Orsua refused to write the story about the Jan. 9 NLRB hearing, telling me that part of the reason was her boss, Scott, had lied on the stand. Leana was present the day that the unionized reporters attempted to deliver a letter peacefully to Wendy McCaw, asking for clarification of beats and a wall between the newsroom and editorial page. They were NOT stomping their feet as Scott testifed. Well, I had to relay to Scott, my boss, that we were not going to have a story the next day. But I did not have to reveal what Leana said about Scott, because I did not want her to be fired for being honest with me.

And that was the day that I learned that the suspicions floating around the newsroom about Leana were false. She was not a spy, she was not going to testify that the union vote was coerced, she had the guts to stick to her principles and not report as truth what her boss lied about on the stand, and she was not inclined to file an unwarranted harassment complaint against any editor.

I personally feel that Leana is one of the nicest, most genuine persons I have ever met in my 30 years in the journalism profession. I was determined to file off the rough edges to help hone her into the fine print reporter she could be. Today I am proud to watch her as a broadcast journalist. I learned by working and talking with her that she had been forced earlier in her career to stop giving credit to outside sources of quotes in her broadcast stories, because her producer would hassle her about the short time alloted for her broadcasts. She was told, "If it was said, it was said. Just report it!" I told her that the producer was wrong! Part of my job was to watch KEYT 3 News at 11 p.m. to report to Scott if they used any of our stories without attributing them to the News-Press.

Cappello also hit me with a line of questioning as to why I did not report to Mrs. McCaw that her top editor had lied on the stand. He also made it sound like I had firsthand knowledge of a serious crime that I should have reported to police. Yeah right, like I'm going to tell the person who is manipulating Scott like a puppet that the strings got tangled up. That would have only served to get Leana in trouble. Or like I'm going to call 911 and say, "I just became aware of a crime. Please arrest my boss for extreme embellishment!" I could picture the men in white coats coming to take me away.

Example No. 4: Last but not least, my attempts to be humorous in two e-mails to Mrs. McCaw. Cappello highlighted only my tail-end jokes, but refrained from revealing the other 98 percent of my e-mails giving Mrs. McCaw serious advice on how to turn the newspaper around and get it back on course. That information will come to light at another time.

So, courtroom observers, bring your gas masks should you venture into the courtroom this week because I'm sure there will be more smokescreens filling the air. I'd recommend reviewing any books on Logic and Probability, or read a Sherlock Holmes novel to see how he uses deductive reasoning to solve crimes. You'll be better equipped to analyse Cappello's faulty line of logic.

P.S. I was not nervous on the stand as reported in some media accounts. Actually, I had been practicing Transcendental Meditation in the attorney chambers, so my alpha brain waves were practically at the level of a deep sleep. I had to snap myself alert and get psyched up before taking the stand. I thought of Muhammed Ali playing rope-a-dope with George Foreman as I anticipated the pounding I was about to receive from Cappello. If I was fidgeting, that was me blocking some of the blows. I figured he would kick my butt in that court, but I would fight back on redirect testimony and also in the court of public opinion.

Watch Out for the Subpoena Man

I'm finally catching up with my reading after a few busy days and caught up on the NLRB Hearing through Craig Smith's Blog.

The real story in Craig's post, however, was a very well-written piece by former News-Press journalist William Etling that was published by our friends at Edhat.

Craig called it required reading and I would say that it is definitely required reading for anyone interested in what is at stake here ---something Washington Post reporter Lou Cannon said is "much bigger than the fortunes of a few former reporters and editors of the News-Press".

Even with all that has gone on over the past many months, and how they are so personally involved, I am sure the erstwhile reporters from The Santa Barbara News Room would agree.

Community Post: Reflections on My News-Press Experience

by Bob Guiliano, former assistant city editor, SBN-P, 10/30/06-1/26/07

Now that my share of the testimony at the NLRB hearing is over, I feel like a big weight has been lifted off my shoulders and I can continue on with my life.

I am not happy, however, that I failed to accomplish my mission, which was to help Wendy McCaw fix the News-Press, and help resolve all the various conflicts taking place between her and past and present news staff and members of the community.

This controversy caught my attention while I sat at my desk at the North County Times in Escondido, Calif., peaceful and secure in a position I had held for eight years, editing stories and designing pages. I had just received a good annual review and raise, and my vacation time increased from two to three weeks. And I had also been substitute teaching about three days a week for five years in local high schools, something I enjoyed doing as I considered making a permanent career change to teaching.

What particularly caught my attention about the News-Press was not all the controversy about the Rob Lowe land story, or the Travis Armstrong DUI story, or even the mass exodus of editors and reporters, but that a group of remaining reporters bonded together and risked their financial well-being and careers for something they believed they were fighting for, journalistic ethics and integrity.

Opinions may vary on whether they have been justified to stand up to the owner/publisher of the newspaper, who possesses the right to determine the paper's philosophy and choose what areas of coverage she would like prioritized in Santa Barbara County.

Of course, a newspaper must be a champion and community leader demonstrating ethics and integrity to maintain its credibility. And, a truly non-biased newspaper would not only require a variety of comments and all sides to be reflected in any story, but it would cover all the news, and publish readers' letters to the editor or op-ed columns, whether they agree or disagree with the publisher's, or editorial page editor's or other readers' viewpoints.

Now, back to my case in point. How often in your lifetime have you seen a group of American co-workers show the courage to risk all in their fight for what they believe is right? Troops have experienced such bonding in combat to the extent that they regard each other as brothers or sisters, and remain close for their lifetimes.

I figured that if Wendy McCaw could recognize the courage in her team of reporters and harness their energy, she could have propelled them and her newspaper to excel in covering Santa Barbara County and perhaps there would have even been Pulitzer Prizes down the road!

Giving up the security of my jobs at the North County Times and the Escondido high school district to enter this mess in Santa Barbara was something I wanted to do. I felt there was such potential, with the combination of an individual, financially independent owner who is not beholding to anyone, and a group of reporters who have the guts to fight. Hell, don't fight them, get in front of the line and lead them! Give them direction, build their confidence, appreciate them and set them loose!

Besides typical news and feature stories, there are always social issues to investigate. The ones I've been involved with or interested in over the years include political and police corruption, illegal drug dealers (you'd be amazed where the kingpins live and what country clubs they belong to), human trafficking, sex & domestic slavery (the best investigative report I read about this was done by El Universal newspaper in Mexico City several years ago, focusing on North San Diego County), child pornography, gangs, and real estate fraud.

One thing about being on the night shift at the News-Press, you field calls from a variety of people giving you tips for breaking news or possible investigative reports. That was always one of the most interesting parts of my job at a newspaper, developing sources, determining if they were credible, and then investigating and writing the story myself, or hooking the source up with a reporter.

In conclusion, I hope the Santa Barbara News-Press can resolve its many situations and get back to focusing on being a real newspaper and serving the community. And I wish the best for the courageous eight fired reporters involved in the NLRB hearing, remaining copy editors and other staff I had the pleasure to work with at the News-Press; community members and religious leaders I've met; my late-night tipsters who kept me company when I was alone in the newsroom, and who provided some really solid leads for stories; and Sara De la Guerra, for allowing all voices to be heard on Blogabarbara!

C'mon Barry, the Film Fest is Months Away!

See Craig Smith for how Sam Tyler's "Michael Moore"-style documentary escaped being aired to early....c'mon Barry, the Film Fest is month's away!

What is a 'club reporter' anyway?

Here's an interesting Editor and Publisher article passed on to me from an avid reader on bias in the newsroom -- which describes a much more reasonable way to handle the issue than firing anyone and everyone where the label might stick if you say it enough times. Ironic that the article is partially about a man that perfected that technique for President Bush.

Editor and Publisher also reported on the NLRB union certification at The Santa Barbara News-Press.

Too bad we have to get detailed news on the certification from a national publication...even our very own Santa Barbara Independent had "Club Reporter" pretty much only refer to our friend Craig Smith on the story which broke late in the week -- saying he "hops all over this". Is a "club reporter" kind of like a "staff report"? Why isn't "Club Reporter" covering what's happening at Tonic or Velvet Jones tonight? Odd name that doesn't instill trust for this issue....

To be fair, it seems they are using many resources for covering the Zaca Fire and doing a great job at that -- but I would have thought one of their main reporters would want to write about this issue. There is likely a fair explanation....but should we hear about it, rather than guess?

Major Victory for Teamsters!

Craig Smith reported today that the NLRB has "adopted an administrative law judge's findings and recommendations that upheld the 33 to 6 vote in favor of unionization, in effect, overruling the News-Press' objections to the outcome of the election".

What does this mean? The Graphic Communications Conference of the Teamster's Union is now the bargaining unit for the newsroom employees at the News-Press. As Craig points out, the hearings we have been posting about will continue as they are about a different issue but this is good news for the rank and file in the newsroom.

Reporters don't put biased stories in the paper....

"editors do....". Linda Strean, former managing editor said the above...and Craig Smith explains it here:

By that she was referring to the process by which an editor assigns a story to a reporter, suggests angles or approaches to the story, suggests sources or individuals to interview and then, when the story is written, reads the story, asks the reporter questions about it, suggests additional stakeholders in the story who might be contacted if their viewpoint is not represented and then finally when, and only when, the story is deemed fair and balanced, puts it in the paper. As Strean put it; "The editor is the backstop."

So who was Melinda Burn's backstop on the Measure D story written by her and cited in her termination letter as an example of biased reporting on her part? Steepleton testified that the person who edited the story and failed to recognize it as being biased was, himself. I guess the buck didn't stop at the backstop.

We also got an explanation today as to why Anna Davison was fired...it turns out that treacherous sidewalks mean less than trees and our Mayor, who was quoted "too much" in the article. I'm not sure what the Mayor wouldn't comment on if she wasn't commenting on trees and sidewalks in her town -- but I guess she can't do her job and not be biased at the same time.

I have to ask -- why does our community newspaper owner get to decide what is biased and what is not? Why can't we decide that for ourselves? What makes her such an expert on the subject and why does her management feel so compelled to forget what they learned in journalism school?

Read Craig's Blog for some other good stories but read this:

Second best exchange of the morning came when Steepleton reiterated his testimony from yesterday that reporters and editors should be regularly reading the editorials of the papers that they work for. Counsel for the NLRB then asked him, "Isn't it true that at the January 9th objections hearing (where the News-Press was contesting the outcome of the union election) you testified that you didn't read the editorial pages of the the News-Press?" Steepleton answered; "That's correct."

Ouch. That must have hit the judge in his gut.

One of Those Journalism 101 Things...

Associate Editor Scott Steepleton of the News-Press continued his effort of defending his paper's jihad against bias by showing even more bias for management today during the second day of proceedings against the Santa Barbara News-Press. An article at The Santa Barbara Independent describes him being shown pictures of the signs used in the "overpass protest" and continuing to deny that that the reporters were fired for union involvement. He then went on to paint Melinda Burns as biased even though he knows full well that republishing articles in political mailers is a common practice by lobbying firms everywhere.

The Independent went on to describe how the amount of "do not recalls" decreased as News-Press attorney Barry Cappello questioned him and suggested that business owners can do whatever they want with their products. I'm not sure when reporters or the news became a product in America but I guess I was sick that day. Here's what Steepleton said about TKA's DUI not being covered and Rob Lowe's address being published showing bias:

She owns the newspaper, and I think she has every right to be a part of whatever she wants to be a part of.

He says later that reporters are supposed to be well aware of their publishers views and "That's one of those Journalism 101 things". Wow, that's rich coming from an Associate Editor and probable Staff Reporter. SO, as the logic goes, reporters are supposed to hold back because of what their publisher believes in? Where's the "wall" they talked to you about in Journalism 101? Orwellian in delivery, Steepleton and Cappello, continued in their effort to rewrite history by taking on Starshine Roshell.

Cappello projected a few sarcastic letters from her onto a video screen, making much ado about the presence or lack of "smiley faces". Not to outdo himself, Cappello then tried to discredit Linda Strean who lectures at UC Berkeley's School of Journalism and has worked for the SF Chronicle and Examiner. She also happened to work for the News-Press and defended Melinda Burns correctly characterizing her "bias" evaluations as normal for a newspaper and not worthy of termination.

There was an almost-live blog post by Craig Smith today and I am posting just about the same time he usually does so there may be more on this tonight over at his blog. No matter what, you can always talk amongst yourselves here at BlogaBarbara.

The Buck Stops with Me in the Newsroom!

Like so many samurai ready to commit hari kari, that's what Scott Steepleton said today in defense of Wendy McCaw, Arthur Von Weisenburger and Travis Armstrong. Kudos to Craig Smith for sitting through the hearing today and even becoming a target of Barry Cappello who may call him as a witness along with the many others that may be called upon as well.

Surprising points made by Smith:

Steepleton Didn't Know?

In listening to Steepleton, there were two things in his testimony that tested the bounds of credulity for me. First he claimed he had no idea of whether his wife, Charlotte Boechler, the paper's assistant features editor, had any allegiances to the union. (I wonder what they talk about on those long daily commutes between Santa Barbara and Ventura where they live?)

Where's Wendy? She might be in court later....I won't hold my breath

Armstrong was sitting in the front row of the courtroom and, according to Cappello, he will be the paper's representative at the proceedings. There were four attorneys sitting on the News-Press side of the counsel table. A few feet away, volumes of enormous loose-leaf binders were stacked up shoulder high.

Cappello's Long Opening, from The Santa Barbara Independent:

As an excuse for why he was about to give a longer opening than his opponents combined, Cappello explained that this hearing’s “potpourri of items” amounted to “15 separate trials.” Judge William Kocol assured, “If it gets long, be sure I’ll let you know.” And he did, multiple times.

Dictators?.....maybe according to the NP in The Santa Barbara Independent:

Unlike most NLRB hearing, this case was not about wages and benefits, said Cappello. Rather, he explained, “These are employees who have testified and will testify here that their sole goal is to take over the newspaper so that the owner of the newspaper has no involvement in how they write their stories or when they write their stories.” It was a statement that everyone in the room could agree with.

Then, Cappello made it seem like too much was reported about Travis Armstrong's DUI -- even though it was not reported fully in his own newspaper. Capello then said Robe Lowe's address should not be printed as a 'stalking guide'. After that, somehow Starshine's column -- primarily about Moms, Dads and Apple Pie -- was biased. Hunh? If it could even get worse, Cappello said that the freeway overpass incident wasn't clearly a union activity becasue the banner did not have the word 'Teamsters'. I'm not clear what world he is living in...

About staff reports according to The Santa Barbara Independent:

As a counterpoint, Wyllie produced the article about the first NLRB hearing that was bylined as a “staff report.” Originally assigned to Leana Orsua, she called in later that day to say she couldn’t write the story. When asked if he wrote the story, Steepleton said, “I don’t recall.” It would become a very common response all afternoon. Later, Wyllie asked if the story, which omitted large amounts of information but reported the news that was favorable to the newspaper, was biased, Steepleton said he thought the piece in question was fine.

What a comedy of errors. Unfortunately, Scott Steepleton is being paid handsomely as newsroom editor to take the fall....I'm not clear it is worth it considering his wife was a reporter for the News-Press and a part of this hearing. What does that say about the two of them? How could he or she not see this coming? Why would they want to be a part of this?

NLRB v. News-Press Began Today, Again

The hearings as to whether the News-Press violated the National Labor Relations Act began today in Santa Barbara. Didn't we already go through this and establish they did a few months ago? Craig Smith has a primer on what the hearing is about on his blog and will likely soon have an update on what exactly happened on day one. You can talk about it here and I will update this post later as information comes in from Craig and, I assume, The Independent and The Daily Sound.

News-Press on NLRB: Let's Tell Just Our Part of the Story

Yesterday, the News-Press ran a short "Staff Report" on two charges that were dropped but failed to mention that the NLRB is prosecuting them to reinstate the Illegally-Fired...where's the wall? Yet another example of the News-Press not giving their readers the whole story -- making the newspaper more of a PR piece than a place to get the news.

NLRB Chooses Prosecution of News-Press

Craig Smith reports that the NLRB wil prosecute the News-Press for violating the National Labor Relations Act. It's about time.

Teamsters File Objection to 97 Theses

The 97 objections that the News-Press nailed to the wall, like so many theses from Martin Luther, has received a formal objection from the Teamsters. In an article on the Indy Media Blog, Matt Kettman reports that the objections were filed on April 11. Many thanks to the SBIMB for publishing the PDF listed above.

BlogaBarbara is mentioned on quite a few of the legal filing pages. A citizen stringer who passed this information along pointed out that Teamster attorney Ira Gottlieb may have invented a new term in saying the infamous 9/11 comment was "depublished". In any event, Gottlieb did a good job at pointing out the obvious -- the News-Press objections to the union election lacked merit for many reasons already mentioned here, in the hearing and in the press.

I've been sensing a bit of News-Press Mess fatigue in the ether of late and hope that although we need to move on in some ways -- the findings of the NLRB are a serious matter to which we have seen no indication from Ampersand of having any intention to following. They've proven this by saying they have a commitment to local news and then making their first post-NLRB hearing hire a gossip columnist -- rather than the eight reporters who were illegally fired. McCaw and Company are hoping we do not notice or are so tired of the mess that we begin to ignore it.