Letters to the Editor 08-25-2004
July 28, 2016 at 4:25 p.m.
By -
- Biased Reporting - Cost Of War
Biased Reporting
Editor, Times-Union:Wow! I too attended the WCS board meeting on Monday and I'd like to help the Times-Union reporter covering the proceedings, paint the other half of the picture. She seems to have a biased view and is unable to report the proceedings objectively.
My case in point.
1. A patron asked Mr. Minatel how he would have voted on the pay raises, he was unable to attend that meeting, Dr. McGuire responded with "it's board policy that members are not allowed to answer that type of question and the question was inappropriate." The reporter only reported "the question was inappropriate."
2. A patron's comment was reported as "teachers are more hands-on with students than administrators are." What I heard was that "administrators are not hands-on with students, only the teachers are." Mr. Minatel took exception to the comment. In his defense, this was just after Mr. Ray gave his review of the successful summer reading program that he oversaw. I believe Mr. Minatel's response was due to the fact that the patron appeared to be confused as to who is or is not part of administration.
3. Near the end of the proceedings, the same patron that made the "hands-on" comment stated for the record that she apologized to Mr. Ray and did not intend to single him out. Mr. Minatel also apologized to the patron for his harsh response. Both of you should be commended. But, to the reporter who missed reporting those apologies ... shame on you!
As the meeting ended there were multiple patrons that approached Mr. Ray to let him know they are very pleased with the work he does. Of course, the reporter didn't catch those off-record comments, but at this point she's having trouble objectively reporting what's on record.
The one thing that really sticks in my mind is the disrespect that some patrons display towards the administration. The manner in which some patrons deliver their questions and comments is very disturbing. Maybe that's why some board members respond in the manner that they do, although that is still no excuse.
When it comes to covering Monday's meeting, review the last two articles this reporter wrote and tell me this is not biased and/or selective reporting. When the reporter refers to a patron delivering a question or comment, she uses words such as "said," "told," "protesting," "noted" and "asked." When referring to board members responses, she uses adjectives or phrases such as "outburst," "angrily," "going off," "not in a kindly way," "interrupted," and my favorite, "passed the outburst baton."
I'm not saying board members have been all that professional, but to some extent I believe they are being provoked. The door swings both ways. If patrons show respect, I'm certain so will board members. As our good Lord said, "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." We still have a lot of work to do, so it's time for everyone to put their animosity aside and move on.
David Smolen
Warsaw
via e-mail
Note: The quotes referenced in this letter appeared in an opinion column written by Laurie Hahn, the Times-Union reporter who covers the school board. The column was clearly labeled "opinion," appearing on an "opinion" page. None of the quotes referenced - save the single word "interrupted" - appeared in the reporter's news stories. Reporters, just like readers, are afforded the opportunity to place their opinions in this newspaper. But reporters are admonished to keep their news stories opinion-free. Accusing a reporter of bias is a serious accusation. I reviewed the news stories to which the letter-writer refers and I would invite readers to do the same:
www.timeswrsw.com/N0817040.HTM
www.timeswrsw.com/N0817041.HTM
The level of bias the letter writer alleges does not appear in these news stories. Sure the opinion column carried a bias, but that is the nature of opinion.
Gary Gerard, Managing Editor
Cost Of War
Editor, Times-Union:We have seen and heard a lot about the cost of the war in Iraq and our current administration's justification for that cost. Many feel that any price has been worth America feeling safer since Sept. 11, 2001. While I do not agree that we are actually safer, and I think the current administration thinks that feeling safer is more important than actually being safer, that is not the purpose of this letter. I wanted to bring your attention to some of the costs of the war - monetary and otherwise - in Iraq. I want to point out to you the choices that have been made for our country.
As of Aug. 18, at noon, the war in Iraq had cost the United State $128,209,708,452. Say that number out loud when you read this, please; it makes it more real - "one hundred and twenty-eight billion, two hundred and nine million, seven hundred and eight thousand, four hundred and fifty-two dollars" (dollar amounts are estimates from the actual Congressional appropriations for this war).
Instead we could have ...
n Paid for 18,126,653 children to attend a year of Head Start, or
n Insured 54,954,950 people for one year, or
n Hired 2,442,094 additional public school teachers for one year, or
n Provided 3,281,997 students four-year scholarships at public universities, or
n Built 1,831,572 additional public housing units, or
n Fully funded global anti-hunger units for five years (the estimated 200,000 to 1 million people who will die from starvation in the Sudan area in the next few months are just one example of who could have benefited from this kind of money), or
n Fully funded worldwide AIDS programs for 12 years, or
n Finally, ensured that every child in the world was given basic immunizations for 42 years.
As of 12:05 p.m. on the same date, the cost had risen to $128,210,336,860. (All dollar amounts and facts were obtained from the Web site, www.notbush.com although there are other "counters" of the cost available.)
I haven't even gone into the cost of human lives that have been taken in the direct fighting of this war. But isn't this enough? Is the idea that we feel safer because the current administration says we are worth this cost, especially when many facts and events prove that we are actually in more danger because of this aggression? Do we really want four more years of choices like this?
President Dwight D. Eisenhower said, on April 16, 1953, "Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies in the final sense a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed."
Lisa Rector
Warsaw
[[In-content Ad]]
- Biased Reporting - Cost Of War
Biased Reporting
Editor, Times-Union:Wow! I too attended the WCS board meeting on Monday and I'd like to help the Times-Union reporter covering the proceedings, paint the other half of the picture. She seems to have a biased view and is unable to report the proceedings objectively.
My case in point.
1. A patron asked Mr. Minatel how he would have voted on the pay raises, he was unable to attend that meeting, Dr. McGuire responded with "it's board policy that members are not allowed to answer that type of question and the question was inappropriate." The reporter only reported "the question was inappropriate."
2. A patron's comment was reported as "teachers are more hands-on with students than administrators are." What I heard was that "administrators are not hands-on with students, only the teachers are." Mr. Minatel took exception to the comment. In his defense, this was just after Mr. Ray gave his review of the successful summer reading program that he oversaw. I believe Mr. Minatel's response was due to the fact that the patron appeared to be confused as to who is or is not part of administration.
3. Near the end of the proceedings, the same patron that made the "hands-on" comment stated for the record that she apologized to Mr. Ray and did not intend to single him out. Mr. Minatel also apologized to the patron for his harsh response. Both of you should be commended. But, to the reporter who missed reporting those apologies ... shame on you!
As the meeting ended there were multiple patrons that approached Mr. Ray to let him know they are very pleased with the work he does. Of course, the reporter didn't catch those off-record comments, but at this point she's having trouble objectively reporting what's on record.
The one thing that really sticks in my mind is the disrespect that some patrons display towards the administration. The manner in which some patrons deliver their questions and comments is very disturbing. Maybe that's why some board members respond in the manner that they do, although that is still no excuse.
When it comes to covering Monday's meeting, review the last two articles this reporter wrote and tell me this is not biased and/or selective reporting. When the reporter refers to a patron delivering a question or comment, she uses words such as "said," "told," "protesting," "noted" and "asked." When referring to board members responses, she uses adjectives or phrases such as "outburst," "angrily," "going off," "not in a kindly way," "interrupted," and my favorite, "passed the outburst baton."
I'm not saying board members have been all that professional, but to some extent I believe they are being provoked. The door swings both ways. If patrons show respect, I'm certain so will board members. As our good Lord said, "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." We still have a lot of work to do, so it's time for everyone to put their animosity aside and move on.
David Smolen
Warsaw
via e-mail
Note: The quotes referenced in this letter appeared in an opinion column written by Laurie Hahn, the Times-Union reporter who covers the school board. The column was clearly labeled "opinion," appearing on an "opinion" page. None of the quotes referenced - save the single word "interrupted" - appeared in the reporter's news stories. Reporters, just like readers, are afforded the opportunity to place their opinions in this newspaper. But reporters are admonished to keep their news stories opinion-free. Accusing a reporter of bias is a serious accusation. I reviewed the news stories to which the letter-writer refers and I would invite readers to do the same:
www.timeswrsw.com/N0817040.HTM
www.timeswrsw.com/N0817041.HTM
The level of bias the letter writer alleges does not appear in these news stories. Sure the opinion column carried a bias, but that is the nature of opinion.
Gary Gerard, Managing Editor
Cost Of War
Editor, Times-Union:We have seen and heard a lot about the cost of the war in Iraq and our current administration's justification for that cost. Many feel that any price has been worth America feeling safer since Sept. 11, 2001. While I do not agree that we are actually safer, and I think the current administration thinks that feeling safer is more important than actually being safer, that is not the purpose of this letter. I wanted to bring your attention to some of the costs of the war - monetary and otherwise - in Iraq. I want to point out to you the choices that have been made for our country.
As of Aug. 18, at noon, the war in Iraq had cost the United State $128,209,708,452. Say that number out loud when you read this, please; it makes it more real - "one hundred and twenty-eight billion, two hundred and nine million, seven hundred and eight thousand, four hundred and fifty-two dollars" (dollar amounts are estimates from the actual Congressional appropriations for this war).
Instead we could have ...
n Paid for 18,126,653 children to attend a year of Head Start, or
n Insured 54,954,950 people for one year, or
n Hired 2,442,094 additional public school teachers for one year, or
n Provided 3,281,997 students four-year scholarships at public universities, or
n Built 1,831,572 additional public housing units, or
n Fully funded global anti-hunger units for five years (the estimated 200,000 to 1 million people who will die from starvation in the Sudan area in the next few months are just one example of who could have benefited from this kind of money), or
n Fully funded worldwide AIDS programs for 12 years, or
n Finally, ensured that every child in the world was given basic immunizations for 42 years.
As of 12:05 p.m. on the same date, the cost had risen to $128,210,336,860. (All dollar amounts and facts were obtained from the Web site, www.notbush.com although there are other "counters" of the cost available.)
I haven't even gone into the cost of human lives that have been taken in the direct fighting of this war. But isn't this enough? Is the idea that we feel safer because the current administration says we are worth this cost, especially when many facts and events prove that we are actually in more danger because of this aggression? Do we really want four more years of choices like this?
President Dwight D. Eisenhower said, on April 16, 1953, "Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies in the final sense a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed."
Lisa Rector
Warsaw
[[In-content Ad]]
Have a news tip? Email [email protected] or Call/Text 360-922-3092