It’s Time To Demand More From Our Free Press
Imagine that you had a business which needed to move product through a network of warehouses and you decided to out source this part of your operation. You narrowed your choice down to two warehouse companies: “A” and “B”. Your principal criteria in making the choice was which company had the best track record on preventing pilferage. So you hired First Report Agency to study the issue and provide a report and because you are a “belt AND suspender” sort of fellow you also hired Second Report Associates to provide another look. First Report found that there was pilferage in both companies while both claimed they were the best at theft prevention. Second Report found evidence that Company A’s track record was a very consistent 9.5% loss. Company B also had loss due to pilferage but at a rate of 3%. Your company, Second Report noted would move 10 million dollars worth of goods through the chosen warehouses every year, so choosing B would save your company $650,000 per year. Which report would be most useful to you as the decision maker?
Which kind of reporting do we get from our free press? If you push people in the press as why their so important to our democracy, it won’t be long before the subject of Watergate comes up. But there is some serious revisionist history here. With the almost singular exception of the Washington Post, the coverage was all of the First Report model, ie Nixon’s people might have pulled some dirty tricks, but all the campaigns do it. The Post went beyond the he said she said generalities and uncovered Nixon initiated skulduggery on a whole new scale.
Why do we constantly get useless First Report quality reporting from our major press outlets? Well there are three obvious answers short of deliberate coverup: 1. it doesn’t require heavy lifting; 2. it isn’t going to make important people angry; and 3. the reporter gets to be superior to everyone. In story after story no one gets special blame and the only smart and honest soul is the person doing the reporting.
Consider an example from today’s headlines, the contamination of the drinking water of Flint, Michigan. Today, the national press told us that Michigan Governor Rick Snyder, in his State of the State Address, “apologized” for the poisoned water and said there was plenty of blame to go around between local, state, and the federal government. Really? First, there was no local government decision. The Republican legislature and Snyder has stripped local control away from the people of Flint. Their elected representatives opposed a premature switch from Detroit’s water, but Governor Snyder’s hand picked man paid no attention and started taking the water from the Flint River. Then, the Governor’s hand picked local Czar and Snyder’ handpicked man at the Michigan environmental agency did not install the necessary modifications to the water system to prevent the river water from breaking down the pipes and causing them to leach lead. Why this was not done we do not know. We do know that it’s water treatment 101. When a concerned scientist from the US EPA reported on the dangerous lead levels he was attacked and discredited by the Snyder Administration.
When a local pediatrician reported higher lead lever in the blood of Flint’s little children, she was attacked and discredited by Snyder’s agents at the local and state level.
What about the EPA. They are at fault for not immediately coming down like a ton of bricks on the State of Michigan. The were undoubtably overly concerned with causing a panic and with the common critique of the agency, that they are not “consumer friendly.” For consumer read “polluter.” Could it be that I am the only one who sees irony in Snyder criticizing the Feds for not blowing the whistle on him sooner? Snyder and this appointees have taken actions and then covered up the results which have done permanent damage to Flint’s children. With all due respect, the “nobody’s perfect coverage doesn’t come close to what is needed and when will the press get over this apology b.s. If you accidently spill someone’s coffee an apology means something, if through reckless disregard you poison children and then cover up the crime, an apology is an insult. A resignation and possibly jail time is in order.
This more rigorous style of reporting which is built on facts instead of he said, she said will serve the Democrats in the case of Flint’s poisoned water, but that will not be the result in nearby Chicago. In November of 2015, Mayor Emanuel held a press conference to announce the release of the video tape showing the police shooting of Laquan McDonald. It was reported that it was everybody’s responsibility to keep the city calm. But everyone wasn’t equally the cause and it wasn’t the big press establishment in Chicago that forced this video into the pubic eye. They were happy to regurgitate the pablum they’d been fed. They’d not questioned the police story put out just days after the shooting that Laquan had been running at the police officer with a knife. For over a year that story went essentially unchallenged by facts assembled by Chicago’s Press. Meanwhile, the city sat on evidence that proved their press releases were a a lie, while the Mayor fended off a electoral challenge from a black opponent. Justice was delayed and voters were denied important information. Since then the press tells us that Mayor Emanuel has “apologized” and said there is plenty of blame to go around. My mother had an expression that covered this sort of reporting, “He wouldn’t say shit if he had a mouthful.” Well even for this lifelong Democrat, the story here is that Mayor Emanuel betrayed his trust and actively covered up a crime to advance his reelection. He should resign or be removed from office.
Imagine that you had a business which needed to move product through a network of warehouses and you decided to out source this part of your operation. You narrowed your choice down to two warehouse companies: “A” and “B”. Your principal criteria in making the choice was which company had the best track record on preventing pilferage. So you hired First Report Agency to study the issue and provide a report and because you are a “belt AND suspender” sort of fellow you also hired Second Report Associates to provide another look. First Report found that there was pilferage in both companies while both claimed they were the best at theft prevention. Second Report found evidence that Company A’s track record was a very consistent 9.5% loss. Company B also had loss due to pilferage but at a rate of 3%. Your company, Second Report noted would move 10 million dollars worth of goods through the chosen warehouses every year, so choosing B would save your company $650,000 per year. Which report would be most useful to you as the decision maker?
Which kind of reporting do we get from our free press? If you push people in the press as why their so important to our democracy, it won’t be long before the subject of Watergate comes up. But there is some serious revisionist history here. With the almost singular exception of the Washington Post, the coverage was all of the First Report model, ie Nixon’s people might have pulled some dirty tricks, but all the campaigns do it. The Post went beyond the he said she said generalities and uncovered Nixon initiated skulduggery on a whole new scale.
Why do we constantly get useless First Report quality reporting from our major press outlets? Well there are three obvious answers short of deliberate coverup: 1. it doesn’t require heavy lifting; 2. it isn’t going to make important people angry; and 3. the reporter gets to be superior to everyone. In story after story no one gets special blame and the only smart and honest soul is the person doing the reporting.
Consider an example from today’s headlines, the contamination of the drinking water of Flint, Michigan. Today, the national press told us that Michigan Governor Rick Snyder, in his State of the State Address, “apologized” for the poisoned water and said there was plenty of blame to go around between local, state, and the federal government. Really? First, there was no local government decision. The Republican legislature and Snyder has stripped local control away from the people of Flint. Their elected representatives opposed a premature switch from Detroit’s water, but Governor Snyder’s hand picked man paid no attention and started taking the water from the Flint River. Then, the Governor’s hand picked local Czar and Snyder’ handpicked man at the Michigan environmental agency did not install the necessary modifications to the water system to prevent the river water from breaking down the pipes and causing them to leach lead. Why this was not done we do not know. We do know that it’s water treatment 101. When a concerned scientist from the US EPA reported on the dangerous lead levels he was attacked and discredited by the Snyder Administration.
When a local pediatrician reported higher lead lever in the blood of Flint’s little children, she was attacked and discredited by Snyder’s agents at the local and state level.
What about the EPA. They are at fault for not immediately coming down like a ton of bricks on the State of Michigan. The were undoubtably overly concerned with causing a panic and with the common critique of the agency, that they are not “consumer friendly.” For consumer read “polluter.” Could it be that I am the only one who sees irony in Snyder criticizing the Feds for not blowing the whistle on him sooner? Snyder and this appointees have taken actions and then covered up the results which have done permanent damage to Flint’s children. With all due respect, the “nobody’s perfect coverage doesn’t come close to what is needed and when will the press get over this apology b.s. If you accidently spill someone’s coffee an apology means something, if through reckless disregard you poison children and then cover up the crime, an apology is an insult. A resignation and possibly jail time is in order.
This more rigorous style of reporting which is built on facts instead of he said, she said will serve the Democrats in the case of Flint’s poisoned water, but that will not be the result in nearby Chicago. In November of 2015, Mayor Emanuel held a press conference to announce the release of the video tape showing the police shooting of Laquan McDonald. It was reported that it was everybody’s responsibility to keep the city calm. But everyone wasn’t equally the cause and it wasn’t the big press establishment in Chicago that forced this video into the pubic eye. They were happy to regurgitate the pablum they’d been fed. They’d not questioned the police story put out just days after the shooting that Laquan had been running at the police officer with a knife. For over a year that story went essentially unchallenged by facts assembled by Chicago’s Press. Meanwhile, the city sat on evidence that proved their press releases were a a lie, while the Mayor fended off a electoral challenge from a black opponent. Justice was delayed and voters were denied important information. Since then the press tells us that Mayor Emanuel has “apologized” and said there is plenty of blame to go around. My mother had an expression that covered this sort of reporting, “He wouldn’t say shit if he had a mouthful.” Well even for this lifelong Democrat, the story here is that Mayor Emanuel betrayed his trust and actively covered up a crime to advance his reelection. He should resign or be removed from office.