Humboldt County Newspaper Wars: Printing One's Own Reality
Ah to control a newspaper and control the facts. The temptation to abuse that power must be great. Fortunately, there are no such delusions of grandeur here at TLC's Place, just facts, observations, connecting of dots, commentary, Links to original source material, and an invitation for all to THINK about the world around us, how it really exists notwithstanding a constant flow of propaganda and mind control techniques.
The Eureka Reporter for June 21, 2006, gives a great opportunity to examine what it's like to control a newspaper bankrolled by a very wealthy individual. First we have a letter to the editor by Chuck Harvey:
Is it a fair fight between the Times-Standard and The Eureka Reporter? Why so little outrage at its obvious unfairness? Or concern about its possible results?
The Eureka Reporter exists because Rob Arkley Jr., pours seemingly unlimited money into it, presumably to promote his own agenda - his personal opinions, political influence and business interests, all interlocked. The Times-Standard has to pay its own way by addressing a broad range of interests and opinions in the community.
Full Letter, and it's a very good one.
________________
And then on the opposite page we have an editorial by the Eureka Reporter's Publisher, Judi Pollace, which does everything but respond to the issues actually raised:
The Eureka Reporter currently employees 68 full-time, benefited employees and one summer intern.
In round numbers our annual payroll is more than $1,600,000.
[The piece proceeds to go on at some length about how much money is being put into the community by the paper, as if the paper somehow has its own printing press that manufactures free money. Uh, no folks, it's Rob Arkley's money. C'mon, spit it out.
And it gets better]
Mr. Harvey also stated that we are trying to put the Times-Standard out of business. We want the Times-Standard to continue their 150-year tradition of printing the newspaper, and we look forward to their providing a competition of ideas as will we, and who wins? Both newspapers' readers and advertisers. "Where is the outrage?"
[Uh, funny way of showing it. Putting out a very good sports section, that drains PAYING readers from the T-S, people who get a newspaper mainly for sports coverage. And then there's the Sunday TV section, far sharper and spiffier than that of the one the T-S has the audacity to charge for. And what of people who like a local newspaper for information but who aren't really "news junkies" and don't care about the source, especially if they can get a newspaper for free.
A crippled T-S, a T-S owned by a person or entity that more closely shares Rob Arkley's world view, and/or a T-S that alters its editorial stance to reflect the wishes of Rob Arkley in exchange for the Eureka Reporter not cherry picking the T-S's financial lifeblood or otherwise sparing its life, that's what's really going on. It's not rocket science. While lots of people know this, yet there's been very little discussion in the local newspapers outside of the Humboldt Advocate.
And Pollace's not through]
We have three basic ideals that guide us:
First, our newspaper is free. We don't think anybody should have to pay for the news of their community.
[Especially if they have to PAY the T-S to cover the wages of its employees, materials, overhead, and investment. Does free news extend to free software? Are we entitled to get the New York Times premium stuff for free as a matter of right?]
Second, we maintain low and affordable ads rates, and the money remains local (not cut rate), based on circulation figures, which is how rates should be determined.
[Note the lack of addressing whether the ad rates cover the cost of production. Whether the newspaper turns a profit, or even breaks even. And there's a difference between receiving a newspaper you asked for, and tolerating a newspaper tossed on your lawn that you never asked for. There's an obvious difference between "circulation" and "readership". BTW, can I dump my refuse on the lawns of others until they complain, at which time I'll stop? ]
We think it's very important that small businesses can market their goods and services to facilitate their businesses growth.
Third, unbiased reporting. "Where is the outrage?"
["Unbiased" my a**. To believe the Eureka Reporter "unbiased" would require ingestion of alot of Humboldt County's main cash crop. But I don't think even Monica Lewinsky could swallow the "unbiased" claim without gagging.
And this final coup de grace]
And last but not least, Mr. Harvey stated in his letter that this newspaper is a mouthpiece for Mr. Arkley. It's obvious Mr. Harvey does not read the newspaper; nothing is further from the truth.
[ROTFLMAO! Denial is still not just a river in Egypt. Nor does Denial alter reality].
You can read the full Editorial by Judi Pollace without my commentary, including parts clipped from the excerpts above, HERE.
TLC
The Eureka Reporter for June 21, 2006, gives a great opportunity to examine what it's like to control a newspaper bankrolled by a very wealthy individual. First we have a letter to the editor by Chuck Harvey:
Is it a fair fight between the Times-Standard and The Eureka Reporter? Why so little outrage at its obvious unfairness? Or concern about its possible results?
The Eureka Reporter exists because Rob Arkley Jr., pours seemingly unlimited money into it, presumably to promote his own agenda - his personal opinions, political influence and business interests, all interlocked. The Times-Standard has to pay its own way by addressing a broad range of interests and opinions in the community.
Full Letter, and it's a very good one.
________________
And then on the opposite page we have an editorial by the Eureka Reporter's Publisher, Judi Pollace, which does everything but respond to the issues actually raised:
The Eureka Reporter currently employees 68 full-time, benefited employees and one summer intern.
In round numbers our annual payroll is more than $1,600,000.
[The piece proceeds to go on at some length about how much money is being put into the community by the paper, as if the paper somehow has its own printing press that manufactures free money. Uh, no folks, it's Rob Arkley's money. C'mon, spit it out.
And it gets better]
Mr. Harvey also stated that we are trying to put the Times-Standard out of business. We want the Times-Standard to continue their 150-year tradition of printing the newspaper, and we look forward to their providing a competition of ideas as will we, and who wins? Both newspapers' readers and advertisers. "Where is the outrage?"
[Uh, funny way of showing it. Putting out a very good sports section, that drains PAYING readers from the T-S, people who get a newspaper mainly for sports coverage. And then there's the Sunday TV section, far sharper and spiffier than that of the one the T-S has the audacity to charge for. And what of people who like a local newspaper for information but who aren't really "news junkies" and don't care about the source, especially if they can get a newspaper for free.
A crippled T-S, a T-S owned by a person or entity that more closely shares Rob Arkley's world view, and/or a T-S that alters its editorial stance to reflect the wishes of Rob Arkley in exchange for the Eureka Reporter not cherry picking the T-S's financial lifeblood or otherwise sparing its life, that's what's really going on. It's not rocket science. While lots of people know this, yet there's been very little discussion in the local newspapers outside of the Humboldt Advocate.
And Pollace's not through]
We have three basic ideals that guide us:
First, our newspaper is free. We don't think anybody should have to pay for the news of their community.
[Especially if they have to PAY the T-S to cover the wages of its employees, materials, overhead, and investment. Does free news extend to free software? Are we entitled to get the New York Times premium stuff for free as a matter of right?]
Second, we maintain low and affordable ads rates, and the money remains local (not cut rate), based on circulation figures, which is how rates should be determined.
[Note the lack of addressing whether the ad rates cover the cost of production. Whether the newspaper turns a profit, or even breaks even. And there's a difference between receiving a newspaper you asked for, and tolerating a newspaper tossed on your lawn that you never asked for. There's an obvious difference between "circulation" and "readership". BTW, can I dump my refuse on the lawns of others until they complain, at which time I'll stop? ]
We think it's very important that small businesses can market their goods and services to facilitate their businesses growth.
Third, unbiased reporting. "Where is the outrage?"
["Unbiased" my a**. To believe the Eureka Reporter "unbiased" would require ingestion of alot of Humboldt County's main cash crop. But I don't think even Monica Lewinsky could swallow the "unbiased" claim without gagging.
And this final coup de grace]
And last but not least, Mr. Harvey stated in his letter that this newspaper is a mouthpiece for Mr. Arkley. It's obvious Mr. Harvey does not read the newspaper; nothing is further from the truth.
[ROTFLMAO! Denial is still not just a river in Egypt. Nor does Denial alter reality].
You can read the full Editorial by Judi Pollace without my commentary, including parts clipped from the excerpts above, HERE.
TLC
posted by TLC's Place at 10:42 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home