From the category archives:

Wichita news media

KSN news director meets with critics

by Bob Weeks on October 26, 2009

Can You Hear Us Now? Wichita October 17, 2009

KSN News Director Jason Kravarik

On Saturday October 17, 2009, about 50 Wichitans met in front of Wichita’s KSN Television studio to express their concerns about the state of news media. The event was part of a national protest named “Can you hear us now?” Locally, the South Central Kansas 9.12 Group promoted the event.

Jason Kravarik, KSN News Director addressed the group. The crowd was contentious at first, but after emotions cooled a bit, a more constructive dialog emerged.

Kravarik stressed that KSN is a local news organization. It is affiliated with NBC News, but KSN employees are not employees of NBC. The focus of KSN is local news, not national. When national news stories appear on KSN, they’re furnished by NBC.

Someone in the crowd asked: “Why don’t you correct the national news?”

Kravarik replied that KSN covers national news as it affects Wichita. KSN can’t send reporters to Washington.

The crowd was critical of KSN’s news coverage of the Wichita tea parties. It’s possible that KSN may have broadcast a mistake when counting the number of attendees in its coverage of one of the tea parties. But by and large, KSN has covered the Wichita tea parties. As Kravarik mentioned, this website (WichitaLiberty.org) holds several references to KSN’s coverage. (See Wichita tax day tea party preview on KSN news and Wichita Tea Party News Coverage on KSN Television for examples.)

He also told the group that KSN provides no opinion or commentary, just coverage of local new stories.

One complaint from the audience was that KSN doesn’t provide advance notice of events like tea parties. Kravarik recommended that groups contact the station to make sure that reporters know of the event, and make contact well in advance of the date of the event — not just the day before.

(If I had been in Kravarik’s position, I might have said that local television news stations shouldn’t serve as advertising services for anyone.)

There was also mention of cable television news networks. Kravarik told the audience that based on the ratings success of Fox News with shows like The O’Reilly Factor, MSNBC decided to counter with their own opinion-based shows like Keith Olbermann’s.

One speaker requested time for local exploration of national issues and how they will affect us locally in Wichita and the surrounding area.

Kravarik also mentioned that when local people do things with national impact, that’s something his station is interested in. But reporters need to be notified of such things.

One audience member said “The print media is useless, because people might see it, but it doesn’t register. You guys put stuff on the actual news on the television. People look at that television and take it as gospel, as bad as it is.”

Kravarik also mentioned that as events such as tea parties are repeated, they become less newsworthy: “By the time there’s a hundred of these, will they get as much coverage as day two, three, and four?”

He urged the group to get specific with its issues. Are there local people who are being negatively affected by a policy? Then it moves from the abstract to the concrete. It then becomes a new story idea.

In response to a question about the economics of news, Kravarik mentioned that his station is struggling, as are all stations, due to loss of advertising revenue.

Analysis

While the protesters complained that the issues they’re concerned about are not being covered, somehow the members of the group are informed about them. So the news must be getting out somehow. I believe this points to the diversity of news sources available today, largely due to the Internet.

Some of the protesters were complaining to the wrong person. One person complained about the reporting of the count of protesters at the September 12 protest event in Washington. Regardless of the merits of the complaint, Kravarik’s news station didn’t cover that event.

The plea for attention is understandable. But if KSN gives more attention to issues and events that are important to the protesters, we would expect other interest groups to insist on increased coverage of their issues.

The criticism of print media by one person is mistaken, I believe. One of the important differences between print journalism and television journalism is breadth and depth of coverage. Print media — Internet too — has the space to cover issues in depth. The daily television news broadcast doesn’t.

Some people asked why doesn’t local news media explain issues like the “Fair Tax” or the Federal Reserve system. This is more like educational programming, which network television has rarely embraced, as it doesn’t produce ratings. Public television is more likely to provide this type of programming. An important advance in just the past year or two is the rise of Internet video services like YouTube, which contains many educational videos.

There’s also the issue of “What is the truth?” While I am largely sympathetic with the political views of the protesters at this event, there are other groups that are just as firmly convinced that their version of the world is the truth.

Perception, too, plays a large role in opinion of news coverage. The Wall Street Journal has a reputation as a bastion of conservatism. But a UCLA study in 2005 found that “the newspaper’s news pages are liberal, even more liberal than The New York Times.”

As an example of how truth and perception can vary from person to person, I would be happy to make any readers a DVD of the video I captured of this event, on the condition that they write their own news coverage or commentary. (Or maybe create video or audio coverage and commentary.) I’ll then post it here.

{ 2 comments }

It’s a slow, slow news day

by Bob Weeks on September 10, 2009

in Wichita news media

Is there no substantive news to cover in Wichita?

One of the top stories in the headline rotation at KAKE TV’s website has the headline “Girls Burned By Hot Coffee.”

Here’s the lead of the story: “Two girls were burned in Southeast Wichita Wednesday when one of them tripped on a coffeemaker cord and spilled hot coffee.”

{ 2 comments }

Wichita Eagle reporter to speak to Pachyderms

by Bob Weeks on June 24, 2009

in Wichita news media

This Friday, Wichita Eagle investigative and special reporter Dion Lefler will speak to the Wichita Pachyderm Club. Here’s information about Lefler supplied by the Pachyderm Club:

Dion Lefler is an investigative reporter for the Wichita Eagle, specializing in government and politics.

Dion has been at the Eagle for 11 years. Before that, he was a reporter and editor with several papers in the Los Angeles area, including the Los Angeles Daily News and the Pasadena Star-News. Dion has a journalism degree from California State University, Northridge, and has been covering politics across the spectrum since Ronald Reagan’s 1984 re-election campaign.

Recently, he received two Heart of America awards, for online coverage of the Democratic National Convention and a package of stories that halted a city of Wichita plan to provide $11 million in incentives to a developer with a history of lawsuits, bad debts and bounced checks.

All are welcome to attend Pachyderm meetings. Lunch is $10, or you may attend the meeting only for $3.

At Pachyderm meetings, there’s usually plenty of time for the speaker to take questions from the audience. The meeting starts at noon, although those wishing to order lunch are encouraged to arrive by 11:45. The location is Whiskey Creek Steakhouse at 233 N. Mosley in Old Town. You can view a map of this location by clicking on Google map of 233 N. Mosley.

{ 0 comments }

Former Wichita Eagle editor addresses journalism, democracy

by Bob Weeks on May 11, 2009

in Wichita news media

On Friday, former Wichita Eagle editor W. Davis “Buzz” Merritt Jr. spoke to members and guests of the Wichita Pachyderm Club.

He retired as editor of the Eagle in 1999. He is the author of the book Knightfall: Knight Ridder and How the Erosion of Newspaper Journalism Is Putting Democracy at Risk.

Merritt said there are two things to think about today. One is that journalism must somehow survive if democracy is to survive. The two are interdependent. One can’t exist without the other.

The second is that democracy can’t survive on opinions alone. “The plasma of democracy is shared information,” he said. People need a way to discuss the implications of that shared information, forming the mechanism of democracy.

Merritt sees a notion, becoming more reinforced, that opinions are more important that information. Everyone has an opinion, but not everyone has good information. With everyone having a megaphone, there’s no check on irresponsibility.

We’re entitled to free speech, but we’re not entitled to our own facts, he said. Journalism has been the provider of this shared information that makes democracy possible.

Changes in the information environment have been wonderful, he said. “The problem is the rutabaga man can vote.” He may be interested only in rutabagas, and that’s all he searches for on his computer, but there’s information and facts he needs to know in order to participate in democracy.

It’s clear that newspapers are in trouble, Merritt says. We don’t necessarily need newspapers, but we need the type of journalism that newspapers have traditionally provided. A concern is that the infrastructure that supports journalism will go away before the transfer is made to online delivery of journalism.

How did newspapers get in such trouble? The key event is the shift from family ownership to institutional ownership of newspapers. The search for ever-increasing profits by the new owners lead to cost-cutting measures that have snowballed. (If you read “Knightfall” you’ll learn that one of the things the Wichita Eagle did to cut costs was to stop delivery to western Kansas.)

If journalism like that which newspapers provide goes away, democracy is in terrible trouble. “No shared information, no place to discuss the implications of that information, no place for politics, government, and public life to work.” Replacing this with under-informed opinion is a cause for concern for our democracy.

A questioner asked why doesn’t the press aggressively report about ACORN? Merritt replied “How do you know about ACORN?” The point is that newspapers have reported on ACORN.

Another question asked how much ideology has contributed to the problems of newspapers, the premise being that newspapers are out of touch with their readers. Merritt replied that newspapers do have an ideology — on their editorial pages. That’s where a newspaper expresses its opinion. There may be surveys that show that journalists identify more with liberal than conservative thought, but Merritt doesn’t believe that to be that case, in his experience. People who want to see things change are often attracted to journalism as a career.

In a response to a question, Merritt recommended contacting the newspaper with specific examples of bias, if readers sense it in the news reporting.

A question that I asked is whether the declining resources of the Wichita Eagle might create the danger that local government officials feel they can act under less scrutiny, or is this already happening? Merritt replied that this has been going on for some time. “The watchdog job of journalism is incredibly important and is terribly threatened.” When all resources go to cover what must be covered — police, accidents, etc. — there isn’t anything left over to cover what should be covered. There are many important stories that aren’t being covered because the “boots aren’t on the street anymore,” he said.

In response to another question, Merritt said that the “contradictions are too enormous” for government to use public money to support journalism. There may be conflicts of interest, too, in foundation ownership of newspapers. These may have to be tolerated in order to preserve journalism.

{ 4 comments }

Tillman story may leave wrong impression of Wichita tea party

by Bob Weeks on April 22, 2009

in Wichita news media

The Wichita Eagle news story Democrat Tillman enters race for 4th District seat may give its readers an incorrect impression of the Wichita tea party protest held on tax day.

In the story, the reporter quotes Robert Tillman as saying “Confederate flags (were) flown at the Republican tea party.”

The first half of this statement is true, but hardly indicative of the sentiment of tea party protesters.

I have about 360 photographs that I took at the tea party. Looking at them, I saw one confederate flag.

I called Robert Tillman, the subject of the story and whose quote appears above, and asked him how many of these flags he saw. He said “at least two.”

At least 2,000 people attended the Wichita tea party. So a rate of one confederate flag per 1,000 people, I’d venture to say, hardly supports the impression that readers may get from this story.

By the way, an informal survey by a television reporter of 100 people at the tea party found 46 who identified themselves as Republicans. So the claim that it was a “Republican tea party” is not substantiated either.

{ 10 comments }

Wichita Eagle editorial page calls for more government at all levels

by Bob Weeks on April 12, 2009

in Wichita news media

Today’s Wichita Eagle editorial and opinion page is chock full of plans for more government programs, regulations, taxes, and intervention.

Rhonda Holman’s editorial calls for more government involvement in setting energy policy so that Kansas can share in the “green-energy boom.” Readers of this blog know that government involvement in energy policy will only lead to disaster. It will lead to more taxes and more government programs, so maybe that’s why Holman is in favor of programs like this.

Jeff Fluhr of the Wichita Downtown Development Corporation — itself a taxpayer-funded organization — calls for planning to ensure the success of downtown Wichita. How are these plans to be developed and enforced? Through government, of course. Then, he tries to avoid the “T-word” by using euphemisms like “strategic public investment.” But how does the public “invest” in something except through taxation?

A featured letter calls for the city to build more swimming pools.

In the regular letter section, one writer calls for national health care, just like we have national defense.

Another uses the way that injured birds are cared for by the Kansas Raptor Center to advocate that the government care for young and injured people the same way.

A former state representative makes the case for more government regulation of political speech.

Then, to make sure the point is made as clear as possible, a writer who lived through the Great Depression praises Franklin D. Roosevelt and his policies.

Maybe this big-government stance of the Wichita Eagle editorial page is one of the reasons fewer people are reading it.

{ 9 comments }

Flint Hills Center adds investigative reporter

by Bob Weeks on April 8, 2009

in Wichita news media

The Flint Hills Center for Public Policy in Wichita announces the hiring of an investigative reporter. The press release is below.

As newspapers, magazines, and television face tough economic times, it’s thought that one model that might emerge is journalism sponsored by non-profit institutions such as the Flint Hills Center.

I believe that journalism is a vitally important institution in our country. It’s a necessary function in any democracy. With mounting layoffs at newspapers, many papers simply don’t have the manpower to produce the in-depth investigative reporting that keeps government, especially, in check. Wichitans and Kansans should welcome this innovative effort by the Flint Hills Center and wish Paul Souter good luck as he starts a new chapter in his career.

Public Policy Center Adds Investigative Reporter

Publish at Scribd or explore others: Magazines & Newspape wichita kansas

{ 5 comments }

Wichita Eagle’s GWEDC board membership in perspective

by Bob Weeks on March 2, 2009

in Wichita news media

What is the role in public affairs of a newspaper like the Wichita Eagle? Can it wear more than one hat — making news as well as covering it?

This is not a hypothetical question.

Consider that Pam Siddall, president and publisher of the Wichita Eagle is a member of the steering council of the Greater Wichita Economic Development Coalition, an important, partially tax-funded board, that plays a significant role in Wichita.

Should this make any difference to you?

When the Eagle’s editorial board grants the president of the Greater Wichita Economic Development Coalition space on its pages, should readers be aware of this connection? (Vicki Pratt Gerbino: Invest in recruiting, preserving area jobs, February 15, 2009 Wichita Eagle)

When the Eagle’s editorial blog writes a fawning post titled GWEDC crucial to attracting, retaining jobs, should readers be aware of this connection?

When Eagle reporters write a story that can be characterized as critical of anyone who questions the need for the GWEDC — the story starts with “The hard-won balance between the city, county and business leaders over economic development is wobbling a bit after some comments last week.” — should readers be aware of this connection? (See Sedgwick County commissioners question economic development funding, February 17, 2009 Wichita Eagle.)

The nature of the connection is that the Eagle is an “Investor” in the GWEDC, which means they contributed at least $5,000, at least some in the form of advertising. The Wichita Business Journal is also in the Investor class.

I asked the heads of the two organizations involved — Vicki Pratt Gerbino, president of the GWEDC, and Pam Siddall, publisher of the Wichita Eagle — if they thought there was potential for conflict of interest when a news organization covers an entity it has made contributions to. Ms. Gerbino said no, there’s no conflict of interest. Ms. Siddall said the same, citing the separate news and business functions at the Eagle.

In conversations I’ve had in the past with a few Eagle reporters, they’ve cited the “wall of separation” between the main functions of a newspaper, which are news, editorial, and the business of the newspaper.

But this wall may not be as tall and wide as it seems. In an excerpt from Knightfall: Knight Ridder and How the Erosion of Newspaper Journalism Is Putting Democracy At Risk, Davis Merritt, former editor of the Eagle writes “The notion of strict separation between the business and journalism functions of newspapers is relatively recent in terms of the whole of American newspaper history, and judging by current practice, it may be only a passing phase.”

It is difficult for an outsider to be able to know if the Eagle’s news and editorial judgments are influenced by its relationship with the GWEDC. That’s why people and organizations are often advised to avoid even the appearance of a conflict of interest.

Could the GWEDC survive without the publisher of the Eagle on its steering committee and without the Eagle’s financial contribution? I think they could. Then, without this connection, readers of the Eagle wouldn’t have to worry so much about the Eagle’s news and editorial independence.

{ 7 comments }

In Wichita, let’s disclose everything. I mean everything.

by Bob Weeks on February 23, 2009

in Wichita news media

A follow-up post is at at Editorial Board Pen Names at the Wichita Eagle.

In an Wichita Eagle Editorial Blog post, Rhonda Holman calls for more disclosure for groups that send mailings that “dodge campaign finance disclosure law by deftly telling people how to vote without using the words ‘vote for’ or ‘vote against.’” (Treat campaign ads the same)

A few points:

Holman’s target is quite selective. As shown in my post On the Wichita Eagle Editorial Board, Partisanship Reigns from right before last election day, she’s willing to overlook the Eagle’s own political contributions and the use of taxpayer money to fund election campaigns when she agrees with the causes.

And, why the need for a law when, as Holman writes “Kansans aren’t fooled by the ads and mailings”?

Then, wouldn’t a lot of Wichita Eagle readers like to know some of the financial details behind the Eagle’s political endorsements, say perhaps Holman’s salary? Heck, I’d be satisfied if she’d start using her real — or should I say entire — name when making political endorsements.

{ 7 comments }

A Share of McClatchy, or a Copy of the Daily Newpaper

by Bob Weeks on February 20, 2009

in Wichita news media

Yesterday the price of a share of The McClatchy Company, the parent company of the Wichita Eagle, closed at 50 cents. That happens to be the newsstand price of a copy of the Eagle, although to buy a copy of the paper, you’ll have to add sales tax.

McClatchy stock price

The decline in this company’s stock price — from over $70 four years ago to less than one dollar today — illustrates the magnitude of the crisis in the newspaper industry. While there are some who take delight in the financial difficulties of mainstream newspapers, I believe that newspapers are still an important institution. I hope they will find a way to survive.

The plight of newspapers does raise an issue or two, however. When the editorial page dishes out advice on fiscal issues, for example, should we pay any attention?

{ 6 comments }

Newspaper journalism in Wichita: we need it

by Bob Weeks on December 23, 2008

in Wichita news media

Printing presses at the Wichita Eagle

It’s almost impossible to overstate the dire economic condition in which newspapers find themselves. Falling circulation, reduced advertising, and a generational shift add up to bad news for this unique and important industry.

In his book Knightfall: Knight Ridder and How the Erosion of Newspaper Journalism Is Putting Democracy at Risk, former Wichita Eagle editor Davis Merritt describes the difference between newspaper journalism and everything else we call news:

Its content is not shaped by a limiting technology, such as broadcast with its time strictures and, in television and online, bias toward the visual and against permanence.

Its usefulness is based far more on completeness and clarity than immediacy.
Its claim on credibility is based on its length and depth, which allow readers to judge the facts behind a story’s headline and opening summary paragraph and then look for internal contradictions.
It has intrinsic value and relevance to people rather than merely amusing or entertaining them.
Opinions and analysis are labeled as such and are presented separately.

In Wichita we have recent examples of how newspaper journalism has influenced events. Recently the Wichita Eagle uncovered problems in the past of a person the City of Wichita was about to partner with on a real estate development. (See Wichita’s Faulty Due Diligence and Sharon Fearey Doesn’t Appreciate the Wichita Eagle for coverage.) Without the work of Wichita Eagle reporters, the deal would have happened. No other news outlet in Wichita had the resources or wherewithal to do the investigation necessary to report the story.

It appears that we don’t quite know how to support newspaper journalism in the age of the Internet. Let’s hope soon that someone develops a business model that lets journalism thrive in the future.

Additional resources:

News You Can Lose (The New Yorker)
Do Newspapers Have a Future? (Michael Kinsley, Time Magazine)
Who killed the newspaper? (Economist.com)
The Newspaper of the Future (The New York Times, from 2005 featuring the Lawrence Journal-World)
The Elite Newspaper of the Future (American Journalism Review. “A smaller, less frequently published version packed with analysis and investigative reporting and aimed at well-educated news junkies that may well be a smart survival strategy for the beleaguered old print product.)

{ 4 comments }

These Are the Barrels

by Bob Weeks on December 22, 2008

in Wichita news media

Ink barrels at Wichita Eagle

It’s thought that Mark Twain said “Never pick a fight with a person who buys ink by the barrel.” These are the barrels (actually palettes) of ink at the Wichita Eagle.

{ 0 comments }

What is the Future of News Distribution?

by Bob Weeks on December 19, 2008

in Wichita news media

Newsprint at Wichita Eagle

This week I attended an open house event held by the Wichita Eagle. As part of the event, I took a quick tour of their plant. This photo shows rolls of newsprint in the basement of the building, waiting to be turned into newspapers. Ink distribution systems are in the background.

How long will this go on, news being delivered on paper? A few weeks ago I attended a talk given by Davis Merritt, former editor of the Eagle (see Newspapers are Dying; Journalism We Hope Is Not). He said that in five years, newspapers won’t be using paper anymore. Views like this seem to be common and recent events seem to point this way. Soon, the Detroit Free Press and Detroit News will provide home delivery on Thursdays, Fridays and Sundays only. I’ve been told that the Eagle either has or soon will stop same-day delivery to Topeka.

But who really knows? I mentioned Merritt’s remarks to a high-level manager at the Eagle, and she said he’s been saying that for 20 years.

{ 2 comments }

Newspapers are Dying; Journalism We Hope Is Not

by Bob Weeks on November 19, 2008

in Wichita news media

Last night I attended the weekly meeting of the Sedgwick County Pachyderm Club to hear guest speaker Davis “Buzz” Merritt, former editor of the Wichita Eagle. I’d read and reviewed his book Knightfall: Knight Ridder and How the Erosion of Newspaper Journalism Is Putting Democracy At Risk (my review is here).

His talk was based on the Knightfall book, which is to say it paints a somewhat grim picture of the present state of newspapers and newspaper journalism. It’s important to distinguish between the type of journalism that newspapers do, as compared to journalism from other sources such as television. Newspaper journalism doesn’t necessarily have to be delivered in the traditional newspaper printed on the fibers of dead trees, but it’s important to democracy that this form of journalism survives.

One point I learned last night is that not all of the operations of a newspaper have to be carried over to the Internet. Only 25% does, says Mr. Merritt. The remaining, I believe, is costs such as printing and distribution that won’t apply to an Internet-based delivery model.

Those costs of printing and distribution are large. In the late 1990s, when the Wichita Eagle needed to increase its profit contribution to its parent corporation from 20% to 22.5%, it accomplished that goal by canceling the distribution of 10,000 daily newspapers to western Kansas. This was a profitable business move, but hardly one that advanced journalism.

It’s well-known that young people don’t read newspapers very much, and that’s one source of newspapers’ problems. I asked if maybe young people don’t appreciate and value the type of journalism that newspapers practice. Mr. Merritt replied that he believes they do value it, if it affects them.

A few in the audience expressed how reading on the computer screen is not pleasant. I would suggest to these people to check their equipment and its adjustments. For CRT monitors (the old-fashioned tube-style monitors), there’s a setting usually known as “refresh rate” which if set incorrectly, causes flicker. That’s definitely annoying and can cause headaches. Many people also have old monitors that are simply too small, or are set to use such a low resolution, that not much material can be seen on the screen at one time. For LCD panel users, there are also adjustments that are critical for a good viewing experience. With good equipment, which doesn’t necessarily have to be expensive, the experience of reading on the computer can be much improved.

{ 4 comments }

The Cartoon The Wichita Eagle Wouldn’t Print

by Bob Weeks on October 22, 2008

in Wichita news media

Helen Cochran of Citizens for Better Education commissioned a series of political cartoons concerning the Wichita school bond issue. She’s paid to have them printed in the Wichita Eagle each Monday for the past month or so. They’re also carried on her group’s web site.

But the Wichita Eagle refused to run this week’s cartoon. Here it is:

I spoke with Helen and asked her a few questions about the Eagle’s refusal to print this cartoon.

Q. What did the Wichita Eagle give as their reason for not accepting this advertisement? Who made this decision? Who communicated it to you?

A. Citizens for Better Education has been running paid political weekly cartoons for 6 weeks now. They are wholesome and poke fun in a light-hearted way. None have been mean-spirited. I usually give a final approval by noon on Fridays for a Monday publication to my Eagle sales rep. My advertising sales person told me on Friday afternoon that this cartoon would not be approved if she sent it through. I was flabbergasted and told her to send it through. It took correspondence between four people including the editor and publisher and I was finally told no.

Their reasoning was “letting an outside group attack one of our staff members.” They went on to say that on the one hand, this is what Richard Crowson did — in fact he ran a very mean spirited cartoon against me early on. Nevertheless, the Eagle has run our cartoons for six weeks, they have taken our money, and then at the eleventh hour says no they won’t run this one because it pokes fun at McCormick. And I had no finished back up cartoon to run in its place, so CBE lost its weekly cartoon. I was under the false impression, as an ex journalism major, that advertising and news departments operated independently of one another. Well, not so at the Wichita Eagle. They can dish it out but can’t take it.

Q. Does the cartoon make any claims that are not factual?

A. It is common knowledge that Mark McCormick is 100% in support of this bond as is the entire Eagle editorial board. He has written extensively in his column about it and has devoted three or four columns to it. It is disappointing that although he’s been corrected on some of the information he has used in error, despite being asked, by me, to correct it, he has failed to do so.

Q. Your cartoon makes the case that Mark McCormick is a cheerleader for the bond issue. Do you think he weighs both sides of the bond issue, or is he in fact a cheerleader?

A. He is a cheerleader to the “nth” degree as his support is purely emotional. And that’s fine, but he has done nothing to back up his reasons for support other than all the warm and fuzzy reactionary feelings. He has done little if any investigative reporting and that is very disappointing. He takes the Wichita school district at its word despite facts to the contrary.

{ 0 comments }

“Trash The Eagle” Website spotted

October 21, 2008

I recently noticed the new website Trash The Eagle. It holds, as you might expect, some criticism of the Wichita Eagle, our state’s largest newspaper.
The site is run anonymously, although with a little sleuthing, it isn’t hard to find out who is behind this site.

Read the full article →

Should a Beat Journalist be a Layman?

October 1, 2008

Keeping TIFs from a public tiff by Wichita Eagle business reporter Bill Wilson on the Eagle’s Business Casual blog contains some comments that are troubling to me.
In these comments, reporter Wilson wrote this: “Instead, a TIF, to this layman, actually is a government bet on the success of a development.” (emphasis added)
Now I believe that [...]

Read the full article →

The Things Wichita Eagle Columnist Mark McCormick Omits

August 18, 2008

In his Wichita Eagle titled Taxpayer watchdog seems to target city, columnist Mark McCormick asks “What does Karl Peterjohn have against Wichita kids?”
His basis for asking, as developed in the column, is that since Karl Peterjohn, head of the Kansas Taxpayers Network (and now Republican nominee for the Sedgwick County Commission) opposes a bond issue [...]

Read the full article →

Wichita Eagle Reporting Bias

June 30, 2008

In the article Allison to be interim director of WSU economics center, the Wichita Eagle again reveals bias in its business reporting.

Read the full article →

Wichita Business Journal: Please Explain the Wichita School Bond Impact

June 30, 2008

Mr. Heck must be relying on reporting from his own newspaper, for a few months ago it printed the article “Brooks: Bond issue possible in spring” (December 28, 2007 Wichita Business Journal) in which Brooks and Joe Johnson, head of the school district’s architectural firm Schaefer Johnson Cox Frey Architecture say that the bond issue in 2000 did, indeed, save Wichita.

This is nonsense of the highest order. Government spending cannot create prosperity. Borrowing against future tax revenue only compounds the problem.

Read the full article →

The Wichita Eagle’s preference for government

June 19, 2008

An article in the June 19, 2008 Wichita Eagle (Many businesses owners say they carry too much of local tax burden) provides an example of the frequently-expressed bias against individuality and markets, and in favor of government and its institutions.

The article, which presents much useful information, unfortunately contains this sentence: “Needless to say, taxes are essential to running the government, which provides the necessary public safety, infrastructure, education and regulation that makes business possible.”

Read the full article →

Analysis of Wichita Eagle News Coverage

August 13, 2007

I received this analysis and commentary from a friend of mine. It concerns an article that appeared on the front page of The Wichita Eagle a few months ago. I have removed mention of specific names.

I was appalled to read the front page editorial that appeared above the fold on the front page of the April 22, 2007 Wichita Eagle. Let me count some of the egregious flaws in this article:

1) The article mentions the “…a drop off of $185 million…” in state revenues but does not mention the primary reason. Let me provide it: “The new legislation setting aside $122.7 million for the school finance ‘lock-box’ and $80 million for statewide maintenance and disaster relief is primarily responsible for the large adjustment to this (revenue) source.” (source: April 19, 2007 Kansas Legislative Research State General Fund receipt revisions for FY 2007 and FY 2008, page 5). This point alone deserves a correction.

There’s $202.7 million that explains the main reason for this drop off. The money is being spent on increased state spending programs. Add to this the money that was shifted out of the general fund and over to the highway fund, “…enacted in 2004 for the Comprehensive Transportation Program reducing the amount of sales and use tax receipts deposited directly into the SGF (state General Fund)…” (ibid, page 1).

What was neglected in this article was the fact that Governor Sebelius and many legislative spending advocates want even more spending in both the current and next fiscal years. Last week Governor Sebelius proposed a $54 million increase in the current fiscal year plus $146 million in FY 2008 that begins July 1. That salient fact was missing in this article.

2) You repeat the lie that the tax cuts in 1997 and 1998 led to dramatic declines in state revenues leading to spending “cuts.” That did not occur. State General Fund expenditures in FY 2000 (1999-2000) were 4.1% above the previous year’s levels when the last of the 1995, 1997, & 1998 tax cuts phased in. The state ran into budget problems as part of the 2001 recession and the negative economic impact of the September 11 atrocities. These events were separated by several years. I have the FY 1999, 2000, 2001, & 2002 budgets if you need to revisit that fiscal history.

If you will look at past state budgets, the state has increased spending every year from 1993 to 2002. There was a decline that started during the recession in 2001 and the other events of that terrible year but this commentary tying the 1998 tax cuts to a budget shortfall four years later needs to be part of Brownlee’s operation on the editorial page and not on the news pages.

3) The tiny tax cut enacted this year at $36 million (ibid, page 1) is magnified by stretching this out over five years. This 2007 tax cut is slightly more than 1/2 of 1 percent of the state’s general fund spending this year.

If you used the same measuring tools the state’s spending it total in the billions on top of the total state spending (All Funds budget) that will far exceed $60 billion over five years (I can inflate these numbers the same way [the reporter] did, but I don’t have a front page position to have my commentary appear).

[The reporter's] article does provide some of the numbers so I could calculate the five year phase out of the franchise tax is $135 million (I did that addition) and the total for the social security tax cut over five years is only $56.9 million.

That’s a total of only $191.9 million. Where’s the other tax cuts to get to $570 million total this commentary claims? Where’s the rest of the $378 million?

This editorial commentary then ignores the earned income tax credit hike that was part of this legislation. The EITC is where the Dept. of Revenue ships tax funds out to low income Kansans. Critics view it as welfare using the tax code since these folks have no Kansas personal income tax liability. That welfare style tax break was raised a little over 13 percent in this bill.

I can only guess that the “…$570 billion in lost revenue…” must also include the unemployment tax reduction too. That would be the largest single item bulk of the “reduction.” Based on the rest of the figures you cite, the EITC would then be the next largest, if the social security reduction has only a $5.4 million price tag in 2008.

Left wing spending advocates pulled this stunt back in the 1990’s to try and magnify the size of the tax reductions during the 5 year unemployment tax moratorium from 1995-1999. Fortunately, unemployment taxes can’t be shifted into the state’s general fund budget. The mainstream Kansas press largely swallowed this as did [the reporter's] article, “…Gov. Bill Graves responded with record-setting tax breaks–an estimated $4 billion during Graves’ eight-year administration.”

Sorry: That’s $500 million a year in annual tax cuts. Graves’ first budget was FY 1994 and Gen. Fund spending was $3.111 billion. By FY 2002 Graves budget had grown to $4.466 billion or 43% increase (KS Fiscal Facts 2006, p. 23). How did these “cuts” reduce state revenues and spending? The single largest item in these calculations was the unemployment tax moratorium enacted in Graves first year as governor and excluded from the General Fund. Including this figure misleads your readers.

If you wanted to be more accurate you could point out that in nominal dollar terms Kansas had its first $3 billion General Fund Budget in 1994 and stands a good chance of enacting its first $6 billion General Fund budget for FY 2008 depending upon what the legislature does in their 2007 wrap up/veto session. That would be close to a 100% hike in nominal dollar terms.

Or you might point out that the state had its first All Funds budget exceeding $6 billion (including Medicaid and highway programs) in FY 1994 and has gone over $12 billion in the current fiscal year. Even adjusted for inflation, state spending is soaring in Kansas.

The Eagle hasn’t reported that the Tax Foundation’s latest ranking of state and local taxes as a percentage of income ranked us 15th highest among the 50 states earlier this month. That is where this state’s economic problem lies. Not with your unsourced commentary, “…lawmakers…wonder whether it’s a road map back to the budget crisis of the early 2000s, when tax cuts took effect just before a downturn in the economy and left the state scrambling to provide vital services.”

I guess that is fine in editorial commentary but it should be forbidden in news stories. Or, perhaps you could find some legislator or other elected official to make this type of assertion.

Let me add, that despite [my organization] and my best efforts, a sizable portion of the property tax cuts enacted in 1997-98 at the state level never got to taxpayers. They were grabbed by local units who raised their property taxes to offset the state reductions. So, much of the “tax cuts” never got back to the folks who paid them.

This commentary should have appeared on the editorial page. The only useful point in this piece was Rep. Jim Ward’s (D-Wichita) statement that “…We spent it…”

Read the full article →

Bias noticed at the Wichita Eagle, again

November 7, 2006

State Senator Peggy Palmer, R-Augusta has publicly announced that she has canceled her Wichita Eagle subscription in the wake of the controversy over the Wichita Eagle’s “news” coverage of today’s election.

Read the full article →

Bias Noticed at The Wichita Eagle

September 27, 2006

I received this commentary from a person who believes he noticed some bias in reporting appearing in The Wichita Eagle.

… I visited with Eagle writer Dion Lefler regarding the language he used to describe the Sedgwick County Commission meeting the day after Sedgwick County Commissioners voted 5 to 0 to raise the mil levy. I told him politely that I had a “bone to pick” with him regarding the semantics he used in that article when he referred to our group as the “anti-tax group”. I said to him, “Whenever you use the word to describe any group as “anti” you automatically send a negative message to your readers that actually shows your personal “bias” against that particular group.” I pointed out that we are not “anti” anything, but on the contrary we are taxpayer advocates and perhaps should be referred to as the “pro-taxpayer group” or the “taxpayer advocate group”.

I asked him why he did not refer to our opponents at the hearing as the “anti-taxpayer group”. If he had done that in his article, perhaps he could have achieved the “balance” that newspapers try to achieve. He could then rightly refer to our lower tax and less government taxpayer advocate group as the “antitaxers” and our opponents, the more government and higher tax advocate group, as the “antitaxpayers.”

I pointed out to Dion that our opponents who spoke at the hearing were primarily two groups. One group represented primarily government staff people who wanted their particular program funded and their well-scripted clientele who spoke of their need and dependence on government programs to help them with their alcohol, depression, drug, mental, or senior problems. The other group wanting additional taxpayer money were six figure executives from the aircraft industry dressed in their suits and ties begging for additional largess from the public treasury (“corporate welfare”) for an industry that already receives massive taxpayer subsidies. Our group, the “taxpayer advocate group” was speaking for thousands of property taxpaying people (“widows and orphans included”) who were not present and who were not represented particularly by the people that they elected to represent them.

Dion admitted that he saw my point and that he would take it into consideration in future reporting. I hope he was serious and follows through. I believe AFP, KTN, and other taxpayer advocacy groups need to take the lead in insisting on positive and balanced reporting rather than the biased and slanted work that we have unfortunately learned to tolerate as normal.

Read the full article →

Reporting on Wichita’s new terminal

June 29, 2006

A Wichita Eagle article published on June 29, 2006 explores the need for a new terminal at the Wichita Airport. I have some issues with the reporting in this article, as it is quite biased in favor of those advocating the new terminal. When you combine people eager to spend others’ money with sloppy newspaper reporting we have a situation where reason — not to mention sanity — is not likely to prevail.

Read the full article →

Wichita Eagle Editorial Blog not recommended

June 7, 2006

In June, 2005, the editors of The Wichita Eagle started a blog, the Wichita Eagle Editorial blog, or WE Blog.

The way this blog works it that one of the Eagle editors starts a topic, and then the public can add comments.

Read the full article →

Public Access, or lack there of

January 21, 2006

Dear Bob’s Blog, I recently moved to wichita from chicago… a while b4 i decided to move I had completed my Comcast public access certification. Comcast is basicaly the equivalence to Cox here. Un / Fortunately I was unable to put it to any good use while in Chicago due to some circumstances…. however I was searchin around the web and came across your blog entry on the lack of public acess for the public here in wichita. I wondered if you had any luck with your letter and/or knew any sources of information on the subject. I would be willing to put forth some effort in helping our voice be heard…

Read the full article →

Randy Scholfield and less government

September 28, 2005

The dictionary defines laudable as “Deserving commendation; praiseworthy” or “Deserving honor, respect, or admiration.” Mr. Scholfield’s past writings don’t treat the goal of less government this way. In fact, it doesn’t seem there is a single government program that Mr. Scholfield doesn’t like and praise.

Read the full article →

Senator Kay O’Connor

June 12, 2005

It has been reported that Sen. O’Connor opposes the right of women to vote. In the June 12, 2005 Wichita Eagle a letter writer repeated this assertion. On June 2, 2005, the Eagle printed an Associated Press piece by John Hanna that detailed the remarks. On June 3, 2005, the Eagle editorialized about this, opposing Sen. O’Connor.

The facts, though, are different. Sen. O’Connor denies making the remarks. The Kansas City Star, the newspaper that first reported the story, would not print her letter telling her side. Neither would that newspaper print the letters of witnesses to Sen. O’Connor’s remarks, witnesses who say she did not say what she is reported to have said.

Read the full article →

Revolving Door Between Press and Government Turns Again

May 3, 2005

Mr. Van Williams, Wichita Eagle city hall reporter for the past three years, will become Wichita’s public information coordinator.

I believe there needs to be a tension between the press and the government officials it covers. The press needs to hold officials accountable. It needs to dig deep to uncover facts officials don’t voluntarily concede. It needs to ask them tough questions. It needs to make them angry from time to time.

Would the City of Wichita hire someone who had been doing that?

Read the full article →

Book review: Knightfall

April 26, 2005

Knightfall: Knight Ridder and How the Erosion of Newspaper Journalism Is Putting Democracy At Risk

Davis Merritt
Amacom Books, 2005

The theme of this book, written by a former editor of The Wichita Eagle is that over the past few decades, the business of making newspapers has changed from a business unlike any other to a business just like all others, and we are not well served by this change.

Read the full article →

Another letter to the editor

April 25, 2005

Last time I wrote a letter to the Wichita Eagle for publication, I said that I learned my lesson, which was that I needed to be brief. I didn’t learn this lesson well.

Read the full article →

Wichita Eagle Says “AirTran Subsidies Foster Competition”

April 19, 2005

In an editorial in The Wichita Eagle published on April 19, 2005, Randy Scholfield writes: “Wichita should stick to its subsidies. They’re fostering competition, not stifling it, and paying off big-time for the community by lowering airfares and boosting economic development.”

Read the full article →

Why is the Wichita news media not interested?

March 12, 2005

This is a version of a letter that I have been sending to (mostly) Wichita-area newspapers, television stations, and radio stations. Some have expressed some interest and have even assigned reporters to look into this, but so far no stories have appeared.

Read the full article →

A Letter to the Editor is Edited

March 7, 2005

I wrote a letter to the editor of The Wichita Eagle for publication. It was published today, March 7, 2005.

I have learned a lesson: my letter was much too long. I don’t fault the Eagle for editing for space reasons. I do think, though, that my letter has a much different meaning in its edited form. You can be the judge. I have created a document that shows, side-by-side, my original letter and the published letter. The link is here: http://wichitaliberty.org/files/Letter_of_2005-03-07_Edited.pdf

Read the full article →

Wichita News Media Coverage of Downtown Arena Issue

January 18, 2005

Other people in Wichita’s news business appeared to lack basic factual information about the arena vote. As part of its election night coverage, one prominent Wichita television news anchor interviewed Mr. Karl Peterjohn of the Kansas Taxpayers Network. Mr. Peterjohn mentioned something about how now the story moves to the Kansas Legislature. The news anchor expressed surprise to learn that the ballot issue was merely an advisory referendum instead of a binding resolution, and that the legislature would have to pass a law allowing Sedgwick County to raise its sales tax. A Wichita television news personality being so poorly informed about such a basic factual matter tells us that we shouldn’t expect important news reporting from our television stations.

Read the full article →

Stretching figures strains credibility

January 15, 2005

I recently read that the Wichita Airport’s economic impact was estimated at $1.6 billion per year. I thought this seemed high, so I investigated further.

Read the full article →

Columnist Confuses Government and Individual, Again

November 14, 2004

In the November 7, 2004 Wichita Eagle, columnist Mark McCormick again confuses the proper role of government and individual.

He starts by talking about the spirit of the people in Wichita, how they will help you push your car, how they will hold open the door for you, etc. He refers to this as “neighborliness.” He labels Karl Peterjohn, Executive Director of the Kansas Taxpayers Network, as not belonging to this group, because of his opposition to tax increases.

Because Peterjohn opposed the arena and a school bond issue a few years ago, McCormick thinks he also opposed the wheel and fire. This type of ridicule does not advance Mr. McCormick’s argument.

Read the full article →

Columnist Confuses Government and Individual

November 5, 2004

Writing in the November 3, 2004 Wichita Eagle, columnist Mark McCormick labels the vote in favor of a taxpayer-funded, government-owned arena a “rebirth of city’s pioneering spirit.” In this column, Mr. McCormick mentions our famous entrepreneurs and aerospace industry pioneers. Although he explicitly denies comparing the building of a downtown arena to the genius of Beech and Cessna, this article claims that the downtown arena will somehow lead to a rebirth of Wichita.

What I think Mr. McCormick has overlooked is that the people who in the past made Wichita great were people working as individuals, not as governments. Now, when we look to get something done, we look first to the government, and we seem to think that’s a good thing. The entrepreneurs and risk-takers of the past were investing their own money, their own sweat and toil. Our government leaders invest none of this.

Read the full article →