January 30, 2008 8:02 PM
Mind readers at Media Matters
Colorado Media Matters has taken to mind reading.
This is how it describes its methods on its web site.
"Colorado Media Matters is managed and staffed by Coloradans trained in the rigorous editorial policies and research methods developed by Media Matters for America."
Yet if you read one of its letters to me, you'll see that it purports to know what journalists are thinking when they write their stories. That's some kind of "rigorous" editorial research method.
Here's a letter I received from the organization's editorial director in Colorado.
From: Bill Menezes [mailto:bmenezes@mediamatters.org]
Sent: Monday, January 28, 2008 4:49 PM
To: Temple, John
Cc: Goeken, Deb
Subject: Re the Jan. 26 story, "Liberal group fickle on objecting to 'bitch slap' "
John,
The Rocky Mountain News did its readers and subscribers (which I’ve been for 13 years) a grave disservice with its January 26 article, “Liberal group fickle on objecting to ‘bitch slap’.� First it quoted “blogger� Ari Armstrong defending Jon Caldara, over Caldara’s use of the term “bitch slapped� on the air during his KOA program, without ever disclosing that Armstrong has been a researcher (i.e. one of Caldara’s employees) at the Independence Institute. The reporter, Lynn Bartels, neglected to include that rather relevant piece of context. Given that Ms. Bartels is a frequent guest on Caldara's public television program “Independent Thinking� – another fact she failed to disclose in this article -- this type of omission raises serious questions about the Rocky’s intentions in publishing this story.
The article was a one-sided piece, in which the goal clearly was to try to discredit Caldara’s critics (emphasis added) rather than gather a balanced look at whether the average listener, KOA management or KOA’s advertisers – the focus of ProgressNow’s campaign -- would find it offensive that a host on the public airwaves would use a term that literally refers to violence against women in describing a negative experience involving a woman.
Why is that? Why does this story show no apparent attempt to contact the management at KOA for their reaction? Why was there no apparent attempt to speak with Caldara's advertisers to determine if they are comfortable sponsoring a show with this type of dialogue? And finally, why did the Rocky fail to disclose the clear conflict of interest between the reporter and the subject of her coverage, Jon Caldara?
Bill Menezes
Editorial Director
Colorado Media Matters
720-219-1191 (o)
Here's how I responded.
To: Bill Menezes
Cc: Goeken, Deb
Subject: RE: Re the Jan. 26 story, "Liberal group fickle on objecting to 'bitch slap' "
Bill,
I appreciate your concern for our coverage. But Bill, we worked together long enough that I think it’s below you to state that the goal of an article we published “clearly was to try to discredit Caldara’s critics.� I think better of you. You have no way of knowing what our goal was, and you know it. You lessen your impact with such claims. If you want to be taken seriously, then I’d encourage you to take a different approach.
Best,
John
Menezes' approach in his letter is an example of why it's hard to take the work of this organization seriously.Where's the rigor when a former journalist asserts he knows what someone else was thinking?
He didn't address the substance of my response.From: Bill Menezes [mailto:bmenezes@mediamatters.org]
Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2008 9:24 AM
To: Temple, John
Cc: Goeken, Deb
Subject: RE: Re the Jan. 26 story, "Liberal group fickle on objecting to 'bitch slap' "
John,
While I appreciate your candor, I’d also appreciate a response to the three very specific questions I posed below, addressing the issues that I believe raise serious questions about this story. To reiterate, they are:
1. Why does this story show no apparent attempt to contact the management at KOA for their reaction to the ProgressNow campaign?
2. Why was there no apparent attempt to speak with Caldara's advertisers to determine if they are comfortable sponsoring a show with this type of dialogue? The noting of Dun-Rite’s refusal to air ads on Caldara’s show came from ProgressNow and your coverage noted no other attempt to speak with advertisers.
3. Why did the Rocky fail to disclose the clear conflict of interest between the reporter and the subject of her coverage, Jon Caldara?
Bill M.
Colorado Media Matters
720-219-1191
Here's my answer.
Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2008 10:12 AM
To: 'bmenezes@mediamatters.org'
Cc: Goeken, Deb
Subject: your response
Bill,
I don’t appreciate your tone. We’re not in the business of spending our time responding to you. We’ll do what we think is appropriate. If we think there were inaccuracies, we’ll correct them. If we think we should have handled things differently, we’ll discuss that with the people involved.
Best,
John
January 31, 2008
9:40 AM
William Menezes writes:
Quite tellingly, John, you still have not addressed those three questions that are fundamental to flaws in this news story. Your tart response is focused on me, and my alleged flaws, rather than providing a flat statement that the article was a well done piece of reporting. Why is that?
Rather than attacking the critic, take a stab at factually addressing the criticism:
Why did the article fail to note Ari Armstrong's long-term personal and professional ties to the Independence Institute? Why did the article note no attempt to speak with Caldara's advertisers or the management of KOA about the appropriateness of his dialogue? And why did the article fail to disclose the reporter's clear conflict of interest?
Bill Menezes
Editorial Director
Colorado Media Matters
January 31, 2008
10:12 AM
Flamethrower writes:
insteresting all the ties Caldara and the Independence Institute has to our local media. And all the outlets in which he can make his case. You'd think they would succeed in selling their message to Coloradans with all the "free" press.
January 31, 2008
10:21 AM
William Menezes writes:
Oh, and John, you also failed in your responses and this blog posting to differentiate between a Colorado Media Matters research item and a personal e-mail sent to you and Deb Goeken.
Because of our editorial research method our items in fact do not attempt to prove bias or motive, only misinformation (such as that which appears with alarming frequency on the pages of your newspaper). That would have been apparent from any reading you did of our item about Lynn Bartels' flawed article.
In a personal e-mail, however, I have the leeway to express personal opinions that our research model would not allow. These opinions are based not only on what I see in our research, but also on my knowledge as a former employee of the Rocky Mountain News (and one who continues to have numerous contacts in your newsroom) and from decades as a journalist.
All that aside, it's good to know that this is how you respond to a 13-year customer of your newspaper, who also happens to run a media research organization: By using a personal e-mail as a cudgel to dodge the question of why misinformation appeared in a Rocky Mountain News article under the guise of "news."
Bill Menezes
Editorial Director
Colorado Media Matters
February 1, 2008
2:45 PM
kissinger's ghost writes:
oh lawdy this is lotsa fun. talk about folks who deserve one another.
February 12, 2008
12:30 PM
jestbill writes:
They deserve each other?
The guy hasn't answered the most relevant questions about the article and continues to claim that he's somehow been attacked by a fraud (mind reader.)
What part of "integrity" don't you understand?
March 19, 2008
8:27 PM
Ricky Edge writes:
LOVE it! John Temple is KILLER funny. He always thinks he is a journalist / brain surgeon. Goes on and on about that. Like everything he does is so KILLER important. Always good for a laugh. I love how snippy he gets when he feels threatened: "I don’t appreciate your tone. We’re not in the business of spending our time responding to you. We’ll do what we think is appropriate. If we think there were inaccuracies, we’ll correct them. If we think we should have handled things differently, we’ll discuss that with the people involved." THAT IS KILLER FUNNY!!
October 12, 2009
3:00 AM
Donnieboy writes:
Just wanted to drop you a line to say, I enjoy reading your site. I thought about starting a blog myself but don't have the time.
Oh well maybe one day.... :)
January 18, 2010
2:12 PM
Robert Shumake writes:
Just wanted to say that I read your blog quite frequently and I'm always amazed at some of the stuff people post here. But keep up the good work, it's always interesting.
See ya,
February 6, 2012
1:47 PM
Lemuel Kellam writes:
I took it to heart that in order to be a good person, you never said anything mean about anybody.
March 13, 2012
2:27 AM
Jehovah Witness Dating writes:
Wow, I like the way you put that.
July 19, 2012
5:21 PM
Luigi Fulk writes:
Is michael Jackson still alive? http://indy.livemixtapes.com/mixtapes/17226/sosa_eat_my_words.html
September 7, 2012
9:20 PM
Backlinks writes:
You can find remarkable excellent linking firms everywhere.
September 11, 2012
9:06 PM
Purchase Backlinks writes:
You can find wonderful excellent link building businesses all over the Internet.
September 14, 2012
3:23 AM
ghdflghkdfs writes:
I enjoy reading through a post that will make people think. Also, many thanks for permitting me to comment!