Archive for the 'Denver Post' Category

Schaffer’s Iraq deals given shallow treatment

Tuesday, October 21st, 2008

 

It took an op-ed on the Denver Post website by Lawrence J. Korb, assistant Secretary of Defense under Ronald Reagan, to raise some questions that reporters either haven’t asked or haven’t thought to ask Bob Schaffer about his business deals in Iraq in 2006. Korb’s analysis and the context he provides might just provoke local journos to start asking these questions:
 

Do you think there should be a national oil law in Iraq?  If you were charged with doing political research, as reported by the Rocky, for Aspect Energy, why didn’t you know about the oil law controversy until a Kurdish official told you about it on your trip? Did the State Department or any other agency give you any encouragement, as opposed to not just giving any discouragement? Did you know about your company’s correspondence with Sen. Allard? Have you or Alex Cranberg been in touch with the IG at the State Department, who is investigating the Hunt Oil contracts?
 

Or even a broad question:  Do you think it was a mistake to enter into an oil agreement before a compromise on the oil law was reached?  If not, why not, and why has the State Department been wrong?
 

And here’s a bonus question:  If you’re elected to the US Senate, would you join Sens. Levin and McCaskill in demanding an investigation and even hearings into Iraqi oil contracts?
 

Why hasn’t the local media been all over this story? No editorials? No front-page treatment? This is a serious issue, especially a guy running for federal office.
 

Here’s the Korb op-ed again.

The Post, the facts, and Schaffer

Thursday, June 12th, 2008

For my Rocky column Sat., I asked U.S. Senate candidate Bob Schaffer’s campaign Manager, Dick Wadhams, about Schaffer’s accusation that there were factual errors in The Denver Post’s stories showing that Schaffer defended abusive immigration policies in the Marianas Islands, using tactics promoted by corrupt lobbyist Jack Abramoff.

In addition to ripping off Native Americans, Abramoff made big money defending the Marianas Islands’ exploitative immigration policies, which may even have resulted in forced abortions. Abramoff spearheaded a successful lobbying campaign to block immigration reform in the Marianas. Abramoff specifically targeted the House Resources Committee, which had jurisdiction over the U.S. Commonwealth of the Northern Marianas, and on which Schaffer was a member. Only last month, after decades of oppositin from Abramoff and Congressmen like Schaffer, did Congress finally pass immigration reform for the Marianas.

As reported in The Post, Schaffer visited Marianas, courtesy of an organization with ties to Abramoff, and defended its immigration policies in Washington DC. Overall, Schaffer’s lobbying tactics aligned with Abramoff’s.

An April 22 report by Colorado Media Matters pointed out that Schaffer, in an interview on KFKA-AM (1310), said The Post’s stories contained “egregious reporting errors” and many facts that were “untrue and complete prevarications.

Asked about these alleged errors, Wadhams couldn’t cite any facts that were wrong in The Post’s stories.

He said the stories were “designed to give the reader the impression that Bob Schaffer was directly involved with Jack Abramoff.” This, he said was “untrue” and “false.”

I regret not giving The Post a chance in my column to respond to Wadhams’ statement. So I asked The Post’s political editor Curtis Hubbard what the purpose of the stories was.

Hubbard emailed me:

The Post’s reporting relied on documentary evidence showing clear parallels between Jack Abramoff’s lobbying efforts on behalf of the Northern Marianas Islands and its textile manufacturers and the actions of Congressman Bob Schaffer, among others.
 
The lobbying effort included arranging trips to the islands for members of Congress as a way to develop goodwill. Abramoff then pointed to those trips as the basis for being able to successfully stymie legislative attempts to reform labor practices there.
 
The strategy also called for discrediting Interior Department advocates for labor and immigration reform on the islands by Republicans on the House Resources Committee. Documents show numerous meetings between Abramoff (and his staff) and Resource Committee staffers prior to two key hearings — hearings in which Bob Schaffer played a major role and in which he largely worked to discredit the witnesses.
 
Schaffer has said he had no direct contact with Abramoff. If his campaign is claiming he unwittingly implemented Abramoff’s strategy (perhaps at the behest of Resource Committee staffers, the committee’s chairman, or other Republicans), he should make that clear.

If the campaign is claiming that the close similarity between Schaffer’s actions and Abramoff’s plan is pure coincidence, they are free to do so. But it is our responsibility to report those congruencies and let the readers decide.

So The Post’s stories simply stated the facts, and left the reader to decide what to make of it all.When I told Wadhams, who has my respect for talking to me about this, that The Post’s stories didn’t state that there was a direct connection between Schaffer and Abramoff, Wadhams said:

 

Oh spare me. Jason, Jason. Don’t give me that. The intent of the stories was to try to give the reader the impression there was a direct connection. They were written that way. The editors wanted them written that way. They directed they were written that way. Give me a break. What are you talking about?

 

I told Wadhams that Schaffer had taken a more extreme position in his radio interview. Schaffer didn’t talk about the impression the stories created but about facts in the stories. Here’s our exchange on this:

 

Jason: [Schaffer] said there were many facts, actually, not just one, that were wrong, that are just untrue. These stories actually asked the question. They never said that there was a direct connection [between Schaffer and Abramoff].

Wadhams: Oh bullshit. Read the stories, Jason.
 
Jason: I’ll read those stories.
 

Wadhams: I’m sure you have and I’m sure you took great glee in those stories, because they did your bidding for you because you are against Schaffer and for Udall. But what’s your point now.
 

Jason: My point is, I don’t think the stories lied.
 

Wadhams: Don’t wrap yourself in objectivity here.
 

In my interview, for a brief moment, Wadhams sort of acknowledged that the stories did not contain factual errors. But he didn’t say that Schaffer misspoke or that Schaffer should clarify his position.  Here’s our exchange:

Jason: Well, there are these facts that you say that The Post got wrong?

Wadhams: No, I said that the stories were designed to give the reader the impression that Bob Schaffer was directly involved with Jack Abramoff. That’s patently untrue and false. That’s what I said. And that is absolutely what we said from the beginning. And we haven’t changed our reaction to those stories.

That’s not what Schaffer said in his radio interview. If I were in Wadhams’ shoes, I’d just admit that Schaffer got it wrong and that The Post’s facts were indeed correct. I’d ask Schaffer himself to explain what he really meant when he said The Post’s facts were wrong.

And I’d tell Schaffer to apologize publicly to The Post.

 

 

 

 

  

   

 

What Boulder liberal?

Monday, June 2nd, 2008

If you’ve been following Colorado’s U.S. Senate race, you know that Colorado Republican Chair Dick Wadhams has trained himself to refer to Rep. Mark Udall as “Boulder liberal Mark Udall.”

 

Whenever Wadhams is quoted, which is quite often because Schaffer apparently doesn’t like to talk to reporters, Wadhams spreads his name-calling propaganda.

 

It’s Wadhams’ PR at its slimiest, and it’s the kind of thing we pay reporters and editors keep in check, for reasons explained here.

 

So it was a relief to see “Boulder liberal” apparently removed from a Wadhams quote in this morning’s Rocky.

Here’s the key passage:

Two days after winning his party’s nomination, U.S. Senate candidate Bob Schaffer went back to a necessary chore in politics: raising money.

 

“A lot of it is one on one,” said Schaffer’s campaign manager, Dick Wadhams. “We’re not going to raise more money than (Democratic congressman) Mark Udall, but we are going to raise what we need to win this race.”

I asked Rocky reporter Lynn Bartels, who wrote the piece, whether she responsibly removed “Boulder liberal” and replaced it with “Democratic congressman). She emailed me:

 

Wadhams said “Boulder liberal Mark Udall” and I only had 10 inches so I didn’t have the space to explain to readers that Udall is not from Boulder and has never lived in the city of Boulder so I used parens.

Breakdown of breaking news

Friday, May 9th, 2008

For my Saturday column, I analyzed the breaking-news emails distributed by The Denver Post and Rocky Mountain News from Feb. 1, 2008, to May 6, 2008.

Here’s a breakdown of the Rocky’s 39 breaking-news emails sent during this period:

21%      sports
18%      crime
15%      election
13%      business
10%      traffic
5%       disaster
5%       national politics (Spitzer stories only)
5%       state politics (Garcia resignation; Benson approval)
3%       international politics (Fidel Castro resigns.)
3%       Iraq War
3%       celebrity (Fishbein dies.)

 

Here’s a breakdown of The Post’s 70 breaking-news alerts emailed during the same period:

 

34%      sports
17%      crime
11%      election
7%       business
7%       traffic
6%       disaster
4%       state politics (Garcia resignation, Bruce “peasants” remark, and Benson approval)
4%       celebrity (Fishbein dies; Ledger overdose; Winehouse visa granted)
3%       national politics (Spitzer stories only)
1%       international politics (Fidel Castro resigns.)
1%       editorial opinion (announcement of The Post’s endorsement of Mitt Romney)
0%       Iraq War

(not equal to 100% due to rounding)

 

As I write in my column, there’s nothing about Congress or the President. Other than the presidential election, the only national political story to make breaking news was Spitzer’s sex scandal. The only breaking news from the Colorado Legislature was the Garcia resignation. There was nothing about the passage of bills in the Colorado Legislature providing health insurance to 50,000 kids who lack it or requiring energy companies to credit customers who use wind or solar power to make electricity.

 

 

Sprengelmeyer and Abramoff

Saturday, April 26th, 2008

You may by intrigued by Republican Senate candidate Bob Schaffer’s ties to corrupt lobbyist Jack Abramoff, as reported in the Denver Post here, here, and elsewhere.

But the Rocky Mountain News has a reporter who’s in Abramoff’s pants.

That would be M.E. Sprengelmeyer, the long-time Washington DC correspondent for the Rocky.

Sprengelmeyer told the strange story of how he acquired Abramoff’s exta-large pin-striped suits in a 2006 Rocky article

It’s a convoluted story, but here’s the gist of it: Abramoff is a unusually-sized man whose expensive suits were made by a fancy tailor.

Abramoff ordered a couple suits when he was making big bucks ripping off American Indians and others, but he couldn’t pay for the suits because he went bankrupt when authorities caught him.

The Rocky’s Sprengelmeyer, who was roughly the same size as Abramoff, snapped up Abramoff’s suits at a bargain rate from the fancy tailor in Washington DC.

So, situated in Washington and possibly even wearing Abramoff’s clothes, Sprengelmeyer is in a great position to find answers to troubling Abramoff-related questions that have popped up lately in Denver.

Was Schaffer or his staff doing Abramoff’s bidding in defending the immigration policies of the Marianas Islands that resulted in forced abortions and other worker abuse?

I hope Sprengelmeyer does everything he can to find out. The Rocky has some catching up to do.

Iraq War coverage

Friday, February 15th, 2008

In my Sat. column, I beg journalists to keep the Iraq War on the front burner. There’s nothing partisan about supporting the troops. All public figures, including journalists, should talk about the troopsHere’s what KOA radio anchor Steffan Tubbs’ explanation of why he signs off his broadcast with, “Remember the troops.”

I try every day to end Colorado’s Morning News with “remember our troops” simply as a minor way of reminding people that as we go about whatever, there are tens of thousands of people in Iraq and Afghanistan (and around the globe) in uniform fighting and serving us. I do this as completely non-partisan as possible.  I was embedded in March of 2006 with the 4th ID in Iraq and came back with an entirely new respect for servicemen and women.  It doesn’t matter if you’re pro-war, anti-war, Pro-Bush, anti-Bush, it is a fact that they’re serving.  In an all-volunteer force.  The least the deserve is the respect from all of us.  And to not be forgotten.
That’s why I say what I say.  It really is that simple.
  

  

Rocky Mountain News Managing Editor Deb Goeken explained her newspaper’s goals in covering Iraq deaths that have link to Colorado. The daily, which won a Pulitzer for a story about a Marine officer who notifies family menbers when a Marine dies, has produced some outstanding coverage Colorado’s connection to the Iraq War. The Denver Post, the other daily in Denver, has also done a good job finding local angles on the war. The following is Goeken’s response to my questions about coverage of Colorado Iraq deaths:
Jason, We try to write about all Iraq deaths with Colorado connections, starting with soldiers and Marines who are from Colorado and extending to all soldiers based at Fort Carson. If a soldier or Marine is from Colorado, and has family still living here, we view it as especially newsworthy. In the case of a Fort Carson-based soldier, we make every attempt to contact their family and to write their life stories as completely as possible. We also try to cover all the memorials at Fort Carson, either ourselves or with coverage from the Gazette. The memorials are always touching, and our photographers have shot some extraordinary photos at the memorials. (As you know, we covered the memorial service for Major Andrew Olmsted, who had blogged for us about his front-line experiences in Iraq.) And, yes, we do as a policy try to cover all funerals of Colorado soldiers, unless the family specifically requests privacy. We honor those requests.       

 

 

  

 

 

 

Colorado Media Matters Critiques Tax Freeze

Saturday, December 15th, 2007

Colorado Media Matters pointed out various omissions in the coverage of the Independent Institute’s lawsuit opposing the Colorado state law freezing property tax rates in most of the state.

Colorado Media Matters noted that the Denver Post reported important facts that were left out by some other outlets. Colorado Media Matters noted:

“The Post reported hat the rate freeze is applicable only in the 175 (of 178) Colorado school districts that voted to waive restrictions on retaining and spending revenues mandated by the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights (TABOR) provisions of the Colorado Constitution. The Post also reported that under the law, 34 districts will see lower mill levies and 38 others will see no change”

Reporters should be careful to note that property taxes will NOT go up everywhere in Colorado, as a result of the tax-rate freeze.

They should also note, whenever they report on partisan squabbling about the tax-rate freeze, that Republicans in the Colorado Senate passed a similar tax-rate freeze in 2004.

Interview with Chronicle’s Bronstein

Friday, December 7th, 2007

For my Sat. Rocky column, I interviewed San Francisco Chronicle editor Phil Bronstein. To me, what he’s trying to do in San Francisco makes a lot of sense. Here’s a transcript of part of my interview with him.

JS: I’ve read that you want to find ways for readers to act instead of just saying things are bad. What does this mean?

PB: It can mean a variety of things, but we snagged this mission from the original William Randolph Hearst, who despite an interesting and colorful reputation, was for a long time a champion of the working man and women. His newspapers took on trusts. They did a lot of things. And he’s not always remembered for that.

And he had a thing called, journalism of action. And of course his action was probably far grander than anything we have in mind. As someone said about it, and I don’t think he said this, but newspapers at the time injected themselves routinely and conspicuously to correct the ills of public life.

Now we have a slightly different view. The model we have is called Chronicle Watch. Chronicle Watch we started some years ago. It’s on the front of the local Bay Area section every day. And it’s not a column, and it’s not a consumer advocate, or a consumer hotline or advocacy. It basically solicits from readers problems from readers that should be getting fixed primarily by public officials. So it’s not Chronicle Watch to End the War in Iraq. But it’s Chronicle Watch about potholes, it’s about the electrical wiring in public school classrooms that doesn’t work, it’s about bridges that are broken and unsafe. So they [readers] send us a note about it, and we check it out. And we run a thumbnail of the problem and a brief description. And we run a photo of the public official whose job it is to fix it, and we run all their contact information. And we run it every day until they fix it. And this has been going for five or six years. It’s success rate is in the 90th percentile. So it’s a pass through. It’s not, we’ll go out an fix it for you. No question, there’s a lot of leverage in putting a photo in the paper each day next to a problem their paid to fix and they’re not fixing. But basically it really is people feeling like even if it’s not their street that they can do something about it. We are providing them the information and the avenue to do that. And obviously some encouragement to do that if you got that information.

And so this, on a small level, is what we have with this journalism of action.

You provide people with all the information they need to do something. No just here, ok are the facts. Or here’s a problem, and that’s it. That’s our job. We’ve provided the information. See ya. Good night. Have a good day. Good luck. Instead, you know we will offer them opportunities to do something about it. Whether it’s something that’s been standard in newspapers for a long time…-help boxes or which congressperson to call, that sort of thing.

We’re doing that, but more than that, it’s in the stories you choose.

So for instance, the mayor of San Francisco says he’s going to improve the homelessness problem. It’s a huge issue in the last several elections. We go out to Golden Gate Park, actually on another story, and our columnist-goes out there…-he was actually looking for coyotes because there was a coyote problem out there…-and instead he finds giant encampments of homeless people, and once more, you know, there are homeless people who have all sorts of problems and issues. There are hypodermic needles all over the place. One kid, in fact, gets stuck in the butt sliding down a public park slide. And he writes about it and provides people the opportunity, you know, if you want to complain about this. We make the maximum use of all the digital possibilities. There stories are on our website and you get comments, and you take from the comments, we reverse publish some of the better comments. In those comments people can have ideas for solutions. We provide the opportunity for those people to express themselves, for other people to then participate if they want to. Immediately the mayor sent people out there to try to deal with this problem. And we kept sending Chuck out there and other reporters out there and sweep the place, map it for the website, where the homeless encampments in Golden Gate park are, where they are moving, are they doing anything that’s valuable or helpful with the folks they are moving. What about social services?

Another example. They had a trash strike in Oakland. One would think that’s pretty limited to Oakland. If you are not or are not having your trash picked up in Oakland. But, you know, the trash company said despite the strike, everyone’s trash is being picked up by management and replacement workers. We went out as reporters to see if this was true. Not only was it not true, but the places they were picking up happened to be the wealthy neighborhoods and the not picking up happened to be the nonwealthy neighborhoods. So we covered that like it was the giant oil spill we just had, and we had a trash watch, and we put the picture of the guy who’s the head of the trash company and his contact information as part of the Oakland trash strike package. It’s hard to say whether we had any role whatsoever in the resolution of the Oakland trash strike, but no question people got to express themselves and they did, including a lot of people who didn’t live in Oakland but were plugged into the story in a more profound way than if you were just reading it in passing.

These are the kinds of things where you actually give information on about how people can participate in a resolution if they want to. The Bay Area has the highest volunteer rate of, I think, anywhere in the country. So when we had the oil spill, the head of the Coast Guard came to San Francisco, and we had an ed board meeting with him, and he said, “I was frankly kind of shocked, but I guess I shouldn’t have been at the number of people who showed up to help.” And there were a thousand people who showed up the first day saying what can we do. And a lot of them were turned away, so we tackled that, too. What can you do and why were people being turned away, and how can that be fixed?

You just leverage people’s desire to participate in their own lives in the paper and online.

And the third example I’ll give you is a guy fell off Half Dome. Half Dome is a very popular climbing place. Most people didn’t realize, the last part of this climb is a vertical climb, and there are two cables that go up, and there’s a line, it’s like a line for a popular movie, around the block. So this guy falls off. And we have an outdoors writer, Tom Stienstra, very well known, writes a lot of books about the outdoors, he writes about it. And he got hundreds and hundreds of comments on his blog-among the comments were people who claimed to be eye witnesses to this guy falling off. So what you do is go and verify, if you can, that they were there, that they saw this-and in the same set of comments are a set of descriptions of why this is a dangerous situation and how it can be fixed-You turn this into, what can you do and how can the public participate in the solution.

That’s the kind of thing, and as I say, it varies on how you do it and what the tools are. You can go from a help box to the whole way the story is reported or follow-up story is reported-.

People can do a lot more, obviously, than a lot of people think they can.

JS: On the online comments, do you actually solicit solutions in the comments, like solution comments, or do they just naturally come as part of the comments on the story?

PB: So far, they just naturally come but I think that’s probably a great idea. I don’t know what form that would take but I do think that we ought to consider, and we’ve talked about, how to specifically solicit solutions.

And you know, this is controversial. People, you know, have accused us of advocacy journalism. That’s not what we do.

We sort of snagged the William Randolph Hearst line because it’s not a new idea by any stretch of the imagination, but it’s one that journalism has gotten away from in the last number of decades-

The idea is not to direct people to do anything. We’re not telling people what to do. We’re saying, if you want to do something about this, here are all the places you can go, here’s what you can do. We don’t say, do this. More like, if you want to do something, here are some options-.

We started about two and a half months ago. Doing this systematically is new-

I just heard from too many people, you know, readers or former readers, who said, if you want to tell me what’s wrong, I can turn on the TV 24 hours a day. I can find out what’s wrong. I just want to find out what to do about it.

 

 

 

 

Dean Singleton’s job offer to Gil Spencer

Friday, November 30th, 2007

I was finishing up an interview on Nov. 6 with Gil Spencer, who was editor of The Denver Post from 1989-1983, when, unasked, Spencer explained how he came to be hired by Dean Singleton, owner of The Denver Post and Media News. He said:

I had left the New York Daily News and Dean called me and asked me if I would talk to him about coming out there. I said, “Where?” He said, “Denver.” I said, “Where’s Denver and do they have a race track?”

 

And so, he was coming to New York and I was to meet him in a bar. I had never met him, never seen him, and this child walks in, who looks like Peter Pan. Jesus Christ, this is the owner of this newspaper, and we talked for about 10 minutes, and I knew I was talking to a grownup.

And so then it got serious and he said, ok, I’ll tell you what, I’ll offer you 150 grand and you’ll get bonuses and goodies. And I said, “Forget it. I want 175 and I don’t want any bonuses or any of that.” I could hear his mind going around because I figured that some of his top people, in advertising and such, weren’t getting quite that much money.

And he said, “All right.” And I said, “We’re not done.” I said, “My wife had to give up her car when we came to New York. And if we’re coming to Denver, she wants a jeep. And it’s gotta be red, and you gotta pay for it.” That’s a true story. We got there and there was the Jeep. I love him for that. We had a good trip there. We had a lot of fun. The Rocky Mountain News was giving us a lot of trouble. As a matter of fact, we were ahead of the News at that point.”

Tax-freeze lawsuit to be filed by end of the month

Tuesday, October 9th, 2007

I emailed Jon Caldara yesterday.

Hi Jon …•

You’re milking your threat of a tax-freeze lawsuit into significant media coverage. That’s a good PR tactic for you, but it’s bad for people like me who have better things to read about in the newspaper. For my blog or column, do you still plan to file a lawsuit? If so, when? By year’s end? Or after? Or have you already filed it?

As usual, he responded quickly:

The law suit (sic) is a go.  I expect it to be officially filed by the end of the month, unless I want to milk it some more 😉

Jon 

Now, I want to know if Caldara is buying a suit to wear to law school? Or was he referring to the the lawsuit he’s been threatening to file?