Feds File Charges Against the News-Press

Excellent. Anybody know what sort of penalties Wendy might face if found guilty? Control Freak?

NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD SETS HEARING DATE AND CONSOLIDATES TEAMSTER CLAIMS AGAINST THE NEWS-PRESS

SANTA BARBARA, Calif. – December 28, 2006 – As expected, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) today advised the Santa Barbara News-Press that a hearing has been scheduled in Santa Barbara on February 26, 2007 on pending charges brought by the Teamsters against the paper, which the NLRB determined should be consolidated. Last week, the Teamsters agreed to withdraw four unfair labor practice claims they had filed against the paper, rather than allow the NLRB to dismiss them for lack of merit.

The NLRB hearing on the remaining unfair labor practice charges being made by the Teamsters are: a claim regarding the paper's conflict of interest policy, the cancellation of a newspaper column, the issuance of suspension notices in response to an employee disturbance, and the claim that one employee, Melinda Burns, should not have been discharged.

“The News-Press welcomes the opportunity to have these issues heard as part of due process by the administrative law judge, and intends to further demonstrate that the management decisions in question were fair, consistent and undertaken for legitimate and lawful reasons,” said David J. Millstein, general counsel for the Santa Barbara News-Press. “We are confident that these claims will be found without merit” he added.

The NLRB set January 9, 2007, as the date to hear the paper's objections to the union election.

This was released on the 21st of December.

TEAMSTERS WITHDRAW UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICE CLAIMS
AGAINST NEWS-PRESS

SANTA BARBARA, Calif. – December 21, 2006 – The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) advised the Santa Barbara News-Press today that the Teamsters withdrew four more unfair labor practice claims filed against the paper. The Teamsters agreed to withdraw the following four claims:

1) An allegation of the constructive discharge of an employee;
2) A claim by the Union that the paper improperly threatened suit for for trademark infringement;
3) An allegation that the Employer threatened retaliation; and
4) A claim that the Employer changed its discharge policy by terminating an employee.

The NLRB set January 9, 2007, as the date to hear the paper's objections to the union election. The NLRB will also schedule a hearing on the remaining unfair labor practice charges filed by the Teamsters: a claim regarding the paper's conflict of interest policy, the cancellation of a newspaper column, the issuance of suspension notices in response to an employee disturbance, and the claim that one employee, Melinda Burns, should not have been discharged.

“The News-Press continues to be encouraged by the NLRB’s findings. Management decisions are made fairly, consistently and in the best interest of the paper,” said David J. Millstein, general counsel for the Santa Barbara News-Press. “We stand by our belief that the Teamster allegations are without merit,” he added.

2 concerns for those in the know:
1) Does the Teamsters' withdrawal of the four claims cited weaken at all the overall case vs. Wendy's news-supress regime?
2) Is "Justthefacts" truly what his/her name implies, or is he/she a Wendy sycophant serving up skewed, self-promoting fact hashing?

well, if it's any indication to question #2, the two press releases presented are the ones written and provided by Agnes Huff, the PR woman for the N-P. they are anything but "just the facts." at least barney, who's been perhaps the most wronged by this whole ordeal, has the courtesy to give space to millstein.

What is Informant referring to when s/he states "who's been perhaps the most wronged by this whole ordeal..." Is Barney's situation different from the rest of those who left the NP along with him? As an observer, it seems like he has done ok - he has a job, and continues to live in SB. So what's up?

just meant that he'd been there the longest, was a loyal employee, probably lost a ton of retirement benefits, etc. but yea, he's faired quite alright compared to many others, thanks to the indy. good point.

Generally, candidly speaking, the NLRB's remedies are not very strong, but are considered "remedial" in the law. So, the NLRB can order the NP to reinstate Burns and pay her backpay, rescind the suspension threats and unravel the unlawful policies, and promise not to do it again. The agency also has the power to go to court to obtain those remedies in the interim while the administrative process is ongoing. The trouble with labor law as it exists today is that that is probably not sufficient incentive for wealthy callous outlaws like McCaw to obey the law.

As for Millstein's comments, more candor: the man is out of his depth. The NP had the opportunity during the General Counsel's investigation to convince the NLRB that its decisions were consistent with the law, and the General Counsel does not make prosecutorial decisions lightly, especially when the accusation is over an unlawful discharge. This decision is pretty heavily demonstrative of the NP's violative conduct.

As for the remaining allegations of wrongdoing by the NP against the Union - they will go to the same administrative waste basket that the NP's first set of such charges went, fodder only for Wendy's lawyers to keep on billing.

CF- I'm not a legal expert, but it is my understanding that the reason the GC of the NLRB got involved is because no decision could be rendered locally. That means that neither side presented enough evidence for the NLRB to issue a dismissal or decision. No one has been "convicted" of anything as falsely reported above. What now follows is the hearing where both sides make their best case. Then, there will be a ruling. So for those who feel that this is great for the union, it is not. It shows that what the union is saying is questionable. Up to this point in the investigation, neither the union nor the NP have made a clear cut case to secure a ruling. The process is designed to be fair and each party is innocent until the judge says otherwise. It's still very much a horse race here....so don't bet the farm just yet.

May, guess again, dude. The NLRB General Counsel is both investigator and prosecutor. What you said about decisions being made or not being made "locally" is meaningless. As with some other of the charges filed by both sides, the General Counsel does an investigation in which both sides have the opportunity to convince the General Counsel to prosecute or not, just as if the GC were a DA trying to figure out whether to charge someone with committing a crime. So far, all of the NP's charges that have been fully processed have been dismissed and are done. The NP has no further recourse as to its set of dismissed charges (which it appealed to DC and lost there, too). I expect that the remaining NP charges against the union will also be dismissed and tossed in the trash.

The heart of the union's charges against the News-Press, however, have been determined to be worth prosecuting. No, that is not a final adjudication, but it is not just a "toss-up" when the neutral federal investigative and prosecutorial labor relations agency decides to put its weight behind the union's allegations (supported by solid evidence) and to prosecute the NP with government lawyers taking the position before the judge that the NP has violated the labor laws in several respects.

You may have noticed how pleased the NP flacks were when some of the charges filed by the union were withdrawn or dismissed. Well, that's because that's a positive for the NP. By the same token, when a charge is determined to be worthy of issuance of a complaint, that means an investigation in which both sides presented evidence and argument to the prosecutor produced the result that the prosecutor has determined there is sufficient weight to the union's position to warrant hailing the NP before an administrative law judge.

And, just as criminal prosecutors have pretty high conviction rates, the NLRB General Counsel's success rate is high. He wouldn't issue a complaint and use his resources to present at a trial unless he thought he had a damn good chance of prevailing.

You are wrong if you are suggesting that the NLRB can simply do its investigation and "declare" a winner without a hearing. While it can decide that the evidence/law does not support allegations that a party has violated the law, it cannot simply declare unilaterally that a party has violated the law, any more than a criminal prosecutor can collect evidence and convict a criminal without a trial before a judge. That violates due process of law.

To be perfectly clear, that is different from the election objections hearing coming up January 9. There, there is no government prosecutor, just the NP trying to flounder around convincing a judge that its frivolous objections -- which have not been vetted by a prosecutor as occurs as described above with alleged unfair labor practices -- should be enough to upset an overwhelming union victory, when the only coercive conduct during the election campaign was that of NP management itself (as this just-issued complaint shows). In truth, the election objections are purely a delay tactic, since any sentient labor lawyer will have had to tell his/her client that these objections have no chance of overturning the election result, but do serve the purpose of postponing collective bargaining.

Appreciate the explanation from your point of view. I believe the bottom line is this - the outcome of the hearing (not a trial) by the adminstrative law judge is still yet to come. Let's not convict anyone of anything before they get thier day in court and are afforded due process.

The Baron, co-publisher of the News-Press Mess, says “think pink” in choosing your champagne for the New Year.

Lay some away for the decision of the NLRB judge.

http://digital50.com/news/items/BW/2001/...

Think Pink for the New Year

Rosé Champagnes are Leading the Way for Celebratory Occasions

SANTA BARBARA, Calif.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--A rose is a rose is a rose, unless it’s a rosé champagne. Pink (or rosé) champagnes have ascended to the top of the preferred list and are considered the most “in” drink for the new year according to Arthur von Wiesenberger, a renowned wine and champagne expert. For his 2007 champagne recommendations, Mr. von Wiesenberger can sum up his advice in two words: Think Pink.

“Choosing the right pink champagne for New Year’s Eve and other special events throughout the year depends as much on each customer’s taste preference as it does on the champagne’s unique characteristics,” said Mr. von Wiesenberger. “Not to be confused with rosé wines, rosé champagnes are hot sellers that may very well propel a lasting trend. To help choose the perfect bottle, we’ve identified a variety of great rosés that will excite even the most discriminating palate,” he added.

For those with a lavish taste and wallet, Mr. von Wiesenberger recommends the Krug Rosé (about $290), a champagne steeped in tradition with a hint of raspberries and strawberries in the nose and a copper-pink color. Surprisingly dry yet mellow, the unique sophistication of this rosé will make seasoned connoisseurs sit up and take notice. The classic 1996 Dom Pérignon Rosé (about $300) is also a fine choice for those fortunate enough to toast with it. The incredibly fine, pinpoint bubbles, stunning sunrise pink color, and a remembrance of finesse, will entice the taste buds to nirvana.

Today’s moderately priced rosés are nothing short of splendid. For about $70 a bottle, consumers can sample the Ruinart Rosé, now back on the shelves of American wine shops. Boasting a non-vintage blend of 45 percent chardonnay and 55 percent pinot noir, this rosé shines with a golden pink color thanks to a dash of added red wine and a nose of currants and spices. For those with a spicy nose, Moët Imperial Rosé (about $55) with its hints of black cherries, currants and a touch of cinnamon may be an excellent choice. For about $60 a bottle, the Billecart-Salmon Rosé, a tangy rhubarb and berry flavored bubbly with a crispness that lingers long after the first swallow, or Taittinger Cuvée Rosé (about $60) for those who prefer a more crisp and vibrant balance of red berries and fresh floral tones, are wise selections.

Although celebrating the New Year and any special occasion with a fresh pink rosé is always enticing, consumers are reminded to please drink responsibly.

About Pink Champagne

Rosés are made within a strictly defined region of North East France and are a blend of a small amount of finished red wine with fermented white wine and several grape varieties, including the pinot noir grape. After the grape skin is left in contact with the juice for a period of time, skin maceration occurs which extracts a little of the pink color. Too much contact with the skins can produce a bitter wine and so great care and concentration are a necessity when producing this unique blend. Nicely aged rosé champagne will have a yeasty, frothy mousse with tiny bubbles and a taste that is a complex mix between fruits, wild berries and spices.

“Today’s ‘must have’ pink champagnes are good news this year for distributors, who usually get a bigger margin on rosés over regular white champagnes,” said Mr. von Wiesenberger. “But it is also great news for consumers because there is a much broader selection of high quality rosés than there were just a few years ago,” he added.

About Arthur von Wiesenberger

A consultant to the beverage industry since 1978, Arthur von Wiesenberger established the popular Nippers.com Web site that offers in depth information on wines, champagnes and fine dining. Mr. von Wiesenberger has been awarded the Diplôme d’honneur from the Corporation des Vignerons de Champagne (France) and is a Chevalier of the Chapitre de la Fleur de Vigne de l’Ordre des Coteaux de Champagne (France), both considered of great prestige in Champagne, France. In 1992, Mr. von Wiesenberger authored “Champagne & Caviar – A Connoisseur’s Survival Guide” (Capra Press/Best Cellers), which explores all the grand marques Champagnes. The coffee table top book was selected as a featured Neiman Marcus book for their In-Circle events across the U.S. Earlier in his career, he co-founded the Nipper’s Champagne clubs in Montecito and on Rodeo Drive in Beverly Hills, California, that in the mid-1980s were selling four percent of all the champagne imported into the U.S. according to People magazine. The successful clubs were featured on “Lifestyles of the Rich & Famous,” “The Merv Griffin Show,” Time magazine and selected as The Best by Playboy magazine and many other publications. For more information on pink (or white) champagnes, visit the Web site at www.nippers.com.
Contacts

Ágnes Huff Communications Group
Ágnes Huff, PhD, or Anna Jerden, 310-641-2525
ahuff@ahuffgroup.com

The fact that Just the Facts cuts and pastes one-sided, spin-spewing press releases from failed journalist and PR hack Agnes Huff, with the implication that these actually represent the truth, shows how far from reality the McCaw cartel really is. This demonstrates psychotic behavior that likely requires heavy medication.

May, yes indeed, the News-Press will have its day(s) in court, as many as its lawyer legions can buy it. And you, as with Wendy (and any defendant accused of committing an offense against the public), can deny that it means anything that a law enforcement agency has seen fit to prosecute her after conducting an investigation. But it wouldn't hurt to admit you are wrong about what the prosecution decision means, or that the NLRB prosecutor cannot unilaterally decide that the NP violated the law, or that the NLRB's decision isn't a positive for the union. That decision was the necessary next step toward a labor law "conviction" of the NP, a step that, with respect to the bogus charges the NP has filed against the Union, will never happen. Why? Because the NP's charges are meritless and aren't even worthy of that important prosecutorial step.

Here's today's LA Times story on the NLRB lawsuit vs. The Wendy. This plus ACLU, excellent. Couldn't happen to a nicer person.
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-...

If Millstein is indeed "confident that these claims will be found without merit," then he's been sharing Wendy's crack pipe again.

As for Baron von Cheeseburger, I think all those tiny (pink) bubbles have left him more than a wee bit addled.

Travis K. Armstrong keeps banging the d(r)umb of reporters' bias being at the heart of the News Press Mess. However, the actions of the current News Press reporters and editors shows the ridiculousness of this statement. The latest outrage involves the fact that the News Press promptly reported the four NLRB issues that were dropped by the union last week; and yet they have not reported on the hearing scheduled for Februrary on the other four issues even though they had plenty of time to make this morning's paper's deadline. This silence stands in contrast to other newspapers (LA Times, Lompoc, SB Independent etc) that are reporting on this story in today's papers. How are we left to conclude that the current regime is not exponentially more biased than the former? I know that this might be but one example of many, and maybe not even the best one, but it just seems to stand out so much right now.

I keep debating which metaphor is more apt for the News Press Mess. Is it Orwellian? (Big Brother, "Lies are truth," the totalitarian pigs from Animal Farm) Or is it more similar to Nazi propaganda minister Joseph Goebbels? (“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.” Just substitute "News Press" for the "State" and "legal" for "military.)

Either way, for a non-combatant like myself to even have these thoughts occur to me is one measure of how grotesque this situation has become. Let's just be thankful for the blogs and the ability to communicate outside the elite media. Maybe if this mechanism had been around 100 years ago we could have avoided Goebbels and the 20th century tyrany that Orwell depicted. With any luck the blogs will have a hand in rectifying the News Press Mess.

I couldn't get through Baron Nipper's "think pink" ode -- it was too poorly written.

Does he mention whether his champagne recommendations go with the porkburgers he's frying up these days?

Like Nero, he fiddles while his paper burns.

After the SBNP's frivolous, baseless bull#@%* whining about alleged coercion is tossed out by the NLRB as the pathetic delaying tactic it so obviously is, and the union election is certified, the Red Queen and her minions will be forced to sit down at the bargaining table and start negotiating with The Organized.

No amount of pink champagne is going to change that. :)

(BTW, I ADORE the picture of Wendy you guys keep running on this blog! She looks so ... bloated and old. And what's up with that hair?!)

"She looks so . . . old? " That's not really one of her demerits, do you think? That's %$#@ed up, breadandroses.

Today's News-Press in its business front has a big centerpiece photo of three bottles of champagne, snapped by ace Mike Eliason, an obvious waste of his considerable talents. The lengthy paragraph below the photo, really a "story" without attribution quotes from "nippers.com" without disclosing that the site is owned by the Publisher.

Anyone want to bet against the fact that the "great fun" "story" was written by none other than The Nipper himself?

Ban the bias.

I am confident Wendy could find a way to make more pictures available. That particular one captures a moment in time that expresses alot. Wendy can change that when she's so inclined. She's not a victim.

Re: Brouhaha over her Wendyness's picture - Why squabble? Pic is just perfect when one recalls the old truism, "Beauty is as beauty does."

When the Teamsters withdrew three filings against the News-Press in mid-December, the News-Press’ newsroom couldn’t publish the news fast enough -- even running Ms. McCaw’s press release unedited as “breaking news” on the News-Press website.

When, as Barney Brantingham reports above, the NLRB prosecutes the News-Press and orders a February 26 trial, the News-Press newsroom publishes … nothing? The NLRB vs. News-Press complaint story was carried extensively, both locally as well as across the country, but not in the News-Press? Am I missing something; was the story buried on a back page? Or are Ms. McCaw and her champagne boy unethically suppressing the news?

I beg your pardon, but isn't it at all a problem for Independent editors that Barney Brantingham is writing news stories about the News-Press? If we're so concerned about "banning the bias," how could we in good faith trust Mr. Brantingham to stay impartial? Besides, Ethan Stewart is a fine reporter. Put him on the story; it's not like he has a mullet to write about anymore.

With Ms. McCaw’s customary youthful and fit photo (compare with above), the News-Press will publish the NLRB prosecution story tomorrow morning, having accidentally misplaced it on the associate editor’s desk since Thursday.

Dear O. d'Objectivity:

Why would Barney's reporting be brought into question? He has a definite (and informed) point of view, as all good reporters do, but has he misinformed, withheld, or ignored information in his reporting on the News-Press decent into irrelevance?

--virtual nattering nabob of non-neutrality

Yea, i have to agree with Biff: If Barney's reporting is biased, show us all where. He's a pro who can keep his feelings out of the way, as much as humanly possible. And remember, journalists are in fact humans, not robots, which means that true and pure objectivity is never possible. And the smart media watchers have always known this, which is why each story should be judged on its own merits.
I'd venture to bet that any reporter who covers this story will have the same biases as Barney: that it's sad and unfortunate and maddening to see someone trample a once important and decent publication, while at the same time killing the notion of fair journalism.
Any informed reporter would see the story that way (from Ethan Stewart to Susan Paterno to Walter Cronkite), so if we were to take Object's message to heart, then no professional journalist would be able to cover the story. And there would then be no story.
Oh, wait I minute, I get it: Object is Objectivity wants The Indy to do what the News-Press has and simply ignore it....

The National Labor Relations Board prosecutes the News-Press and sets a February trial before a judge … and the News-Press, unlike the L.A. Times and other media across the nation, does not mention a word.

The owner of the News-Press in a front page January 1 “letter to readers” says, “At the News-Press we remain more committed than ever to the values for which we stand: truth, excellence, ethical journalism and the best coverage of local events that can be had. My dedication to these principles was one of the reasons I purchased the paper, and they will not vary or be compromised. I will tirelessly continue to dedicate my resources and time to ensure this paper will always be a shining example of those values.”

Given what the owner said, shouldn’t News-Press editors have even a small story about the NLRB prosecution? Or at least explain to readers why it isn’t a story? Wouldn't that be “truth, excellence, ethical journalism and the best coverage of local events that can be had?”

Will they report on the trial itself?

Am I missing something? What gives?

Confused,

What's missing from McCaw's laughable front page clap trap is the truth: she and von Porkpattie have done nothing but downgrade the standards of the paper across the board instead of admitting their blunders and asking for forgiveness.

Their lack of humility has led to a mass exodus of seasoned professionals, a pile of vindictive and wasteful lawsuits, and the illegal termination of at least one employee. And McCaw would have you believe each of these steps is carefully crafted as part of a larger mission to improve the paper. To anyone paying even the slightest amount of attention, however, McCaw is either lying or delusional - and probably both.

Worker bee,

Thank you. Your explanation makes sense. She's plainly out of her depth and doesn't know it.

One more question:

When Ms. McCaw says she will “tirelessly” dedicate her time, does she mean that when her newspaper blows up in her face, again, by having, say, six senior editors walk, she’ll cut short her European yachting vacation and helicopter back?

The doubt about objectivity should not just be about what is written, but explicitly about what is not written. Every story printed is done so via a deliberate and conscious decision, just as the News-Press made a deliberate and conscious decision not to print the update on Travis Armstrong's DUI. As we continue to bemoan the destruction of the so-called "wall" between fact and opinion, should we not also consider the other "wall," the one that has stood mightily between the editorial and advertising side of a newspaper? Does anyone need reminding that the virtuous Jerry Roberts, winner of the ethics award by the Society of Professional Journalists, was once both the publisher and editor of the News-Press, the living embodiment of a conflict of interest, both at a small newspaper and mid-sized publication such as the News-Press.

I received a call from the LA Times five minutes ago. I began subscribing to their paper in September after I cancelled my longstanding News Press subscription. However, I only took their weekend package. They call I recieved was to tell me that they were providing me with daily service at the same rate because "they were making changes to the Santa Barbara edition, and wanted me to be able to check it out." Does this mean that the LA Times is making a major change in their SB edition to take market share from the News Press?

Is Barney a news reporter or a columnist? Is it supposed to be objective or his own soap box? And has anyone noticed that the only thing that gets comments when Barney writes is his former employer? Anything else he pens gets virtually zero on the comments scale....

Sharon,

Has anyone noticed you're an idiot? Of course Barney's posts about the NP are the most popular - the subject is very heated and raises the emotions of the public - probably because it involves a rich tyrant vs. the average person.

I've never - ever - met anyone who truly condones McCaw's blind-headed decisions regarding the NP. I can only assume "Sharon" is a hired goon who thinks inserting the random "pro-Wendy" opinion into the blogosphere is clever and will influence opinion. Wrong! McCaw's lies remain so and none of us are amused....

And if I'm wrong, please, Sharon, argue on behalf of McCaw's corporate greed...I'm patiently waiting to hear this argument.

To Object: Once again, the proof is always in the pudding. When Jerry Roberts was editor and publisher, did we see any inkling of the breach between advertising and editorial? Nope, and that's because Jerry was a professional and knew where to draw the lines. This has really never been about a "wall" between titles like editor versus publisher or between objectivity versus subjectivity. This is about a "wall" between the reporting of news and the influence of a paper's owners, no matter what that influence may be. So when it comes to Jerry as editor and publisher or Barney as a reporter and columnist who writes about his former employer, one must look at the result. And in these two cases, the result is good, solid, respectable journalism. In the case of McCaw and company, it is not. That is the wall that must be reinstalled.

Good catch on the Sharon the sockpuppet, Worker Bee.

The Toadies for Ms. Wendy stick out like sore thumb. Anonymity is a bee-ach.

--virtual dowsing rod

Relax, "claire"! I didn't mention the fact that the Red Queen looks old in the blog photo because I'm some kind of ageist - I mentioned it because the ONLY picture the SBNP is allowed to run of Her Highness is the six-year-old shot of her showing off her biceps (as if!). She HATES candid pix of herself, just like she HATES growing older ... and anything else she can't control. Perhaps she'll do us all a favor and OD on Botox.

BTW, did anyone else notice that in the SBNP's year-end fill-up-the-space-with-pix-cause-we-have-no-local-news photo retrospectives, there was not a single picture or mention of anything having to do with the News-Press Mess? Looking at the SBNP's coverage, you'd think that nothing had happened at the paper that was out of the ordinary in 2006.

Bias? What bias?!

Worker Bee - the emotions of the public could care less for the most part. it is near and dear to the hearts of those who are in the midst of it all. no matter what kind of boss you have or I have, if it is making you (me) that miserable, then we should take some positive steps to change the circumstances. yeah, I may not agree with my boss's decisions - but there is an implied employer-employee contract there. I do my work, they pay me. I go home. they go home. and the next day I show up again and I have a job. when they breach the contract, or when I do, it's over and I have to find something else. hard, but not impossible. what is the emotional cost of misery?

Sharon,

What on Earth are you talking about? Have McCaw's goons finally lost their already fragile grasp upon reality?

You've asked "what is the emotional cost of misery?" Well, it's the time spent being miserable.

What is the emotional and financial cost of being forced out of work by a tyrant who lacks humility, wisdom, couth, and class?

You can take a side: Employers can do as they please - no regulation. Or, In a civil society we should demand our employers always - ALWAYS - keep first the best interest of their employees and keep second the bottom line. I know what side I choose. I'm still waiting for the argument in favor of the bottom line over humanity.

To Pudding: Let me borrow the time-old maxim about ethics. The appearance of a conflict of interest can often be as dangerous as a real conflict of interest. Again, the fear is not about what appears in the newspaper, but about what does not appear. How many times do you think Jerry Roberts was faced with decisions in which he had to publish embarrassing or uncomplimentary articles about a business but was reluctant to do so because that business was an advertiser? It's a readership's fear of what they're not told that creates ethical dilemmas. Just imagine what news Santa Barbara readers missed out on while Roberts was in charge of the editorial and financial side of the paper. Also, please ask yourself, how many newspapers of that size, and with such a wealthy owner, have an editor and pulisher handling the positions simultaneously.

Yes, it is true that the appearance of conflict is just as bad, and I can't say that I was entirely comfortable with Roberts as both pub and editor. But that was more because I thought that without any publishing experience, he'd do a poor job.
So to your concerns, what businesses were spared?
As well, if you know the workings of a newspaper, the editor doesn;t have complete control over the copy by any means, and I assume that Roberts, as a professional, simply didn;t say anything about articles involving advertisers. He's a pro, and pros don;t do that.

There, Proof, I think you've answered the question. Jerry Roberts, not once in his lengthy experience in the newspaper industry, had he ever served as a publisher until the News-Press hired him. Which is to say, if we factor in your barometer for success, that he would have done a poor job. But we're digressing. The point of our discussion has been about sound ethical judgment. When readers have a clear and present reason to question a paper's impartiality, that paper's integrity is at stake. Jerry Roberts made a mistake in accepting and fulfilling the dual duties as publisher and editor. At the same time, Independent editors are making a mistake allowing Barney Brantingham – whose resignation from the News-Press cost him a secure job, a good salary and possibly a pension – to write news articles about these sensitive, litigious matters, despite his professionalism or propensity for human error. We must consider these points as we move forward.

So, Object, when is Wendy (who is not the editor) going to run the story (if ever) about the NLRB prosecuting the News-Press for labor violations and hauling the paper before a federal judge in late February? The L.A. Times and other media across the nation have carried the story. With all due respect, this is the point we must consider as we move forward.

"At the same time, Independent editors are making a mistake allowing Barney Brantingham – whose resignation from the News-Press cost him a secure job, a good salary and possibly a pension – to write news articles about these sensitive, litigious matters, despite his professionalism or propensity for human error. We must consider these points as we move forward."

I might be able to consider your points and move forward, O d'O., if I spoke non sequitur. Please return when you can provide some coherence.

--virtural curmudge

To OIO,

1. Wendy doesn't pay a pension.

2. American Journalism Review's "Santa Barbara Smackdown" story had the following to say about Jerry Roberts. See below. Sounds like he handled his dual role as editor-publisher just fine. On the contrary, it's more than clear that McCaw and von Wiesenberger continually and unethically try to and do promote their own dealings in the paper, including that rose champagne/nippers.com piece on the SBNP Business page as recently as last week. Talk about a conflict of interest.

From AJR:

Profit margins reached record levels of 25 percent in 2003, say those familiar with the paper's finances, and the News-Press consistently won local, state and regional journalism awards for its coverage. But its success was not enough to save [former publisher Will] Fleet: The day he returned from his honeymoon in August was his last at the News-Press. "He was just gone," Strean says. "There was no reason given." (Fleet declined to comment for this article.)

Roberts added publisher to his editor title, recusing himself from daily newsroom decision making [emphasis added]. The arrangement worked well, Strean says, until spring 2004, when McCaw insisted on previewing stories mentioning Brian Cearnal, a prominent Santa Barbara architect she was suing for malpractice. An ugly scene ensued in June when McCaw ordered Roberts to publish a piece touting her alleged legal victory over Cearnal, Strean says, a story that had no comment from the architect and whose facts were disputed by his partner. After a while, McCaw wanted Roberts to publish four pages of her boyfriend's restaurant reviews. Though McCaw "continually pursued it," Roberts "kept arguing against it," Strean says, and refused to implement her directive [emphasis added]. Finally, McCaw stopped meeting with Roberts and then "quit speaking to him."

footnote:

"Strean" is Linda Strean, former managing editor.

To Biff: What I meant to say, and what you clearly misunderstood, is that a person's sense of professionalism doesn't matter in debates about conflict of interest, expressly because it is impossible to fully and simultaneously do two jobs that by nature conflict each other.
Two Things: Barney was up for a pension. If you recall, when McCaw purchased the News-Press from the New York Times, the terms of the deal stressed that all current employees keep their jobs, in addition to the New York Times pension, which I'm told is the gold standard in the industry. Anyone who was hired after McCaw's purchase did not qualify for that pension. But again, I think we're digressing; I'm not here to defend Wendy McCaw. Never can, never will. Her actions have and continue to be unconscionable, but I want to assert that others besides McCaw have made and continue to make decisions that are either questionable or unscrupulous. Barney Brantingham should not be writing news articles concerning these matters. The Journalistic Code of Ethics, the document Jerry Roberts cited in a recent speech as the bible for resolving ethical dilemmas, would defend me without question on this point.

There are countless factual misrepresentations in the AJR article, so don't believe all that you read. Especially when it is so obviously one sided.

The LA times whittles away the SBNP readers in the south . In the North where I live, the factor we have not noted here is the recent Lompoc Record decision to go from afternoon to morning distribution. How many papers do I need on my porch in the morning?? One is enough. I wonder how many more people here came to the conclusion that they don't need the SBNP.

One thing,

How much do you bill McCaw an hour to post little "Wendy is great!" bombs on local blogs? Nice work if you can get it, huh? what sort of price do YOU put on your dignity?

Countless misrepresentations in the AJR article, huh? Are you saying you can't count very high? Not surprising...considering the moves her circle makes, I'm convinced McCaw's money makes you retarded.

Nice hit and run, "one thing," unblemished by substantiation, example, or referenda.

According to the May 21, 2001 LA Times article, the benefits were cancelled in late 2000:

"the company-paid pension plan and the 401(k) retirement savings program were being eliminated. The money savedwould be pooled and used to pay bonuses for the paper's best and brightest, which they could spend or invest as they wished.

Two staff members said the first bonuses ranged from $400 to $800.

"It was kind of a joke," said a reporter The worst part was when some staffers learned they got no bonuses.

"The whole thing is sort of ghastly," one writer said. "We feel like we're in the hands of amateurs."

And finally, O d'O, let us know what part of the SPJ Code of Ethics supports your thesis. For my money, Barney has claimed some rather high ground on this issue, that is, he walked (leaving behind his cancelled benefits) rather than stand by and watch the institution to which he had given 40+ years of his life become the bully pulpit and vanity press of a loon. His ethics are demonstrated by his actions. And you still come up short in providing evidence of straying from that course in his subsquent reporting on the N-P.

--virtual smak that

Biff: I never stated that Barney had strayed from his course. You did. I only said we should question his position in light of his past involvement. Put yourself in his shoes. You've worked somewhere for more than 40 years, watched that company develop and evolve, made your entire living at this company and suddenly you're put in a position that you believe requires you to quit. After you resign you participate in protests against the powers that be of the company from which you resigned and write opinionated columns opposing those leaders. Then, you decide you want to write news articles about these same events, a responsibility that will require you to take into account all perspectives (many do exist, you know). Putting all of this together, how can you be expected to consider all sides?
Hereforth, the Code of Ethics guidelines on conflicts of interests. Drum roll please:

"Journalists should:
– Disclose unavoidable conflicts.
– Avoid conflicts of interest, real or perceived.
– Remain free of associations and activities that may compromise integrity or damage credibility.
– Support the open exchange of views, even views they find repugnant."

What side did Barney not represent in this story, OisO? He got Millstein's quote. We live in a small town. The Indy has a small staff of news reporters. If Barney has the time and inclination to do a story, and do it fair, why shouldn't he do it? It's clearly not a perfect set-up, but if the choice is no-news versus Barney-doing-NP-news, I think anyone with their head on straight would take Barney's news. And plus, Kettman's been doing most of the recent SB Media Blog stories anyway, so your point is more or less a moot one.

Todays Letters section has a classic example of Armstrongs bias- why would he print a letter that is addressed to a Supervisor about a public works issue? Was this a news story? is there background on this issue? What are the facts? Did he get a statement from the public works department which is accused of something in this letter? undoubtedly the answer is no to all of the above.
what would Armstrong care about the facts? He has his biases and he wants to use his bully pulpit to promote them.

It's been said before but perhaps it needs to be said again: Barney is a columnist...a columnist writes by different rules and standards than a reporter. A columnist is entitled, usually because of a long, distinguished reporting career, to express opinion and even sometimes bias.

Barney has earned his stripes as a reporter and he makes a great columnist, so keep entertaining, educating and inspiring us Barney, because that's your job! Object, you're just flat out on the wrong page on this one!

Object, your point is duly noted for the record. When reading Barney, we'll all have to take into account his resume.

Barney, keep on doing your usual fine job doing what you do.

I don't know guys, Barney's situation seems a little too murky for comfort. One day, he plays reporter – presenting all the facts, trying to consider multiple opinions, structuring his sentences in inverted pyramid format. On another day, he plays columnist – peppering newsy facts with lofty descriptions and loaded adjectives, a la Angry Poodle. On other days, it's a mixture of both. Seems like a lot of latitude to give to someone.
And I don't buy the "it's a small town, it's a small paper with few reporters" excuse. The Independent covers a County of nearly 400,000 people, a county that boasts some of the wealthiest areas in the world. The paper has a staff of reporters and should stick a reporter on this story and do a more diligent job of defining Barney's duties. After all, if anyone or any company has best profited from the News-Press crisis, it is certainly the Independent.

How has the Independent or anyone benefited from losing the daily newspaper?
If you actually knew how newspaper worked, OisO, you could look at the thickness of the indy and see whether it really got a boost after the n-p fallout. It has not grown that much, if at all, which means that the indy isn't "profiting" from this at all.
Perhaps it's grown in popularity, and maybe the death of the daily forced people to find more news at the indy's website, but that's only because the indy is doing what it's always done: covering the news. That's a newspaper's job, and it's ashame that the daily forgot that. That may have made them more popular, but until I see a 200-page issue, thee's certainly no evidence that it made the indy any richer.
It's also a shame that it seems the daily is paying someone to decorate these blogs with half-truths and baloney.
Geez, when's the indy gonna throw up another media blog article so we can lose these dull string?

Newsflash - News is NEVER completely objective! There's no such thing. Not when human beings are involved. Now we all have to strive for objectivity, to be sure.

I would rather have Barney doing the reporting/commenting/whatever, who openly admits to and even foregrounds the cards he has on the table, who doesn't pretend to be completely objective--but who does in fact try his hardest to get the other side's viewpoint all the same.

This is much better than those who purport to be objective but hardly ever offer the other side a chance for comment, and who flagrantly suppress the news.

Actions speak louder than words, especially when words are the issue.

Keep up the great work Barney!! Your efforts and steadfast ethical compass are very much appreciated. Please don't back down; we need you.

Rather than profiting from the Mess, the Indy is ponying up huge legal fees to defend itself from one of The Wendy's and The Nipper's vendetta lawsuits.

What benefits: Thank you for your devised lesson on the newspaper business, but don't be fooled by how much the Independent has gained from this whole mess. The fact is that the paper can't get any larger, not for lack of advertising dollars, but for lack of paper space to fit those ads. Remember, it's not just the number of pages printed that determines revenue, but also the ratio of ads versus copy in each issue. I'd venture to say the Indy's come out well in all this, and if nothing else the magazine has added a stable of well-known columnists whose talents once resided at the rival paper.
And I disagree that this is a "dull" blog string. It's always important to challenge the whistleblower.

This should not be confused as support for the NP, but ask any of the indy's employees if they have a pension?

Interesting thread.

Our page count is up significantly for 2006, about 9%.

We do not have a defined benefits plan, but have 401k plan with a 35% match. We provide a modest life insurance policy for our employees, and of course dental, medical, and Cafeteria plans.

We are always looking for talented writers, designers, and sales people for our Website and newspaper.

Loyalty oaths are not required (but encouraged).

--Randy Campbell
Publisher, Santa Barbara Independent

Thanks for that clarification Randy.
But what is OisO talking about paper space? The Indy page number fluctuates from 90-something to more than 100 on a fairly regular basis. As far as I understand it, if you get more ads, you make a bigger paper. Like the Best of SB issue, which is like 200 pages. Am I correct? The Indy is not relegated to a certain size right?

Like Eau de Ob's other posts, he has thoroughly failed interpret facts in a manner which comports with the world which we share; The Independent's paper size, that is, the amount of pages produced, is limited only by revenue.

Could not be simpler: more ads, bigger paper.

-virtual LIFO/FIFO

All newspapers page counts fluctuate depending on lots of factors. Advertising revenues determine the number of pages run. Generally page counts plummate after New Year's and then gradually pick up. Special editions and special sections such as Wedding, Spring Fashion, Fiesta, Back to School, "Best Of..." etc. bring out advertisers and increase page counts. That is why they run them. Holidays also bring out the advertisers, so page counts go up, especially near Christmas. For dailies, Sunday is of course the big day of the week. Saturday, Monday and Tuesday are the worst days. That is why the paper is loaded with car ads on Saturday and newspapers often offer special rates for Monday and Tuesday. It is all revenue driven with the News Department having to make the best of what they are given. sometimes it means plugging news holes because more ads were sold than expected or cutting stories because the paper ends up tighter than expected. Also, the press can only jump up in pages by 2 or 4 depending on the press so if your ad count goes up, you might have to fill 4 pages to make up the difference for 1 page of advertising.

Since the News-Press reporters won't be allowed to cover the NLRB hearing tomorrow, can the Indy send a reporter and give Santa Barbara an up-to-date story?

Hi loyal Indy readers,

This is an interesting string here, as our publisher noted, so let me clarify a couple things.

One, yes The Indy will be sending a reporter, maybe two, to cover tomorrow's hearing.

Two, as a columnist, Barney has free reign to cover the N-P situation in whatever way he pleases. Columns are opinion-based and therefore not held to the same ethical standards as news reporting. That's Journalism 101.

Three, having Barney cover the N-P situation as a news reporter is clearly not a perfect situation, even though he has shown nothing but fairness and desire for accuracy when reporting on the situation. But Barney's potentially perceived conflicts are why our printed edition only uses the newsroom to generate such stories. It's also why, for the most part, I have been writing the Santa Barbara Media Blog for the past couple months.

In regards to this article about the NLRB, the entire Indy staff was on vacation for the holidays from December 22 to January 2, including myself. Barney, however, was monitoring the situation in Santa Barbara, and when the NLRB news broke, he called my cell phone and told me. Luckily, the wind was too strong for snowboarding in Tahoe that morning, so I was there to get his call.

Did I want a report? Hell yea. Did I have the time or information to do it myself? Nope, especially since all I had was a dial-up connection. Was there anyone else on the Indy staff available? Nope, everyone was outta town or otherwise vacationing.

What's an editor to do? Give the go-ahead to Barney, of course, who turned the story around superfast. It was posted within two hours of the news breaking, which is pretty darn fast for a publication used to 20 years of the weekly grind. When his numerous calls to the N-P PR folks were finally returned, we threw in their response immediately.

That's good journalism, in my understanding: we got the news, we got both sides, and we published it fast.

In this situation, it was clear to me that the appearance of Barney's potential conflicts was outweighed by the magnitude of the news and the necessity of getting that news to our readers as fast as humanly possible. So that's what we did.

In the future, we will continue to use our newsroom staff and my reporting/writing to cover this story as much as possible. But if similar situations arise, and Barney is the only one available to deliver the news, I will not hesitate in giving him the go-ahead.

And just to put all of my cards on the table, I'd like to make one thing clear: The Independent truly is dismayed and saddened by the situation at the News-Press. It's bad news for everyone and the only benefits that we have accrued as a paper came our way because of what we've always strived to do: cover the news and tell the community why they should care.

Healthy rivalries and cutthroat scoop chases aside, we believe that our town needs a functioning, fair, and strong daily newspaper with the institutional knowledge and community ties enjoyed by the News-Press. Democracy requires a free and unintimidated press to thrive.

While the Daily Sound, numerous blogs, and Independent.com have been diligently fighting to fill the void, it would be a tragedy to see to a Santa Barbara institution die because of a confused, combative owner.

Look for a new SB Media Blog about tomorrow's proceedings on the website around 2 p.m.

Thanks for reading Independent.com,
Matt Kettmann
Senior Editor
The Santa Barbara Independent
matt@independent.com

Bravo, Matt. Bravo.

Matt: As a former News-Press copy editor I want to thank you for explaining about Barney's duties. I worked with him for 16 years and while I didn't always agree with him, I never questioned his integrity or skills as a reporter. Even when he was still at the N-P his knowledge of the community and skills as a reporter were used for hard news when needed. In other words, he was more than a reporter and he did it well. That is one of the things people outside the newspaper seem to have a hard time grasping -- we all wore more than one hat sometimes. Yes, there should always be a distinction between columns, editorials and news reporting, but manpower issues sometimes require a cross-over. Prior to McCaw this was never an issue because the columnists and reporters and editors all were professionals. Putting out a newspaper may look easy from the outside, but it sure is obvious when a bunch of amateurs are in charge. You and Barney followed the first rule of the newsroom: Get the news out. Good work!