Comments by webadmin
Page 1 of 11 | Next
Posted on November 7 at 1:38 p.m.
Thanks for catching our oversight, pinkerbell03; it has been updated.
--WebAdmin
Posted on November 5 at 10:53 p.m.
That comment by restein9 was yanked for being a thoughtless jerk, in the hope no one would have to suffer seeing it.
-- WebAdmin
Posted on November 3 at 8:48 a.m.
Thanks for the catch, 154driver.
-- WebAdmin
Posted on November 2 at 10:19 p.m.
The argument now comes full circle:
Barney's comment on the wall of separation between editorial opinions and news coverage is often misunderstood, and "Bajades's" attempt to make some sort of point is a fine example of that confusion.
Assuming the endorsements stats from the last 4 years as presented by Bajades are correct, what exactly do these facts prove -- that our editorials are opinionated?
Endorsements would have very little value if they didn't show a decision bias toward one result or another -- you know, actually endorse something.
But endorsements are not news coverage, they are editorial opinion -- two parts of a newspaper's content which good organizations try to keep separate. It is something we also try mightily to attain.
I will also point out two other facts; the majority of endorsements we provide deal in non-partisan races, so that renders a goodly amount of Bajades's breakdown by party beside the point, at least as far as governing on the local level.
Finally, the record of our endorsements since 2000 -- over 75% have been winners -- shows the vast majority of our neighbors would find our suggestions quite agreeable and in line with their votes.
-- Web Admin
Posted on November 2 at 8:16 a.m.
sewanee, you have responded to me, but your quotes and your rebuttal are aimed at comments left by JoeHill.
-- WebAdmin
Posted on November 1 at 9:50 p.m.
I appreciate you taking the time to refine and further your arguements, "pointssouth" and we are moving along in fine form on the subjective merits or miscues in our reporting.
Unfortunately, you have propagated some new errors and unsupported assertions into your answer which require clarification, with this claim:
"It does not seem the has Indy been vigilant about enforcing those rules [the rules proposed by the Society of Professional Journalists] among staff."
As you reference Cathy Murillo, let me mention she was last a paid staffer with our company over 4 years ago. She has written occasional articles on a freelance basis since that time, including a few this year.
With one exception -- a piece about the Santa Ynez Valley Community Plan and Neverland's potential impact [http://www.independent.com/news/2009/jul/23/santa-ynez-plan-gets-okay/] -- Murillo has written no articles for us since David Pritchett's candidacy announcement June 11, 2009.
As to anyone else who might be in conflict with SPJ recommendations, you won't find anything that matches those problems on our staff; if you think you've got something, please let our management know.
- Publisher: randy@independent.com
- Editor: marianne@independent.com
-- WebAdmin
Posted on November 1 at 4:01 p.m.
If that's the best you can come up with, revisionist, you get a fail.
I asked for proof of your assertion we have issued some sort of blame on the problems in Santa Barbara to 'Anglos' (your words, not mine).
You provide excerpts from a book of interviews with undocumented workers and an article on the struggles and changes facing Harding School under a new principal and curriculum; neither dispositive of your bold claim.
But I'm pretty sure I've got your number; the mere mention of immigrants, illegal immigrants, Mexicans, Central Americans, the complexities and issues within those communities, and most likely hispanic surnames is enough to establish "bias" on our part.
In that case, avoiding our coverage altogether will be your best move.
-- WebAdmin
Posted on November 1 at 1:48 p.m.
Better yet, just follow the link provided at the end of the story to view all of our election coverage to date.
-- WebAdmin
Posted on November 1 at 11:34 a.m.
pointssouth:
Who's asking for a "pass?"
You make the unsupported claim that The Independent adopts a moral posture, and as a result gains or demands an accommodation from our readers because of it.
Show me where that has been suggested.
-- WebAdmin
Page 1 of 11 | Next
Previous Month


Posted on November 7 at 3:54 p.m.
I can. (barely).
-- WebAdmin
On Fighting for Survival