MOBILE USERS: m.isthmus.com
Connect with Isthmus on Twitter · Facebook · Flickr · Newsletters · Instagram 
Friday, August 22, 2014 |  Madison, WI: 80.0° F  Partly Cloudy
Collapse Photo Bar

WSJ's misleading headlines...

Please limit discussion in this area to local and state politics.

Re: WSJ's misleading headlines...

Postby gargantua » Sun Jan 15, 2012 10:24 pm

Jonny, the lucrative bonuses article wasn't about teachers, unless you got a completely different WSJ than I did. It was about the competition to keep and retain school system superintendents. For the State Journal, I thought the treatment was pretty even-handed.

I mean after all, superintendents are bosses and deserve all that money. Not like those lowlife bus driver worker bees who made more than the Journal approves of.
gargantua
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 4023
Joined: Sat Apr 13, 2002 1:30 pm
Location: Madison

Re: WSJ's misleading headlines...

Postby jonnygothispen » Tue Jan 17, 2012 11:28 am

Yeah, I admit just browsed over the top few lines. I can barely stand to look at the thing some days.

Yes, I think WSJ is often "even handed" in the way they write the topics they choose to print. But that's precisely the point: they usually pick topics, or an angle that is by it's nature right-wing. And then nothing presenting the opposing view. It's scattered throughout their coverage. WSJ is certainly not FOX, but as far as being even-handed in which topics they pick, nada. And yeah, they could be much worse.

And when they do stick their necks out in an extreme way, it's always right wing. Every time. they even ran an article on "how to protest" Bush, explaining what their conservative minds would accept or reject, and written from that angle. Pretty disgusting.

I am surprised at their coverage of the recent scandals though as to me it's a major departure from their right-leaning coverage of the protests.
jonnygothispen
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 3094
Joined: Wed Jun 25, 2008 3:53 pm

Re: WSJ's misleading headlines...

Postby jonnygothispen » Sun Jan 22, 2012 9:19 am

WSJ seems very concerned about election integrity re: Mickey Mouse voting, so I'm waiting for the front page headline expose' on ES&S/Diebold. Clue: Stephen Spoonamore and Mike Connell. Ah, but maybe something that wasn't going to happen is a bigger concern then something that has happened and has secret proprietary control of the outcome of our elections.
jonnygothispen
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 3094
Joined: Wed Jun 25, 2008 3:53 pm

Re: WSJ's misleading headlines...

Postby Henry Vilas » Sun Jan 22, 2012 10:17 am

Not from the WSJ, but another local media source:

Wis. GOP Wants To Let Locals Keep More Ore Tax

The law used to read that all the ore tax went to local communities. Then when the Republicans wanted to loosen up mining regs, they also took 50% of that tax for the state's coffers. In light of recent criticism, they now want to amend that so the state takes only 40%. How generous of them. It will be local communities that suffer the environmental degradation due to the proposed pit mining. And they will have 40% less money to ameliorate those effects.
Henry Vilas
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 19730
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 8:57 pm
Location: Name sez it all

Re: WSJ's misleading headlines...

Postby narcoleptish » Sun Jan 22, 2012 12:30 pm

How about the headline in my paper this morning for Chris Rickert's column:

"Will recall will be a real election?"

Can we try to keep the really unprofessional stuff on the web where it's expected.
narcoleptish
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 3622
Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2005 1:35 am

Re: WSJ's misleading headlines...

Postby Henry Vilas » Sun Jan 22, 2012 12:56 pm

I saw that too. He compares it to a referendum, which he opines might not be a "real election." What an idiot.

Will recall be a referendum or a real election?

...last week's delivery of signatures to recall Gov. Scott Walker, Lt. Gov. Rebecca Kleefisch and three other state senators was less grassroots than choreographed by a massive, powerful, well-funded political organization.

Which is not to say Wisconsin's Democratic party doesn't deserves props — at least if you're into cheering on massive, powerful, well-funded political organizations.


Does he think Americans for Prosperity (the Koch brothers) and other big time out-of-state donors to Walker's cause are grassroot?

Again, what an idiot.
Henry Vilas
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 19730
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 8:57 pm
Location: Name sez it all

Re: WSJ's misleading headlines...

Postby jonnygothispen » Mon Jan 23, 2012 9:49 pm

WSJ strikes again. It seems innocuous...
"Good advice from growth guru"
http://host.madison.com/wsj/news/opinio ... 963f4.html
"Our only enemy is the status quo."

...Holladay and his team offered five key points in the draft plan. Among them is a push to more effectively "tell our story" to the rest of the country and world.

"Nobody knows about you," he said, despite our many assets here, from natural resources to extensive research and development.

Complacency, he warned the group, is a killer when it comes to economic development. And in Madison, "It's beyond complacency, it's almost an arrogance."
That's strong stuff to drop on a large group of business and community leaders. But, as usual, Holladay was right on target
I get his point and agree that Madison could perhaps do a better job at courting responsible businesses-everyone can. But I think one of the reasons Madison is so attractive is that it's government often puts the community before business, which is kind of rare considering how urban it is. I think we have closer to an equal voice than many other cities this size. Business isn't necessarily given the City key to run roughshod over everyone because we choose community leaders to represent us. Forgive us Mr Halladay.

I also think Holladay ignores a few key points completely. We consistently have some of the lowest unemployment figures nation wide suggesting we have ample business opportunities for our size, and Madison already is well known for it's research and development.

WSJ doesn't give any specifics about why Mr. Halladay's thinks our business and community leaders aren't doing enough in regards to economic development other than to say they need to get the word out and that business and community leaders are arrogant. Arrogant about what? Instead of presenting both sides of this view, WSJ falls back on local conservative code language of arrogance for liberals who give community standards equal consideration with business interests. But w/o specifics, there's no way to tell.

It would be more interesting and informative if WSJ did a little investigative work, and gave a few specifics instead of depending on catch phrase ideology that seems designed to protect conservative views of a liberal city. But given that the current top 2 reasons for a lack of economic development are the anti-business policies of Scott Walker, and the obstruction of job creation bills by the Republican legislature, perhaps the main idea was to be vague and divert attention to the lesser causes that were prevalent before Walker and the Fitzgeralds started destroying job growth for partisan politics.
jonnygothispen
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 3094
Joined: Wed Jun 25, 2008 3:53 pm

Re: WSJ's misleading headlines...

Postby jonnygothispen » Thu Jan 26, 2012 4:12 pm

1-26 http://host.madison.com/wsj/news/local/ ... 963f4.html

"WALKER TOUTS WINS, OTHERS ALLEGE SINS" Catchy! But how about...
"WALKER ALLEGES WINS IN SPITE OF 6 STRAIGHT MONTHS OF JOB LOSSES Wisconsin experienced 6 months of job growth before his budget passed"

You know, the truth. Robin Voss's comment was also precious. "I think it's a shame that a very small number of NUT JOBS are in the audience trying to disrupt what the people are trying to hear." So Robin Voss thinks that 5 in the audience, who represent the very same things that the million + protesters were in 30 days last Feb/march, are not the people. And that a very small number of out-of-state financed partisan Republican hacks are "the people." Can someone call Mend0ta and see if they have a room for this guy?

After Walker and Voss both lied claiming they eliminated $3 billion in debt, WSJ makes no mention of the fact that we still have it No mention of the waste on corporate welfare programs or the loss of $3 billion in federal funds for partisan political gains. And for a closing comment, WSJ leaves the reader with the J. Fitzgerald claim that Republicans "improved our business climate in nearly every ranking" while "Democrats spent the last year protesting, recalling and playing politics with our business climate" without pointing to the fact that democrats proposed job creation bills that were completely ignored by Republicans, while the Rs played partisan politics over Wisconsin's social agenda AND... threw out thousands of jobs, again for partisan politics. Without printing the facts, WSJ has chosen once again to provoke the casual reader to depend on emotions, which is the exact reason we have so much divisiveness.

On a positive note, WSJ at least pointed out that we had 6 straight months of jobs losses since Walker's budget passed, but leaves the reader with the idea that it's the Democrats fault, and fails to mention that we had 6 straight months of job growth under Jim Doyle's policies in the 6 months preceding the passing of Walker's budget.

1-26 Page A6 headlines with the skewed Marquette poll w/o pointing to the unequal conditions that gave these results: An unusually high % of those polled were in aeas of Walker's strongest support; 46% were gun owners; over twice as many claimed to be conservatives as were liberals-41% to 20%; and most were clueless as to what was actually happening, which points to problems with our statewide media.

https://law.marquette.edu/poll/wp-conte ... plines.pdf

...and the lovely opinion page : )
"Ending unpaid wars no windfall"
The gist being that Obama shouldn't spend any of the money "saved" from ending the war on anything else, but rather "the president should learn from the past and pay for more of his priorities with real money" as the closer. True, but... no mention of the fact that he's tried to fund his programs by closing the wage and tax disparity to something more sane, but republicans have vowed, and followed through, to focus on defeating him rather than do much of anything to help our economy regain it's footing.

2 articles in the same issue, with the same blockage by the same party, and WSJ blames the opposite party each time either directly or indirecty by omission of key facts.

Since WSJ is so concerned with the economy, where are the articles showing how wage disparity, deregulation of the fincancial industries, and low taxes on the top were resonsible for The Great depression, the 1991 recession, and this one? Where's the concern for the results of gutting the consumer classes, which results in less consumer purchases, less production and fewer jobs and hence less tax revenue for a much slower recovery? They do this so often that it's sickening.

Mr. Smalley, if you're wondering why people are canceling their subscriptions...
jonnygothispen
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 3094
Joined: Wed Jun 25, 2008 3:53 pm

Re: WSJ's misleading headlines...

Postby jonnygothispen » Fri Jan 27, 2012 12:13 pm

What an amazing turn around in just one day. Yesterday, WSJ couldn't find it within themselves to present the other side of the story and left readers with the misleading impression that Democrats were to blame for what is actually Republican obstruction and partisan politics, but today, WOW, just wow! Not only does WSJ present the other side, but prints a photo of the physical evidence of the rebuttal ABOVE THE HEADLINE!!! I have to apologize, WSJ can present both sides of the story... when the accusation is against a Republican. Nice going guys.

Not only do you get physical evidence of the rebuttal, but...

But perhaps most notable in the complaints is an email from Walker to a longtime top aide discussing the resignation of Wink, who left her county job after admitting to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel that she frequently posted political comments online during working hours.

"We cannot afford another story like this one," Walker wrote about the Wink story. "No one can give them any reason to do another story. That means no laptops, no websites, no time away during the work day, etc."
... the rebuttal is "the most notable thing..." involving the whole story. Why just yesterday the actual facts regarding Republican obstruction over jobs creation bills wasn't notable enough to print. Not only was it not notable but they left casual readers with the absolutely false impression that Democrats were guilty of what Republicans were doing in spades...

and even that wasn't enough...
"Scott Walker expected everyone to follow the law and made that clear publicly and privately," the statement read.
Odd, he didn't fire anyone for what was clearly illegal, or otherwise reprimand them in a significant way. He doesn't even mention that it's illegal. Instead he clarifies in his letter that he was only concerned because he couldn't afford to be embarrassed by having another story come out, not because it was illegal. Yet WSJ does this...
Walker was not available Thursday for interviews to clarify what he meant in the email.

And this...
"She's clearly adamant that at no time did Scott Walker know that she was doing any of this type of behavior," Wolff said of the accusations against Wink.
Rebuttals that allegedly "clear" Walker are scattered throughout the article, yet WSJ couldn't find it within themselves to tell the truth about Republican obstruction over job creation or Walker's false statements about the budget and job losses just yesterday and instead used false allegations leveled against Democrats as the main theme.

The only reason this might be a tight race between Walker and whoever runs is because of WSJ's brand of press coverage, and they know it.
jonnygothispen
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 3094
Joined: Wed Jun 25, 2008 3:53 pm

Re: WSJ's misleading headlines...

Postby Henry Vilas » Fri Jan 27, 2012 8:59 pm

Walker denies knowing of wrongdoing by former top aides

That's what the headline claims, yet no quotes from Walker in the fairly lengthy article that followed it reports that he denied knowing about those crimes.
Henry Vilas
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 19730
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 8:57 pm
Location: Name sez it all

Re: WSJ's misleading headlines...

Postby jonnygothispen » Mon Jan 30, 2012 8:27 pm

1-28 "Walker says integrity intact" Friday's Walker rebuttal becomes Saturdays headline! Just in case you missed Walker's rebuttal conveniently placed above Friday's headline. WSJ seems to be saying: "We can't take any chances here, guys!" Nice. Otherwise, I think it was fairly well detailed, and this time provided a few quotes from Democrats to rebut his claim. But was a second day of Walker rebuttals really necessary when WSJ was so very clear Friday, or was it just there to reaffirm through repetition what WSJ wishes everyone to believe?

And let's add just a bit to Walker's "disclaimer" in Friday's article, for accuracy, of course:
But perhaps most notable in the complaints is an email from Walker to a longtime top aide discussing the resignation of Wink, who left her county job after admitting to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel that she frequently posted political comments online during working hours. Notable because Tim Russell was by then already two months removed from working in any official capacity as Deputy Chief of Staff. Taking into consideration the necessity of contacting the current Deputy Chief of Staff for daily operations after Russell left, it's simply implausible to think that Walker mistakenly sent this email to Russel two months after he left unless one considers that Russell was the one who set-up and ran the secret email system that allowed Walker's aides to illegally solicit funds on the taxpayer's dime. This shows that Walker had pre-existing knowledge of it's existence, use and purpose, and also that Walker knew Russell was in charge of it.


!-30 "Is GOP really focused on jobs?" An AP rebuttal to 1/2 of Walker's & Fitzgerald's false claims in Friday's featured article. But on page 3, and 3 days later, after the maximum attention on the corruption issue is gone. And an ambiguous title to boot. Of course this could've been cleared up Friday when there were likely 5 to 10 times more people reading the headline story. When there was a maximum, statewide focus on what would happen next in the investigation.

While I tip my hat to WSJ for printing the AP article today, the difference in when and where the opposing views were presented couldn't be much more dramatic. The recent example being that many readers canceled their WSJ subscriptions during their often bogus coverage of the issues during the protests last spring, when people were fully focused on, and knowledgeable about what was actually happening at the Capital, and statewide with Walker's policies.

When there was a maximum number of people interested in reading the headline article, WSJ chose again to present an absolutely false view, unopposed.

Two to three days later, when interest had died off considerably, WSJ finally finds it within themselves to tell the truth... on page 3 with an ambiguous title as if it's somehow up in the air rather than the dramatic way they presented Walker's rebuttal almost as if it was some sort of irrefutable "revelation" or fact.

Aren't news sources, by their nature, supposed to cut through the nonsense and present the naked truth as soon as possible? Isn't that what reporting is really all about? If a topic merits this much attention, shouldn't facts that disprove someone's headline story claims merit equal formatting and emphasis? Yes, of course, unless it's someone's intention is to mislead.
jonnygothispen
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 3094
Joined: Wed Jun 25, 2008 3:53 pm

Re: WSJ's misleading headlines...

Postby jonnygothispen » Wed Feb 01, 2012 5:05 pm

1-31"Former Walker aide was fired before
Tim Russel lost his state job in 1993 for 'gross misconduct,' file shows"

Walker campaign spokeswoman Ciara Matthews said "the governor was not aware" of Russell's firing from WHEDA.


The escape... "just a few bad apples, nothing else to see here." After "clearing" Walker by omitting key facts, now the Great Escape. But, Walker had a history of campaign violations at Marquette University when he ran for president of the Associated Students. The school paper called Walker “unfit for presidency.” Walker's campaign workers were also seen snatching up and trashing copies of the school paper that included an article endorsing his opponent.

http://marquettetribune.org/2010/10/26/ ... -campaign/
But for Walker, a questionable campaigning strategy is apparently nothing new.


Further, Walker retained both Kavanaugh and Russell after suspicions arose, even reappointing Kavanaugh 1 year after he was caught stealing $12,000 by Scot-Tea's chief of staff.

And another fine detail that's overlooked at WSJ... Russell resigned as Deputy Chief of Staff on March 15, 2010, the day after the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel printed the Darlene Wink story. It looks like Russell stepped down as a precaution just in case anything else came up, but oddly, he was replaced with someone he hand picked, Kelly Rindfleisch, who was also privy to the secret network.

Too many coincidences...
jonnygothispen
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 3094
Joined: Wed Jun 25, 2008 3:53 pm

Re: WSJ's misleading headlines...

Postby jonnygothispen » Sat Feb 04, 2012 4:59 pm

2-4-12 "Walker, prosecutor to meet" Tea and crumpets I presume...
jonnygothispen
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 3094
Joined: Wed Jun 25, 2008 3:53 pm

Re: WSJ's misleading headlines...

Postby jonnygothispen » Tue Feb 21, 2012 1:20 pm

Just noting that people standing up for their rights are often labeled as "anti-Walker," but his bill that takes away from so many people in Wisconsin is never labeled "anti-teacher, anti-education, anti-poor, anti-worker, anti-kids, anti-Wisconsin." I'm not picky. I'd settle for "Walker's corporate welfare bill (at the expense of everyone else)"
jonnygothispen
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 3094
Joined: Wed Jun 25, 2008 3:53 pm

Re: WSJ's misleading headlines...

Postby jonnygothispen » Thu Mar 01, 2012 4:28 pm

WSJ's Opine today http://host.madison.com/news/opinion/ed ... 963f4.html
Let's get this thing over with, accept the result and move on... We aren't fans of the recall process — regardless of the target. Voters elected Walker 16 months ago to a four-year term, not a trial run.

...so the solution is to support the voters by taking the power of recall away from the voters?

Pssst WSJ...Scot-Tea lied.

and...
The threat of an unprecedented recall attempt against Wisconsin's governor has loomed long enough
putting the power in the hands of the voters is a "threat?"

I would've loved headlines like "Walker threatens to take away worker's rights" or "Fitzgeralds threaten peaceful protesters 1st amendment rights..." or "Walker's bill threatens quality of education" or Walker threatens to diminish middle class" or...

and...
Wisconsin badly needs to get past this bruising battle over the power and rights of public sector labor unions. It was Walker's strict limits on collective bargaining for these unions that prompted massive protests at the Capitol last year.
The "power" of unions that already agreed to pay cuts? Or the power of one party rule trying to take away anything they can from the Democratic party? WSJ perhaps disingenuously misapplied the word "power."

... and it certainly wasn't just collective bargaining that prompted the protests.
jonnygothispen
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 3094
Joined: Wed Jun 25, 2008 3:53 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Local Politics & Government

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 2 guests

moviesmusiceats
Select a Movie
Select a Theater


commentsViewedForum
  ISTHMUS FLICKR

Promotions Contact us Privacy Policy Jobs Newsletters RSS
Collapse Photo Bar