COLLATERAL DAMAGE IN THE GOP'S WAR ON WOMEN

Maybe a candidate for long-distance trucking?

The notorious 5th Circuit Court of Appeals once again proved itself unappealing by upholding the Texas GOP's anti-abortion legislation. Nothing surprising here following January's hearing. What is surprising is the matters-of-law. It is now demonstrably more difficult for women to exercise their constitutional rights here. That apparently isn't a problem for the 5th Circuit. 

This is part-and-parcel with a decade of ideology-driven anti-abortion policies that have created considerable collateral damage. The Texas GOP has succeeded in driving up healthcare costs for Texas while delivering worse outcomes. 

Before, I've detailed why this campaign is doomed in "Why the War on Women will Fail." But there are other aspects to the GOP's larger campaign that may doom the basics of our free society. This is in the damage to the checks and balances between the legislative and judicial branches. The GOP's decades-long national campaign to politicize and polarize the bench has been a signal success. Now, when you want to really understand a ruling, questions of law are secondary to the judges' political backgrounds. Here, I think an even more disturbing factor plays a role: class. The income inequity set in motion by the GOP during Reagan's reign is now tearing apart the possibility for equal justice under the law.

That the ruling was authored by three female Texas judges appointed by Republicans will likely thrill the so-called "Red State Women." But their gender identity is beside the point. Their socio-economic identity may give the best understanding. Do these judges have much experience outside of their select circles? Judge Edith Jones is a standout for so many reasons. But her sisters on the bench also require scrutiny. They are Baker Botts alums with ZERO real-life experience out of elite educations, prestigious jobs and stints on the Texas bench via the state GOP's political machine. Do they know the realities of life for the less blessed? As the Texas Observer's Carolyn Jones notes:

It seemed beyond Justice Jones’ imagination that a Texas road trip might not be an adventure—or more than a minor inconvenience—for a woman with a full-time job, child care responsibilities or visa restrictions that confine her to the lower reaches of the Rio Grande Valley.

As income inequity increases, the wealth divide increasingly separates the majority of people from real justice. How are judges separated from reality in gated communities to judge? 

Sen. Nelson: Ready for Lt. Gov. Patrick

Curiously coincidental with the 5th Circuit ruling, Texas Sen. Jane Nelson had felicitous timing publishing a piece the day before the ruling trumpeting "Women’s Health Care Advancing Under Republican Leadership":

Not only does my party care deeply about the rights, respect and needs of Texas women, Republicans have delivered results for women since becoming the majority party.

Really? 

Must-reading alongside this: Andrea Grimes' fact-check on Sen. Nelson's claims. Then, Reps Jessica Farrar, Donna Howard and Dawnna Dukes' reply, "Women’s health care: Fixing what Republicans broke." What are are the  Texas GOP's "delivered results"?

...it’s difficult for us to be wildly complimentary of our Republican colleagues who voted to destroy a successful program and then congratulate themselves for restoring dollars to clean up the mess. 

So, setting aside women's health - what about all the infants saved in the Texas GOP's crusade against abortion? 

Here's another reality-check for Sen. Nelson, representing part of Tarrant County - with the highest infant mortality rate for Texas counties with 10,000 or more live births. Also check Pro-Life? GOP Promotes Nine Out Of Ten Things That Cause Death In Unborn Children.

.

###

Tips? Suggestions? Ideas? Drop a line to carl (at) inanityofsanity (dot) com

TRIFLES OVER TRIBBLES

"Trib Hands" in action at the State Thursday

I'm deep into my research to foster a CONSTRUCTIVE dialog about the Texas Tribune's business practices. One thing I want to make clear is that I have no interest in joining those that seem intent on offering less-than-constructive comments.  It seems clear that there's a great deal of animosity out there over this. I don't see that it is either warranted or helpful. 

Now, I walk a tightrope of seeming either too soft or too hard on the Trib. What is the right relationship? The philosopher Wittgenstein said that when a man says that a particular coat is his favorite, you really don't know anything about his relationship to it.  But when you see that he wears it all the time, then you know something. By this standard, we know what a lot of people think of the Tribune. They rely on it as I do. The Trib has a significant relationship with the public. What we have now is an opportunity to deepen it.

Last year, the Colombia Journalism Review published a thoughtful look at the evolution of this New Media experiment now well on the way to becoming an institution. "The Tribune is here to stay. The question is: What does it become next?" Richard Parker asked.

The debate and discussion over the ethics of its business model is an opportunity to shape it. It is the occasion for fans and foes alike to take ownership of what can and should be a PUBLIC institution.

Once again, let me be clear again as to my intentions in engaging this matter. 

I'm not a journalist, so I don't have to worry about the professional problems that might go with being outspoken here. Still, I know enough about the profession to be useful in facilitating the discussion that is simmering under the surface. So my task is opening and facilitating the conversation. I will resist coming to my own ethical judgment. Again, I do not hesitate to recommend reading James Moore's reporting and judgement. I just think that, at this point, engaging the community in this reflection is the proper process. We may or may not come to closure as he has. Whatever the resolution, engaging the community in this process is what is most needed now. 

One curious phenomena has shown itself time-and-again as I seek on-the-record comments for my story. Bill Minutaglio, the excellent reporter who brought (among other things) the "Dallas Buyers Club" story to the world, first noted it in a piece he wrote about the Trib in 2011.

I took a very unscientific poll and called several editors, consultants, reporters and educators across the state. What startled me, and I have no precise explanation for it, was how many folks instantly went off the record when they wanted to criticize the Tribune.

So far, all of the professional journalists I've spoken with have done the same.  What is behind the omertà? Some have been very clear in explaining their reticence. They don't want to seem petty or jealous for their criticisms. That's legit. I don't like having anonymous sources, but I'm going to have at least a few here. Rest assured, these are NOT petty or jealous attacks. In fact, they are honest concerns that are difficult to express in this situation. Most of all, those that I've talked to want to know what the Trib has to say for itself. What of their claim, a fundamental principle for their ethics. Can disclosure cure all ills?  

Oh, I have also gone out-of-market to be sure to get plenty of on-the-record comments. This is a larger-than-Texas issue. We ALL share the same fate if we fail to arrive at a workable, ethical business model for journalism in the Online Era.  

Please, no.

Some seem to think this is some kind of conflict, a cause where we should be taking up sides. I don't see the value in such "closure" now. It just seems to be a justification for animosity. Let me repeat and expand on a response I made to one harsh critic:

....the dislike I see for Evan Smith is inappropriate. Let's give the man credit - he HAS set something quite remarkable in motion. Part of the problem is that our sense of how great the Trib might or should be can belittle what is. Now, that's an enviable predicament for a not-for-profit.

And as for those calling for his head? The real concern is what to do if he moves on to other challenges.

...If he isn't already, (Smith) certainly SHOULD be on the short list at PBS for when Charlie Rose retires. In fact, one of the major concerns should be what will they do IF he leaves to fill Charlie's shoes at PBS. Has he sufficiently empowered this organization so it has taken on a life of its own, or is it crippled without him?

This doesn't mean I will shy away from the kinds of critiques I've already made about the Trib and other media.

That being said, a clarification seems to be in order.

Some mistakenly understood my last post, a lukewarm reaction to the election Livestream, as being insulting or demeaning. My poor attempt at wit in titling it "The Trouble with Texas Tribbles" succeeded in being provocative. Alas, some misunderstood the meaning of my parody of the celebrated Star Trek TOS episode. Tribbles, it would seem, are fuzzy, harmless critters. Obviously, that is not a positive characterization for a news organization. But that is not all there is to the tribbles! The story's happy ending turns on their ferreting out the Bad Guys.

Tribbles may not be watchdogs, but they get the job done.  

What about events announced AFTER the deadline???

On other notes....SXSW is underway. I had hoped to provide some coverage of some of the more provocative offerings, including an appearance (via teleconferencing) by Edward Snowden. Alas, the SXSW public relations people are one of the only conference people I've encountered that specialize turning media away. I'd successfully pitched an editor at a reputable publication, but they had closed accreditation - even for an event announced after their deadline.  No, they didn't have the professional courtesy to even respond to my request.  

Well, I can still watch on the Texas Tribune's "Livestream"....

###

Tips? Suggestions? Ideas? Drop a line to carl (at) inanityofsanity (dot) com

THE TROUBLE WITH TEXAS TRIBBLES

Looking downtown from SoCo

Living in Austin, I've lost touch with how most people experience Texas politics. I'm walking distance from the capitol. I don't have to worry about parking if I want to testify, participate in a rally, or to just sit in to see government in action. Retail politics, too, has the same immediacy. Watching election returns at a campaign party is a wonderfully social occasion - less so with a losing campaign. Still, I'm used to being in the thick of things if I'm into it at all.

Unfortunately, I've been stricken with what is likely the flu since Sunday. I'd expected it would clear in time so I could head out to a few election events last night. Instead, I decided to "listen to my body." And it said "no, don't go."  So I stayed home and watched the evening 's events unfold from both my TV and my computer. 

As far as the TV's concerned, there wasn't much. I don't have cable, so I had to wait for the returns on the local news. In the meantime, the broadcast schedule droned on as if were any other day. Actually, that's just what it was for most Texans - a day like any other. The vast majority declined to exercise their franchise. Most of what was decided was decided by default.

Texans did their usual - from the Texas Civic Health index

Much to the chagrin of Democrats, their all-out effort to turn non-voters into active participants in our democratic society apparently yielded little in the way of results. The peculiar status quo here in Texas seems sure and steady. We live in a modern industrialized society reaping the benefits of science and technology. However, political control is conferred on those who profess a pre-scientific understanding of the world. The Internet and other communication technologies are used to reinforce these beliefs.

Civic engagement at home

I spent a good deal of time in the evening exposed to another highly touted response to this civic disengagement. I experienced the Texas Tribune as it is meant to be experienced - online. Usually, I go to their in-person events. Here, I had another go at the "Livestream" phenom - various reporters talking about races in-between victory speeches and the like from campaigns. I watched off-and-on while looking for the latest on particular campaigns. How was it? It was bad "live" TV, a notch above the stuff you surf past on local cable access. The "plus" is that the Tribbles actually have something intelligent to say, even if they do better putting their words into type instead.

So this is the answer to civic disengagement? Then I switched to the TV news. They had less to say, but polished it up more. 

Then, this morning, I reconnected with the Trib's Livestream to see the "Post-Primary Debrief," a reporter's roundable. It was a lively talk about who fared well or worse in the horserace. After the reporters had their say, it went to a Q&A. It seems that at least one non-politico made it to the room. He asked about the real-life significance of this news event.

A round table with no table at all

'That was a terrific overview of the politics of the results last night. I would love to hear your assessment of the impact on governance - of the ability of Texas elected officials to come together to address the great problems and challenges that Texas faces."

A momentary pause followed.   

'We're not going to hear much of that until at least November," said Emily Ramshaw, Editor.

 

'....The voice last night was not about governance. That's not what we're talking about at this point....' explained Ross Ramsey, Executive Editor and Co-Founder.

Maybe that explains the pervasive disengagement of the public. Politics, it would seem, suffers from civic disengagement, too. 

   

The hour-long session ended about 10 minutes short for a lack of questions from the audience.

###

Tips? Suggestions? Ideas? Drop a line to carl (at) inanityofsanity (dot) com

TRIBULATIONS OF THE TEXAS TRIB, PART III: Introducing Your Integrity Cop

Not always self-appointed

I suppose I qualify as one of the dreaded "self-appointed integrity cops" that the Texas Tribune's Evan Smith derides in the Nieman Lab Series' year-end "Predictions for Journalism 2014." 

  

Yes, there's nothing more obnoxious. But, in my defense, I wasn't always self-appointed.  Once, I'd be assigned to the task by the editors of several trade publications covering the media industry. I hadn't really expected to get caught up in this again here, but seem to get drawn back to my old beat time and again.

Now, I had intended to simply follow up my previous prefatory postings here with my take on James Moore's pointed criticism of Smith and the Texas Trib. Unfortunately, I'm a compulsive researcher.  I started digging. I've started looking at other, similar organizations to understand the Trib in context. What are the norms and standards in the industry today? I've also reached out to get other perspectives and wanted to give the Trib a chance to participate. I sent a few questions for Ross Ramsey, the Trib's Executive Editor and Co-Founder, about the new ethics policy posted at the start of the year. He referred me to Emily Ramshaw who heads the Trib's editorial operations. She's spearheaded the task of crafting the ethics policy and has agreed to meet to talk about it. We will set a time to meet after the primary on Tuesday. ***see FULL DISCLOSURE below.

  

In other words, I've got my work cut out for me. I hope to be back with a full report before long. 

Chat about it on FB

In the meantime, let me say a few things about James Moore's expose of the Trib.  First, it is massive. The four-part investigation comes to some 10,000 words! It is extensively researched and gives numerous examples of conflicts of interest that are troubling. Moore seems to have hit a nerve with it. His criticism has been widely read. I've chatted about it on background with several people in the news business while reaching out for on-the-record comments. At the very least, this raises fundamental issues about the Trib's business model - and practices.

All else being equal, I would expect the Trib to respond to it directly. Unfortunately, Moore's strident tone gives cause for not doing so. That leaves a vacuum. My goal is to fill that by providing an opportunity for the Trib to address the concerns raised. 

While I am an unknown to the Texas Tribune and most of the media community here, I believe I am well-suited to give a fair hearing to a newfangled online public media news organization. Allow me to introduce myself. I have both a long experience reporting on the business of New Media as well as a hands-on experience in public media.

"Checking in from the CyberScene with today's website..."

After returning to radio as a reporter/news announcer in New England in the mid-90's,  I created "CyberScene: The Socially Significant Cyberspace." The Dot Com era had just dawned and I saw an opportunity. Cyberscene was a daily short-form (2 minute) feature for public radio highlighting an interesting website. I started writing about New Media for broadcast and audio trade publications to help publicize the program and to establish my credibility. 

This was an incredibly creative time in industry, and I got to talk with some of the most innovative minds about the evolution of communication amidst this revolution in media. Cyberscene folded after about two years, but I kept writing about New Media till the bubble burst in 2001. Sadly, much of my work was published before the publications even had websites. You can't find much of it online. Still, here's a few late samples, like this interview with Vinton Cerf in Radio World, or looking ahead to the way streaming media would alter the broadcast landscape for Broadcasting & Cable in 2001. 

Getting the cover is a thrill!

Putting New Media in a broader cultural context was one signature of my writing. I am not trained as a journalist. My undergraduate obsession was ancient moral philosophy. Plato's project was, in part, piecing together how the Athenian democracy destroyed itself - how sophists and political opportunists brought the great city-state to ruin. How to develop new communication tools to see through deception and manipulation for effective governance? This these issues remain vital as we see our governance turn to gridlock with our contemporary culture of spin and sophistry. 

Another less esoteric thing that distinguished my work was my skepticism for the Dot Com bubble. I simply didn't buy into the buzz. I was the guy asking tough questions like "how do you plan to monetize that?" "How is your business plan sustainable?" "What happens when you burn through your VC money?"

Banging out stories through the Dot Com era

Despite my caution, I wasn't spared when the bubble burst. I had to rebuild my freelance business as New Media advertisers vanished and page counts dropped.

What have I been doing since?  This may be what fully qualifies me here - I joined the dark Side of the Force and started a successful public relations practice! So I know a few things about how lax journalistic ethics opens PR opportunities.

Here's the reality. Even "legit" journalists under-the-gun can and will make compromises over time to survive in our PR-driven culture. I remember one of my greatest PR triumphs was when a staff reporter at the New York Times took a piece I wrote and published it almost whole. In fact, all the reporter did was freshen up the quotes - and give it a MORE positive spin (my trademark is striking a gritty, realistic tone that doesn't look like the usual PR puff pieces). Yes, my client was ecstatic. What a coup! After, I've had more than a moment of despair. I wonder if the folks working Judith Miller felt the same way.

BONUS CLIP: Check this feature about KTRS-FM, the NPR affiliate in Marfa.  

***FULL DISCLOSURE***

Now, since I'm taking on the task of reporting on journalistic ethics, it is appropriate that I give a COMPREHENSIVE disclaimer. I have no formal relationship with the Trib beyond what I disclosed before - I have donated money and been an active participant both at the Tribfest and various public forums they have hosted. In other words, I'm one of those folks asking questions. Also, at the Tribfest last Fall, I got into a discussion with April Hinkle, Chief Revenue Officer. I asked her about pitching some audience engagement/UGC concepts I'd developed for public media elsewhere. I got no response from my email follow-up. Likewise, I passed along some research I turned up to Ross Ramsey - no interest. I have had conversations with Ramshaw about Greg Abbott's use of the title "General Abbott" and also to alert her (along with other reporters) about some things I've turned up in my research here.  Oh, I also wanted to be sure that The Inanity of Sanity is on the list of political blogs when they start covering that scene sometime this Spring as part of an initiative to add more commentary. 

The upshot?  I have no business with the Trib. I am not angling for anything with or for them beyond that typical of other bloggers on the scene.

What?  Is this just some kind of public service I'm offering here?  Well, I have done such things in the past.

In 2007, I went to great lengths to expose the unethical conduct of the Media Bloggers Association, something of a precursor to the Franklin Center for Government & Public Integrity. The Franklin Center is the Koch-funded outfit that I caught red-handed for their lack of journalistic integrity in January. They "reported" on a complaint filed at the Texas Ethics Commission against Wendy Davis by one of their own. 

###

Tips? Suggestions? Ideas? Drop a line to carl (at) inanityofsanity (dot) com