Well, here's a story that failed to live up to the promise of its headline. I had wondered what the beaten man had done that would cause the Farmington man to charge after him. ::snark::
My, what fine rhetorical skills you have. Obviously, on par with your reading comprehension.
Eddie said there must be an option, although he's decided a signed option is not "a deal." The person interviewed by the Advertiser said there's been no deal, no option, and not even so much as a final site selection.
From the Sun Journal
Oxford casino site chosen
By Leslie H. Dixon, Staff Writer
Published Oct 01, 2010
PARIS — Investors in the proposed $184 million casino and resort have signed an option for land in Oxford, one of them said Thursday night.
“It's over 100 acres. It's a beautiful piece of land,” investor Bob Bahre told the Sun Journal after the public informational meeting on the proposed development.
Bahre, one of the investors with casino developer Black Bear Entertainment, said a deposit has been made on the property and will be forfeited after 30 days if the statewide vote on Nov. 2 to allow the casino fails.
From the Advertiser Dmocrat
OPS is not Casino Site, Says Owner
by Matt Hongoltz-Hetling
Published Oct 07, 2010
The actual casino location remains undisclosed, although Bob Bahre told the Sun Journal last week that an option had been signed for a parcel of land in excess of 100 acres. Take Charge Maine spokesperson Randy Seaver says that this is not the case. “The [sic] the best of my knowledge, it is not down to one site,” said Seaver. “We're not going to put the cart before the horse.” After the November vote, said Seaver, “we'll present out [sic] ideal site to the town.” Oxford Town Manager Michael Chammings has declined to release the location of the casino, citing an economic development exception to freedom of information laws.
I'd be perfectly content with an admission that a site has been found, and a purchase and sale agreement signed, but that addition information cannot be disclosed, due to terms and conditions, such as a final sale being contingent on the outcome of the November 2 vote.
But that's NOT what happened.
What happened is that Bob Bahre said deal was signed for a lot. His partners in Black Bear Entertainment then came back and said, no, there has been no deal. In fact, they claimed, it was premature to even pick a site, let alone sign a deal on one.
Well, if that's all true, then either Bob is a liar, or his partners are. Moreover, if his partners are to be believed, they've invested bags of cash on pushing a development deal that, two weeks out, still has no site selected. Taking a pretty big chance, don't you think, on the vote going their way but nobody in the allowable area being willing to sell them the needed property?
Again, the preponderance of evidence seems to indicate that Black Bear Entertainment has something to hide. Personally, I'm not willing to take a chance on being sprung with any post-Election Day surprises.
The problem with casinos is that, unlike a manufacturing facility, such as the Grover’s gundrilling shop, they do not create anything. As such, they do not produce wealth. Instead, they merely push around wealth which already exists within the economy.
Surely, a casino will bring some nominal economic benefit to the Oxford Hills, but, on a macroeconomic level, casinos are poor development tools. The time to build one is when the economy is at a peak, and people have money to spend, not when it’s languishing in a deep valley and the public is willing to do anything for a few service-sector jobs.
Desperation is a bad environment for decent decision making. Already, we have seen some questionable activity logged on behalf of the casino group. Very little has been asked by the Sun Journal about the seeming secret, sweetheart deal to buy the harness racing track at the Oxford Fairgrounds. When queried on why they need to own the facility, casino investors, speaking though a mouthpiece, will only say, “It’s required in the bill.” But THEY wrote the bill, so the question stands, why is it in there? Does Hollywood Slots own the Bangor Raceway?
For years, Suzanne Grover pleaded with businesses and individuals in the Oxford Hills to give their money to track construction, “for the good of the community.” Now that it’s been built into what, by all accounts, is a first-class facility, she gets own it? Really? And would that sale have gone through had Grover not been president of the Oxford Fair, as well as a casino investor?
Because of the secrecy – indeed, the initial denials – that’s accompanied the sale, one can only presume that it’s a control issue. Perhaps Grover, having taken the brunt of ill-feelings, and accusations of financial mismanagement, from fair folks she’s shunted aside over the years, wants to own the track, in case she ever is ousted from the fair board? Who’s to say? Grover has done a lot for the Oxford Hills – that goes without question – but until she steps forward to answer questions, we can only speculate about her motivations. The behavior that has accompanied this casino deal necessarily calls those motivations into question.
Uncommon recalcitrance on the part of Black Bear Entertainment also leaves us to speculate in other areas. Where will the casino be built? Who will manage it? We don’t know. BBE won’t say.
Should we, out of desperation for jobs, simply vote for the casino and trust in the good intentions of its investors? Does the secrecy over the track sale make these folks seem more, or less, worthy of our trust? How about the environmental damage done in the name of Grover’s other fair-related brainchild, the Live Nation concert stage? Does that make it seem more, or less, likely that she will play a proper managerial hand in construction of a casino?
And lastly, I leave you with this: The possible location of the casino.
Because of Bob Bahre’s late involvement, there has been much rumor-mongering claiming the casino might be built on the grounds of Oxford Plains Speedway. But keep in mind, Bahre also owns a 40-acre lot adjacent to the Oxford Fairgrounds, where he once hoped to build a Lowe’s. Is the secrecy surrounding the casino location due to the fact that it will be built partly on this site, and partly on the grounds of the fair? How are we to know whether, like the sale of the horse track, a deal has already been agreed to under the table, or that Grover won’t seek to push one through after the vote, with the current fair board cow-towing to her demands?
Casinos are poor development tools, but folks should be free to waste money building them, just as they should be free to waste money frequenting them. However, this particular deal is too much of a gamble. The last Oxford casino was a hot mess, but at least everything relating to its development was on the table, where it could be addressed. This deal simply seems enshrouded in too much secrecy.
When questions are asked about a developer’s intentions, and the answer amounts to little more than, “Trust us,” the vote must be, “No.”
There is an error in the section about Eliot Cutler. These two sentences are incorrect: “In the 1970s, he worked for U.S. Sen. Edmund Muskie and President Jimmy Carter. He then worked in China before returning to the U.S. in 1999.”
First, it gives the impression that Cutler worked in China throughout the ‘80s and ‘90s. Secondly, he worked there for two years, from 2007 to 2009.
Cutler moved back to Maine in 1999. Between then and his stint in the Carter administration he ran Cutler & Stansfield, which he once described to me as “the nation’s second largest environmental law firm.” The firm’s main claim to fame may well be the work it did to get the Denver International Airport built in an environmentally responsible manner. In a January, 2010 interview, one of the last I conducted before leaving journalism, Cutler was unquestionably proud of the balance his firm struck, making certain the environment was respected while also ensuring the development happened, repeatedly freeing it from regulatory red tape.
It was only after his firm merged with another that Cutler began his substantive work with China, opening a branch office there for the new, combined firm. Although he lived in China from 2007 to 2009, he claims to have maintained residency in Maine, repeatedly pointing out that although he kept in touch with his native state throughout his life, he “returned for good” in 1999.
I understand the Sun Journal “news hole” is not large enough for Mr. Mistler to give a FULL accounting of each candidate’s background. However, I think he owes a correction for the glaring error in his mini-bio of Eliot Cutler, which could have been avoided with a simple Google search.
Recently, on Twitter, I engaged a couple of editors (one from the Sun Journal) in a debate about what's wrong with newspapers today. It didn't go very far, bogging down almost instantly in the old we-know-what-we're-doing hurbris.
However, the point I tried to make was this: It is lazy thinking to blame the woes of the newspaper industry on the internet, or the economy. The biggest problem with newspapers is newspapers themselves, I argued. By and large, the product sucks. One reason is that the Gunning-Fogg index, the inverted triangle, and other precepts of "good" journalism developed during the past 50 years, have conspired to suck all the life out of newspaper writing. Pick up any Maine newspaper from the 1940s and you'll find that not only was there much more to be had in terms of actual content, the stories were infinitely more interesting to read.
Then comes Mark LaFlamme.
This article is not long, but it gives all the facts and, best of all, really gives the reader a sense of having been at the meeting in question. Anyone reading this article, whether today or 100 years from now, can't help but come away with a real feeling for what it was like to live in this time, and in this place.
Now, there are certainly a lot of charged, subjective words in this piece, and a "good" editor might have been excused for wielding the red pen like a sickle. But I'm so glad that whoever reviewed Mark's copy saw fit to let it alone, allowing him to report his impression of what he observed at this meeting.
Now, I grant you, a different reporter might have come way with different impressions, might have found different things to highlight. But I will always look for a LaFlamme byline because, over time, I've learned to trust his impressions, and because a Mark LaFlamme article is simply a joy to read.
That's what newspapers need to succeed, reporters who can write. When I hit the Powerball and start my own newspaper, Mark LaFlamme will be the first person I headhunt from the Sun Journal.
It's funny that you think a vote for Jenkins hurts Mitchell, while I suspect they'll be votes that might have otherwise been cast for LePage. Maybe we're both right, which helps Cutler. Either way, between us we've stumbled onto what's really at stake. Jenkins himself, as a candidate, is irrelevant.
I can forgive the Sun Journal for getting all excited about Jenkins' candidacy when he first announced it, back when neither he nor the paper seemed to realize that one has to file as a write-in candidate, and that there is a deadline to do so. In Maine, if the voter writes in a name not printed on the ballot, that vote is simply ignored if the person who has been written in has not officially notified the state that he or she will accept those votes.
But, after all, why bother checking election law on such matters? Jenkins announced a deadline for a decision, based on Facebook love, that was well past the filing deadline, and the Sun Journal dutifully trumpeted the news. Even after I clued-in an editor who'd been tweeting the topic, the Sun Journal went a couple of days and a few stories before mentioning the fact, waiting, in fact, until Jenkins himself had got the memo. Why, after all, tell readers Jenkins clearly had no idea what he was doing.
Actually, I have an idea why, but let's not go there.
Anyway, today we find the Sun Journal still tripping over itself regarding election law. You see, unless that law has changed very recently, one does not take out nomination papers to run as a write-in.
If Washuk, her editor, the copy editor, a proofreader, or a fact checker has applied only a few cells of grey matter to the issue, they'd have soon seen its inherent illogic. Even without checking Maine election law, someone at the Sun Journal should have said, "Hey, wait, that does't make any sense." The purpose of collecting signatures is to show the minimum public support required to have one's name printed on the ballot. Why collect signatures that can only be verified and notarized after the deadline for one to proclaim, "Hey, I know it's too late to print my name on the ballot, but if anybody should write in my name, please don't throw that vote out."
You see, Jenkins did not take out nomination papers. He simply collected a form, which he must sign and have notarized, saying he wants any votes for him to be counted.
So, assuming Jenkins returns the form by the deadline, votes for him will be tallied. Of course, anyone who does vote for Jenkins is throwing away his or her vote just as effectively as if the man never ran at all.
Jenkins has to know he hasn't a prayer of winning. The real question should be, why is he bothering? No, I take that back, the real question should be, which of the other candidates is hurt most by any votes cast in L/A for Jenkins?
Let's do the math: Most, if not all, votes cast for Jenkins will come from L/A. This area has a very large percentage of Franco voters. There seems to be a perception, real or imagined, that Franco voters might go all-in for LePage. The question of his wife's residency notwithstanding, Mr. LePage is from Waterville. Isn't the fella cited as the spark in Jenkins' electoral ambitions from the Waterville/Winslow area?
I would ask if this person, a Republican, has had any negative relations with Paul LePage. I'd ask if he, or Jenkins, or any of Jenkins' entourage, have taken meetings with anybody from the Mitchell or Cutler camps. I'm not saying there is a conspiracy at work here, I'm just saying there are questions that need to be asked. Chief among these questions is, who benefits from a John Jenkins candidacy?
Newspapers have a responsibility to advertisers to craft headlines and ledes that will move the product off newsstands. That goes without saying. But they also must not irresponsibly excite their readership. This, as one might readily imagine, can be a thin and dangerous line to walk. Today, the Sun Journal failed.
I suspect that, today, CMMC is a low-morale nut house. Personally, I'm not so certain a hospital is the place in which I'd most like to incite a panic over job security.
Unfortunately, whether due to lack of resources, or a deficiency of initiative, the Sun Journal took the easy way out on this important story. Just as the paper recently ignored the deep, underlying issues on Lisbon Street in order to present the happy fluff, it appears to have glossed over the complicated details of the Central Maine Healthcare story in order to trade in shock value.
In my humble opinion, after the print headline, "Layoffs Loom," and the lede, "looking to lay off employees," nothing else in this story is going to resonate with the public, no matter how factual. The Sun Journal has gone for the jugular, all but declaring job losses to be imminent, and that's all anyone is going to take away from this article.
However, in my opinion, the Sun Journal still has an opportunity to salvage this story with a compelling and relevant Sunday package. Expand on today's effort with the following:
1. An article by Steve Mistler in which each of the five gubernatorial candidates address how they'd address the MaineCare debt, as well as their ideas for reform, if needed, of Maine's healthcare system.
2. Rural ambulace services in the area report declining revenues from lower call volumes, presumably because people, even if insured, are not availing themselves of the service, out of financial fear. Is the same true of United? Send Mark LeFlamme on a ride-along to talk to patients and EMTs.
3. Is it true that MaineCare users overuse the hospital while regular people, even if insured, are shying away? What are the real numbers? What does this say about the regional economy as a whole, in terms of recovery or double-dip? Send a reporter to find out.
4. It can be argued that CMMC is the economic engine which drives L/A. How about a Bonnie Washuk piece on how the hospital impacts other businesses in the area?
5. Given the furor today's story is likely to create, send Tice to talk to employees, on or off the record, about their fears, or lack thereof, for their jobs.
6. How will the advent of Obamacare impact the hospital's finances and the delivery of services? Is help on the way, or are things likely to get worse? Put a reporter on that.
7. Solicit columns for the editorial page, addresing opposing views of the MaineCare crisis and/or the management of CMMC. Also give the CMMC CEO a chance to address readers directly. Plus, gotta have a cartoon.
8. Is the MaineCare debt a convenient excuse? Tice did a good job addressing the natural question which arises, how does the new construction impact the financials, but questions linger. Is it possible to determin the degree to which management at CMMC is responsible for the system's budget deficit. I bet the Sun Journal has a reporter on staff good enough to find out.
9. We could probably use a follow-up on the board-member salary issue.
10. There's probably a dozen different additional angles the fine editors at the Sun Journal can think of, just off the top of their heads. Call together the staff and pass out the assignments. Sunday is right around the corner, but I bet you can make it. Give us a complete package that really delves into all of the issues at stake, including all the stakeholders involved in the issue.
I think the Sun Journal is capable of delivering something really important which drives and facilitates the public conversation. However, today's story was not it. One screamin' lede announcing that people are about to lose their jobs does more to damage the credibility of the Sun Journal than that of Central Maine Healthcare.
There appears to me a larger story lurking under the surface of Labrador Pond. Only months ago, Sumner Selectmen were tied in knots, fretting over the fact that some mysterious person, or persons, was piling large stones on top of the spillway, making the pond's water level higher than what it should be, given the height of the dam.
Now, if I read Mary's story correctly, selectmen are concerned that sand bags since placed at the site might wash away, lowering the water level to a point predicated by the height of the dam.
I'm not saying Mary made a mistake. I'm certain she copied down what was said precisely. Nor am I saying there's anything particularly nefarious being practiced by the town. I just think there's a data point missing somewhere that, when noted, will being everything into perfect sense.
Still, I think there is an interesting story to be had at this dam, relating to local v. State control of the environment. If I understand correctly, locals for decades raised and lowered the water level depending on the needs of the season. Then, a few years ago, DEP came in and mandated construction of the dam, insisting that the water level would henceforth remain at a uniform level. The town has agonized over control of the dam ever since and, it seems, not a years goes by without pond issues swamping debate as some select board meeting.
While Sumner Selectmen are to be thanked for not waiting decades between revaluations, as many towns do, their choice of an assessor appears to be lacking.
O'Donnell's folks never entered my home, so I'm not sure how they were able to factor in closet space, as Norton claims. During the last revaluation a few years ago, O'Donnell never visited my property at all, assessing me for a basement, even though I have none. When I complained at that time, Norton told me the assessor does not need to physically go to the property in order to calculate a fair assessment. Now, O'Donnell's folks were kind enough to admit the error, and to make a reduction on my assessment, but then the town clerk decided of her own accord to reverse the credit. As it was explained to me, every property in my tax "neighborhood" pays a base price for a foundation and well, whether it has a foundation, or not.
Why O'Donnell did not know that, I can not explain, nor can I fathom why we pay an assessor when the town clerk can unilaterally "fix" tax cards as she sees fit. I mean, why not just have her do the revaluation?
Oh, well, I don't know a lot of things. What I do know is that the little guy can't fought city hall, or even the town office, and, depending on who you are, the official answer will always be whatever it takes to shut you up. I didn't bother to fight my valuation this time. I didn't even bother to look at it. The letter's still sitting on the table, unopened. There's just no profit in giving a crap.
But there is profit to be made for some folks, and here's one thing I do know, based on recent history as a guide. Given a new tax bill, Summer's selectmen - already among the highest paid in the area - will get a raise at next year's town meeting.
Why was Education Day canceled? It seems a basic enough question. Doesn't appear to have been asked, though.
I have not seen last week's issue of the Sun Journal's subsidiary paper, The Advertiser Democrat, but I'm told it was interesting this week, with one story announcing cancelation of Education Day right next to another one that said, essentially, never mind that other story, it's back on. So, if it's true that Education Day was off, then on, then back off again, it seems there's a larger story here.
I just wish there was someplace I could go to get the news.
I don't blame Leslie, of course. She's a fine reporter. I imagine she and the Sun Journal were forced to skimp on this story because of all the time and resources dedicated to detailing the involvement of Fair president Suzanne Grover in the sale of the harness racing track to the casino group, in which she is a principle investor. Yup, that story should be along any day now . . .
I beat up Steve Mistler on his first article for the Sun Journal, about the Maine Heritage Policy Center, but I must say, I've been impressed with his work since then. More importantly, I like the volume of work I'm seeing. The Sun Journal seems to be getting its money's worth.
I also like that Mistler appears to be thinking out of the conventional-wisdom box. There has been much hand-wringing online since the PPP poll was released, along the lines of Melcher's "real threat" assessment, but Mistler's is the first report I've seen to look past LePage. As this aticle notes, the crux of the matter is support, or lack therof, for Cutler.
Of course, polls are best at revealing trends -- not so much outcomes. And, with just one poll, the PPP results don't give us a any trend line. Use of other polling, such as the Rasmussan poll, or any candidate's internal polling, can reveal maco trends, if there are enough data points, but not direct trends from the PPP result.
Still, unless something significant and unexpected happens, it does appear Cutler will act as a spoiler, at best. Libby's best chance may be to switch from attacking LePage to hitting Cutler, in order to win over some of his supporters.
Funny thing Old Bill, while I'm aware of who Glenn Beck is, mainly from seeing clips of him spoofed on the Daily Show, I've never actually seen an episode of his show. I also haven't heard Rush's show in more than 15 years. Also, I think I'd rather have bamboo shoots driven under my fingernails than listen to a Sarah Palin speech. But ojie's right, I must be a conservative. LOL
Well, now, ojhuig, here's what I expect: I expect you to communicate clearly and effectively, so I don't have to waste my time on research to understand what the heck you're talking about. You've yet to so dazzle me with brilliance that I'd consider it time well spent. I also expect you to go easy on the pejoratives until you know who you're talking to. If you'd seen some of the knock- down, drag- outs I've had with neo-cons, you'd hardly hurl an invective like "conservative" at me. The real world is no more liberal-or-conservative than it is black-or-white. I ain't your boogeyman.
This article is a perfect example of why many people deride the media, especially the Maine media, including the Sun Journal, as left-leaning propagandists.
In the third paragraph - right around where we usually find the "nut graph," i.e. the reason the article is being written - John Piotti gets to say the MHPC is "often misrepresenting the truth." It is not until the 17th graph that Tarren Bragdon gets a chance to say he's "confident" in the work done by his group. Now, when I was working as a reporter, I would often get dressed down for writing an article that long, in total. Apparently, not having confidence in the reader's they serve, the conventional wisdom of newspaper editors is that "nobody will read that far."
And yet, we get 15 graphs of words maligning the integrity of the MHPC, such as "misrepresenting the truth," "attempts to spread its ideology," "cause for concern," "cloaked," "extreme right," and "pushes, if not violates, political lobbying limits."
We also get a donor, albeit several steps removed from the MHPC, cast as a moustache-twirling "oil baron." The tenuous connection seems to be that an AFP group funded by this donor, launched in Maine several years after the founding of the MHPC, happens to be run by a Bragdon brother. That siblings might have similar values, and so might pursue similar careers is not explored. Instead, we are led to believe there must be some nefarious connection. After all, while Sun Journal reporter Steve Mistler appears to do no original research, he's happy to paraphrase the New Yorker, which, we're told, can assure us AFP works are merely "billed as education positions," while they "ultimately benefit the organization's anonymous [though named as Koch Industries] corporate donors." No such charge is leveled at the MHPC directly, just guilt by association.
Meanwhile, Mistler takes a jab at Maine voters, who have a "suspicion," that government is wasteful. To back this seeming conspiracy theory, Mistler tells us the MHPC "recently" posted salaries of all state employees. Given that this happened more than three years ago, Mr. Mistler must have in his AP Stylebook a different definition for "recent" than was printed in mine. Still, the allegation does serve to advance the allegedly insidious nature of the MHPC.
Finally, only after all of this -- deep enough down that most editors will tell you the reader has moved on to the next article -- do we get a tepid defense from Bragdon, who tells us, simply, that he is "confident," in his group's work. Let 'em attack us if they want, he's quoted as saying. Hardly a direct rebuttal.
Of course, by describing libertarians as "anarchists," it would seem Mr. Bragdon betrays his own limited understanding of the accusations hurled at him.
Now, I do not claim Mr. Mistler, or the Sun Journal’s editors, of purposefully trying to pound a nail in the conservative coffin. Heaven's no. What interest would there be in discounting in September a think tank which conservative candidates are sure to lean on as we approach the general election in November?
Rather, I think this story, like last Sunday's Lisbon Street rah-rah, is a perfect example of a newspaper being lazy, and merely finding the story it goes looking for.
All reporters have their biases, of course. The best learn to mitigate those biases. Although such bias is certain to drive what questions a reporter asks, the good reporter tries to ask questions from all points of view and keeps a mind open enough to let the story lead him where it wants to go, not where he or she expects it to end up. A good news story must be not only accurate, and this one seems to be, in a general sense, as far as the facts go, but it must also be fair.
Instead, we have the MHPC pounded on for 15 paragraphs -- including mention of its failed TABOR drives but no reference to Mr. Piotti's failed tax overhaul, which may well give him a mad-on for conservative think tanks of all stripes. Meanwhile, any defense of the MHPC is buried about as far as it can be. At the very least, although it would not have cured all the ills of this article, Mr. Bragdon should have been allowed to express his confidence in the graph immediately following Mr. Piotti's strong accusation.
Until the Sun Journal can do a better job at balancing its coverage, it will continue to be discounted as just another bastion of the "liberal media," and that's too bad, because I know from personal experience that the paper has many outstanding, fair-minded staffers devoted to truth, in all its forms, regardless of the source.
Although a reader comment complaining about a typo in the pothole story was deleted, the comment about "contnue" gets to stand, even though it's no longer clear what Ellis was spoofing.
How odd. I guess I just don't get the ethics of newspaper publishing.
Correcting "right" to "write" was appropriate, but deleting the comment that complained about the typo was not exactly the classiest thing I've ever seen done by the Sun Journal.
The writer of this piece made a bad assumption, Tron. No true Libertarian I know supports subsidized elections. I assure you. the possibility of "Clean Elections" funding plays ZERO part in out attempt to gain official Party status.
Actually, Eastman "retired" in 2005. Since then, he's been raking in roughly $64,000 in annual retirement pay on top of his $103,000 salary, all before benefits.
One other thought . . . granted, former selectmen David Ivey and Troy Ripley did a lot wrong during their tenure, but I wonder if Jean and others in her faction might be ready, now, to cut them some slack. Were they really trying to circumvent the law and manage the town to their own ends, as Smart claimed then, or might they have simply been in a position similar to the one Smart now finds herself in, where they "thought, honest to God, [they] had followed the procedure the way [they were] supposed to?"
Only by acknowledgeing that both sides make mistakes can Paris avoid the factionalism we see in state and federal politics, where ethics seem defined as, "deeds that are just fine when done by my side."
Oh, and for what it's worth, with the sweeper only needed for three weeks, did selectmen look into the possibility of renting one, leasing one from a nearby town, or hiring an outside contractor to do the work. All are options, if available, which I have to imagine would cost less than $46,875. Also, I am curious how the FEMA reimbursement money was used to buy a street sweeper. Unless I am missing or misread something, that's kind of money is generally reserved for fixing storm damage, or mitigating the possibility of future damage. I'm not sure how it can be applied to this purchase.
Jean Smart talking town business outside of official meetings and arranging for hastily-called special sessions to pass pet projects?! Why, I'd call that "a kind of lawlessness." LOL
The above article -- posted to the Sun Journal website in Sunday, April 18 -- says the Libertarian Party of Maine (LPME) convention "is Saturday." That may cause some readers to think the event will be next Saturday, April 24. In point of fact, the convention was held yesteday, Saturday, April 17.
A press release will be issued early next week, once details of its next meeting are finalized, but I can share now that the new seven-member executive committee elected at the convention is as follows:
Chairman: Shawn Levasseur, of Rockland Vice-Chair: James Oaksun Dompkowski, of South Portland Treasurer: Jorge Maderal, of Brunswick Secretary: Wm. Duke Harrington, of Sumner 1st District Rep.: Sue Poulin, of Casco 2nd District Rep.: vacant At-Large Rep.: Brent Tweed, of North Berwick
If you are an advocate of smaller government, lower taxes and greater personal freedom, please join us at www.lpme.org, or on the Maine Libertarians page on Facebook.
I'm not sure what to believe. Either A) Only Oxford voters have a say and residents of the other seven SAD 17 towns can go pound sand, or B) The cat who writes headlines for the Sun Journal does not actually read the stories.
I'm pretty sure this is not what Leslie meant, but the sixth graph makes it sound as if all custodial services are being cut at the high school, and that Paris and Rowe elementary schools will be closed.
Perhaps, " . . . and some custodial services at the high school, as well as at Paris and Rowe elementary schools."
And while Tony may poo-poo her history lesson, he can't talk down the history of human behavior, which hasn't changed much since the days of Homer. People want to get something for nothing, and, as such, we can expect people without paid subscriptions to nurf articles from pals with.
Newspaper publishers used to relish this behavior under the old revenue model, to the point of touting it to advertisers as "pass-through readership" i.e. "every issue is read by three people, so our 20k in sales is really 60k in readers."
A move to paid online subscriptions essentially locks out those extra 40k readers, which can only deepen the detrimental affect new media has on dead-tree adver-fieds.
Tony, instead of saying, "If we produce a great product, people will want to pay us for it," you should be telling yourself, "If we produce a great product, people will want to access it, and advertisers will pay to be in front of those eyeballs."
The conventional wisdom that online news sites should be subscription based is as fatuous as the conventional wisdom that the internet was killing print. No, what's been killing print is that the newspaper is stuffed with AP filler from three states away that means nothing to local readers.
Try this, walk up to anyone with a paper in front of them in Simones' and ask, "Anything in the paper today?" I guarantee you said person will look at the three-inch story about some fire in Vermont and shrug, "Eh, there's never anything in here." However, fill that same three inches with last night's knock-down, drag-out selectboard debate, three towns over, about transfer station hours, and you'll end up in a 40 minute row with Mr. Shrugsalot about what a bunch of boneheads they all are in Town Threefromhere.
The news needs to be hyper-local and needs to be tailored so that the content matches the audience and the delivery platform. The worst thing newspapers do is attempt to duplicate their print efforts online. THAT, will cannibalize readers.
Instead, my mantra is, "Web says what; print says why."
Online stories should be short snippets of info as close to immediate as possible, covering who, what, when and where only. For the morning print addition, and subsequent online articles, build on that, adding a bit more color, for a story just long enough to get grandpa through his morning cup of coffee with a little sumpin'-sumpin' left over to fill time at the water cooler.
Make the Sunday edition (or Sun Media's weekly papers) the showcase for expanded feature-length stories, where you add more color, along with generous helpings of the how and the why. Refer from that edition back online for additional data, like video/audio from public meetings, photo essays and interactive maps.
This way, instead of having one product in print and online, and making your readers choose, while your weeklies compete with the daily for readers and ad dollars, you create a circle of information in which your various outlets feed and compliment each other. Some readers will get what they need from just one outlet, while others will follow the full circle.
Add to that new, creative revenue streams. For example, create an online gift registry for your socials. People who see a wedding, birth, graduation, etc. in the paper can then go online, click an icon, and send a gift to the celebrants in question from some local business. A manufacturer or other business with little need for local advertising might, as a community service, sponsor a real-time blog covering a local sporting event.
There are lots and lots of solutions to the downturn of the newspaper industry. Paid subscriptions for online content is not one of them.
Recent Comments
Fun with copy editing
Well, here's a story that failed to live up to the promise of its headline. I had wondered what the beaten man had done that would cause the Farmington man to charge after him. ::snark::
Right back atcha dipnard
My, what fine rhetorical skills you have. Obviously, on par with your reading comprehension.
Eddie said there must be an option, although he's decided a signed option is not "a deal." The person interviewed by the Advertiser said there's been no deal, no option, and not even so much as a final site selection.
So, kinda the opposite.
"Loser."
As requested
From the Sun Journal
Oxford casino site chosen
By Leslie H. Dixon, Staff Writer
Published Oct 01, 2010
PARIS — Investors in the proposed $184 million casino and resort have signed an option for land in Oxford, one of them said Thursday night.
“It's over 100 acres. It's a beautiful piece of land,” investor Bob Bahre told the Sun Journal after the public informational meeting on the proposed development.
Bahre, one of the investors with casino developer Black Bear Entertainment, said a deposit has been made on the property and will be forfeited after 30 days if the statewide vote on Nov. 2 to allow the casino fails.
From the Advertiser Dmocrat
OPS is not Casino Site, Says Owner
by Matt Hongoltz-Hetling
Published Oct 07, 2010
The actual casino location remains undisclosed, although Bob Bahre told the Sun Journal last week that an option had been signed for a parcel of land in excess of 100 acres. Take Charge Maine spokesperson Randy Seaver says that this is not the case. “The [sic] the best of my knowledge, it is not down to one site,” said Seaver. “We're not going to put the cart before the horse.” After the November vote, said Seaver, “we'll present out [sic] ideal site to the town.” Oxford Town Manager Michael Chammings has declined to release the location of the casino, citing an economic development exception to freedom of information laws.
Not so fast
I'd be perfectly content with an admission that a site has been found, and a purchase and sale agreement signed, but that addition information cannot be disclosed, due to terms and conditions, such as a final sale being contingent on the outcome of the November 2 vote.
But that's NOT what happened.
What happened is that Bob Bahre said deal was signed for a lot. His partners in Black Bear Entertainment then came back and said, no, there has been no deal. In fact, they claimed, it was premature to even pick a site, let alone sign a deal on one.
Well, if that's all true, then either Bob is a liar, or his partners are. Moreover, if his partners are to be believed, they've invested bags of cash on pushing a development deal that, two weeks out, still has no site selected. Taking a pretty big chance, don't you think, on the vote going their way but nobody in the allowable area being willing to sell them the needed property?
Again, the preponderance of evidence seems to indicate that Black Bear Entertainment has something to hide. Personally, I'm not willing to take a chance on being sprung with any post-Election Day surprises.
Desperation breeds bad deals
The problem with casinos is that, unlike a manufacturing facility, such as the Grover’s gundrilling shop, they do not create anything. As such, they do not produce wealth. Instead, they merely push around wealth which already exists within the economy.
Surely, a casino will bring some nominal economic benefit to the Oxford Hills, but, on a macroeconomic level, casinos are poor development tools. The time to build one is when the economy is at a peak, and people have money to spend, not when it’s languishing in a deep valley and the public is willing to do anything for a few service-sector jobs.
Desperation is a bad environment for decent decision making. Already, we have seen some questionable activity logged on behalf of the casino group. Very little has been asked by the Sun Journal about the seeming secret, sweetheart deal to buy the harness racing track at the Oxford Fairgrounds. When queried on why they need to own the facility, casino investors, speaking though a mouthpiece, will only say, “It’s required in the bill.” But THEY wrote the bill, so the question stands, why is it in there? Does Hollywood Slots own the Bangor Raceway?
For years, Suzanne Grover pleaded with businesses and individuals in the Oxford Hills to give their money to track construction, “for the good of the community.” Now that it’s been built into what, by all accounts, is a first-class facility, she gets own it? Really? And would that sale have gone through had Grover not been president of the Oxford Fair, as well as a casino investor?
Because of the secrecy – indeed, the initial denials – that’s accompanied the sale, one can only presume that it’s a control issue. Perhaps Grover, having taken the brunt of ill-feelings, and accusations of financial mismanagement, from fair folks she’s shunted aside over the years, wants to own the track, in case she ever is ousted from the fair board? Who’s to say? Grover has done a lot for the Oxford Hills – that goes without question – but until she steps forward to answer questions, we can only speculate about her motivations. The behavior that has accompanied this casino deal necessarily calls those motivations into question.
Uncommon recalcitrance on the part of Black Bear Entertainment also leaves us to speculate in other areas. Where will the casino be built? Who will manage it? We don’t know. BBE won’t say.
Should we, out of desperation for jobs, simply vote for the casino and trust in the good intentions of its investors? Does the secrecy over the track sale make these folks seem more, or less, worthy of our trust? How about the environmental damage done in the name of Grover’s other fair-related brainchild, the Live Nation concert stage? Does that make it seem more, or less, likely that she will play a proper managerial hand in construction of a casino?
And lastly, I leave you with this: The possible location of the casino.
Because of Bob Bahre’s late involvement, there has been much rumor-mongering claiming the casino might be built on the grounds of Oxford Plains Speedway. But keep in mind, Bahre also owns a 40-acre lot adjacent to the Oxford Fairgrounds, where he once hoped to build a Lowe’s. Is the secrecy surrounding the casino location due to the fact that it will be built partly on this site, and partly on the grounds of the fair? How are we to know whether, like the sale of the horse track, a deal has already been agreed to under the table, or that Grover won’t seek to push one through after the vote, with the current fair board cow-towing to her demands?
Casinos are poor development tools, but folks should be free to waste money building them, just as they should be free to waste money frequenting them. However, this particular deal is too much of a gamble. The last Oxford casino was a hot mess, but at least everything relating to its development was on the table, where it could be addressed. This deal simply seems enshrouded in too much secrecy.
When questions are asked about a developer’s intentions, and the answer amounts to little more than, “Trust us,” the vote must be, “No.”
Error correction
There is an error in the section about Eliot Cutler. These two sentences are incorrect: “In the 1970s, he worked for U.S. Sen. Edmund Muskie and President Jimmy Carter. He then worked in China before returning to the U.S. in 1999.”
First, it gives the impression that Cutler worked in China throughout the ‘80s and ‘90s. Secondly, he worked there for two years, from 2007 to 2009.
Cutler moved back to Maine in 1999. Between then and his stint in the Carter administration he ran Cutler & Stansfield, which he once described to me as “the nation’s second largest environmental law firm.” The firm’s main claim to fame may well be the work it did to get the Denver International Airport built in an environmentally responsible manner. In a January, 2010 interview, one of the last I conducted before leaving journalism, Cutler was unquestionably proud of the balance his firm struck, making certain the environment was respected while also ensuring the development happened, repeatedly freeing it from regulatory red tape.
It was only after his firm merged with another that Cutler began his substantive work with China, opening a branch office there for the new, combined firm. Although he lived in China from 2007 to 2009, he claims to have maintained residency in Maine, repeatedly pointing out that although he kept in touch with his native state throughout his life, he “returned for good” in 1999.
I understand the Sun Journal “news hole” is not large enough for Mr. Mistler to give a FULL accounting of each candidate’s background. However, I think he owes a correction for the glaring error in his mini-bio of Eliot Cutler, which could have been avoided with a simple Google search.
What a great article
Recently, on Twitter, I engaged a couple of editors (one from the Sun Journal) in a debate about what's wrong with newspapers today. It didn't go very far, bogging down almost instantly in the old we-know-what-we're-doing hurbris.
However, the point I tried to make was this: It is lazy thinking to blame the woes of the newspaper industry on the internet, or the economy. The biggest problem with newspapers is newspapers themselves, I argued. By and large, the product sucks. One reason is that the Gunning-Fogg index, the inverted triangle, and other precepts of "good" journalism developed during the past 50 years, have conspired to suck all the life out of newspaper writing. Pick up any Maine newspaper from the 1940s and you'll find that not only was there much more to be had in terms of actual content, the stories were infinitely more interesting to read.
Then comes Mark LaFlamme.
This article is not long, but it gives all the facts and, best of all, really gives the reader a sense of having been at the meeting in question. Anyone reading this article, whether today or 100 years from now, can't help but come away with a real feeling for what it was like to live in this time, and in this place.
Now, there are certainly a lot of charged, subjective words in this piece, and a "good" editor might have been excused for wielding the red pen like a sickle. But I'm so glad that whoever reviewed Mark's copy saw fit to let it alone, allowing him to report his impression of what he observed at this meeting.
Now, I grant you, a different reporter might have come way with different impressions, might have found different things to highlight. But I will always look for a LaFlamme byline because, over time, I've learned to trust his impressions, and because a Mark LaFlamme article is simply a joy to read.
That's what newspapers need to succeed, reporters who can write. When I hit the Powerball and start my own newspaper, Mark LaFlamme will be the first person I headhunt from the Sun Journal.
Also, Kalle Oakes.
The real issue
It's funny that you think a vote for Jenkins hurts Mitchell, while I suspect they'll be votes that might have otherwise been cast for LePage. Maybe we're both right, which helps Cutler. Either way, between us we've stumbled onto what's really at stake. Jenkins himself, as a candidate, is irrelevant.
Has the law changed?
I can forgive the Sun Journal for getting all excited about Jenkins' candidacy when he first announced it, back when neither he nor the paper seemed to realize that one has to file as a write-in candidate, and that there is a deadline to do so. In Maine, if the voter writes in a name not printed on the ballot, that vote is simply ignored if the person who has been written in has not officially notified the state that he or she will accept those votes.
But, after all, why bother checking election law on such matters? Jenkins announced a deadline for a decision, based on Facebook love, that was well past the filing deadline, and the Sun Journal dutifully trumpeted the news. Even after I clued-in an editor who'd been tweeting the topic, the Sun Journal went a couple of days and a few stories before mentioning the fact, waiting, in fact, until Jenkins himself had got the memo. Why, after all, tell readers Jenkins clearly had no idea what he was doing.
Actually, I have an idea why, but let's not go there.
Anyway, today we find the Sun Journal still tripping over itself regarding election law. You see, unless that law has changed very recently, one does not take out nomination papers to run as a write-in.
If Washuk, her editor, the copy editor, a proofreader, or a fact checker has applied only a few cells of grey matter to the issue, they'd have soon seen its inherent illogic. Even without checking Maine election law, someone at the Sun Journal should have said, "Hey, wait, that does't make any sense." The purpose of collecting signatures is to show the minimum public support required to have one's name printed on the ballot. Why collect signatures that can only be verified and notarized after the deadline for one to proclaim, "Hey, I know it's too late to print my name on the ballot, but if anybody should write in my name, please don't throw that vote out."
You see, Jenkins did not take out nomination papers. He simply collected a form, which he must sign and have notarized, saying he wants any votes for him to be counted.
So, assuming Jenkins returns the form by the deadline, votes for him will be tallied. Of course, anyone who does vote for Jenkins is throwing away his or her vote just as effectively as if the man never ran at all.
Jenkins has to know he hasn't a prayer of winning. The real question should be, why is he bothering? No, I take that back, the real question should be, which of the other candidates is hurt most by any votes cast in L/A for Jenkins?
Let's do the math: Most, if not all, votes cast for Jenkins will come from L/A. This area has a very large percentage of Franco voters. There seems to be a perception, real or imagined, that Franco voters might go all-in for LePage. The question of his wife's residency notwithstanding, Mr. LePage is from Waterville. Isn't the fella cited as the spark in Jenkins' electoral ambitions from the Waterville/Winslow area?
I would ask if this person, a Republican, has had any negative relations with Paul LePage. I'd ask if he, or Jenkins, or any of Jenkins' entourage, have taken meetings with anybody from the Mitchell or Cutler camps. I'm not saying there is a conspiracy at work here, I'm just saying there are questions that need to be asked. Chief among these questions is, who benefits from a John Jenkins candidacy?
Answer: It's not John Jenkins.
More to the story
Newspapers have a responsibility to advertisers to craft headlines and ledes that will move the product off newsstands. That goes without saying. But they also must not irresponsibly excite their readership. This, as one might readily imagine, can be a thin and dangerous line to walk. Today, the Sun Journal failed.
I suspect that, today, CMMC is a low-morale nut house. Personally, I'm not so certain a hospital is the place in which I'd most like to incite a panic over job security.
Unfortunately, whether due to lack of resources, or a deficiency of initiative, the Sun Journal took the easy way out on this important story. Just as the paper recently ignored the deep, underlying issues on Lisbon Street in order to present the happy fluff, it appears to have glossed over the complicated details of the Central Maine Healthcare story in order to trade in shock value.
In my humble opinion, after the print headline, "Layoffs Loom," and the lede, "looking to lay off employees," nothing else in this story is going to resonate with the public, no matter how factual. The Sun Journal has gone for the jugular, all but declaring job losses to be imminent, and that's all anyone is going to take away from this article.
However, in my opinion, the Sun Journal still has an opportunity to salvage this story with a compelling and relevant Sunday package. Expand on today's effort with the following:
1. An article by Steve Mistler in which each of the five gubernatorial candidates address how they'd address the MaineCare debt, as well as their ideas for reform, if needed, of Maine's healthcare system.
2. Rural ambulace services in the area report declining revenues from lower call volumes, presumably because people, even if insured, are not availing themselves of the service, out of financial fear. Is the same true of United? Send Mark LeFlamme on a ride-along to talk to patients and EMTs.
3. Is it true that MaineCare users overuse the hospital while regular people, even if insured, are shying away? What are the real numbers? What does this say about the regional economy as a whole, in terms of recovery or double-dip? Send a reporter to find out.
4. It can be argued that CMMC is the economic engine which drives L/A. How about a Bonnie Washuk piece on how the hospital impacts other businesses in the area?
5. Given the furor today's story is likely to create, send Tice to talk to employees, on or off the record, about their fears, or lack thereof, for their jobs.
6. How will the advent of Obamacare impact the hospital's finances and the delivery of services? Is help on the way, or are things likely to get worse? Put a reporter on that.
7. Solicit columns for the editorial page, addresing opposing views of the MaineCare crisis and/or the management of CMMC. Also give the CMMC CEO a chance to address readers directly. Plus, gotta have a cartoon.
8. Is the MaineCare debt a convenient excuse? Tice did a good job addressing the natural question which arises, how does the new construction impact the financials, but questions linger. Is it possible to determin the degree to which management at CMMC is responsible for the system's budget deficit. I bet the Sun Journal has a reporter on staff good enough to find out.
9. We could probably use a follow-up on the board-member salary issue.
10. There's probably a dozen different additional angles the fine editors at the Sun Journal can think of, just off the top of their heads. Call together the staff and pass out the assignments. Sunday is right around the corner, but I bet you can make it. Give us a complete package that really delves into all of the issues at stake, including all the stakeholders involved in the issue.
I think the Sun Journal is capable of delivering something really important which drives and facilitates the public conversation. However, today's story was not it. One screamin' lede announcing that people are about to lose their jobs does more to damage the credibility of the Sun Journal than that of Central Maine Healthcare.
Duke
On another note . . .
There appears to me a larger story lurking under the surface of Labrador Pond. Only months ago, Sumner Selectmen were tied in knots, fretting over the fact that some mysterious person, or persons, was piling large stones on top of the spillway, making the pond's water level higher than what it should be, given the height of the dam.
Now, if I read Mary's story correctly, selectmen are concerned that sand bags since placed at the site might wash away, lowering the water level to a point predicated by the height of the dam.
I'm not saying Mary made a mistake. I'm certain she copied down what was said precisely. Nor am I saying there's anything particularly nefarious being practiced by the town. I just think there's a data point missing somewhere that, when noted, will being everything into perfect sense.
Still, I think there is an interesting story to be had at this dam, relating to local v. State control of the environment. If I understand correctly, locals for decades raised and lowered the water level depending on the needs of the season. Then, a few years ago, DEP came in and mandated construction of the dam, insisting that the water level would henceforth remain at a uniform level. The town has agonized over control of the dam ever since and, it seems, not a years goes by without pond issues swamping debate as some select board meeting.
Typical
While Sumner Selectmen are to be thanked for not waiting decades between revaluations, as many towns do, their choice of an assessor appears to be lacking.
O'Donnell's folks never entered my home, so I'm not sure how they were able to factor in closet space, as Norton claims. During the last revaluation a few years ago, O'Donnell never visited my property at all, assessing me for a basement, even though I have none. When I complained at that time, Norton told me the assessor does not need to physically go to the property in order to calculate a fair assessment. Now, O'Donnell's folks were kind enough to admit the error, and to make a reduction on my assessment, but then the town clerk decided of her own accord to reverse the credit. As it was explained to me, every property in my tax "neighborhood" pays a base price for a foundation and well, whether it has a foundation, or not.
Why O'Donnell did not know that, I can not explain, nor can I fathom why we pay an assessor when the town clerk can unilaterally "fix" tax cards as she sees fit. I mean, why not just have her do the revaluation?
Oh, well, I don't know a lot of things. What I do know is that the little guy can't fought city hall, or even the town office, and, depending on who you are, the official answer will always be whatever it takes to shut you up. I didn't bother to fight my valuation this time. I didn't even bother to look at it. The letter's still sitting on the table, unopened. There's just no profit in giving a crap.
But there is profit to be made for some folks, and here's one thing I do know, based on recent history as a guide. Given a new tax bill, Summer's selectmen - already among the highest paid in the area - will get a raise at next year's town meeting.
Why
Why was Education Day canceled? It seems a basic enough question. Doesn't appear to have been asked, though.
I have not seen last week's issue of the Sun Journal's subsidiary paper, The Advertiser Democrat, but I'm told it was interesting this week, with one story announcing cancelation of Education Day right next to another one that said, essentially, never mind that other story, it's back on. So, if it's true that Education Day was off, then on, then back off again, it seems there's a larger story here.
I just wish there was someplace I could go to get the news.
I don't blame Leslie, of course. She's a fine reporter. I imagine she and the Sun Journal were forced to skimp on this story because of all the time and resources dedicated to detailing the involvement of Fair president Suzanne Grover in the sale of the harness racing track to the casino group, in which she is a principle investor. Yup, that story should be along any day now . . .
Nice
I beat up Steve Mistler on his first article for the Sun Journal, about the Maine Heritage Policy Center, but I must say, I've been impressed with his work since then. More importantly, I like the volume of work I'm seeing. The Sun Journal seems to be getting its money's worth.
I also like that Mistler appears to be thinking out of the conventional-wisdom box. There has been much hand-wringing online since the PPP poll was released, along the lines of Melcher's "real threat" assessment, but Mistler's is the first report I've seen to look past LePage. As this aticle notes, the crux of the matter is support, or lack therof, for Cutler.
Of course, polls are best at revealing trends -- not so much outcomes. And, with just one poll, the PPP results don't give us a any trend line. Use of other polling, such as the Rasmussan poll, or any candidate's internal polling, can reveal maco trends, if there are enough data points, but not direct trends from the PPP result.
Still, unless something significant and unexpected happens, it does appear Cutler will act as a spoiler, at best. Libby's best chance may be to switch from attacking LePage to hitting Cutler, in order to win over some of his supporters.
Funny thing . . .
Funny thing Old Bill, while I'm aware of who Glenn Beck is, mainly from seeing clips of him spoofed on the Daily Show, I've never actually seen an episode of his show. I also haven't heard Rush's show in more than 15 years. Also, I think I'd rather have bamboo shoots driven under my fingernails than listen to a Sarah Palin speech. But ojie's right, I must be a conservative. LOL
Preview of coming attractions?
THere's been no official announcement that I'm aware of, but I'm guessing Mr. Mistler is the Sun Journal's new statehouse reporter.
Hardly worth my time
Well, now, ojhuig, here's what I expect: I expect you to communicate clearly and effectively, so I don't have to waste my time on research to understand what the heck you're talking about. You've yet to so dazzle me with brilliance that I'd consider it time well spent. I also expect you to go easy on the pejoratives until you know who you're talking to. If you'd seen some of the knock- down, drag- outs I've had with neo-cons, you'd hardly hurl an invective like "conservative" at me. The real world is no more liberal-or-conservative than it is black-or-white. I ain't your boogeyman.
Please help me out,
I guess am not bright enough to understand, ojhuig. "TL;DR" ?? Care to help me out?
Liberal Media?
This article is a perfect example of why many people deride the media, especially the Maine media, including the Sun Journal, as left-leaning propagandists.
In the third paragraph - right around where we usually find the "nut graph," i.e. the reason the article is being written - John Piotti gets to say the MHPC is "often misrepresenting the truth." It is not until the 17th graph that Tarren Bragdon gets a chance to say he's "confident" in the work done by his group. Now, when I was working as a reporter, I would often get dressed down for writing an article that long, in total. Apparently, not having confidence in the reader's they serve, the conventional wisdom of newspaper editors is that "nobody will read that far."
And yet, we get 15 graphs of words maligning the integrity of the MHPC, such as "misrepresenting the truth," "attempts to spread its ideology," "cause for concern," "cloaked," "extreme right," and "pushes, if not violates, political lobbying limits."
We also get a donor, albeit several steps removed from the MHPC, cast as a moustache-twirling "oil baron." The tenuous connection seems to be that an AFP group funded by this donor, launched in Maine several years after the founding of the MHPC, happens to be run by a Bragdon brother. That siblings might have similar values, and so might pursue similar careers is not explored. Instead, we are led to believe there must be some nefarious connection. After all, while Sun Journal reporter Steve Mistler appears to do no original research, he's happy to paraphrase the New Yorker, which, we're told, can assure us AFP works are merely "billed as education positions," while they "ultimately benefit the organization's anonymous [though named as Koch Industries] corporate donors." No such charge is leveled at the MHPC directly, just guilt by association.
Meanwhile, Mistler takes a jab at Maine voters, who have a "suspicion," that government is wasteful. To back this seeming conspiracy theory, Mistler tells us the MHPC "recently" posted salaries of all state employees. Given that this happened more than three years ago, Mr. Mistler must have in his AP Stylebook a different definition for "recent" than was printed in mine. Still, the allegation does serve to advance the allegedly insidious nature of the MHPC.
Finally, only after all of this -- deep enough down that most editors will tell you the reader has moved on to the next article -- do we get a tepid defense from Bragdon, who tells us, simply, that he is "confident," in his group's work. Let 'em attack us if they want, he's quoted as saying. Hardly a direct rebuttal.
Of course, by describing libertarians as "anarchists," it would seem Mr. Bragdon betrays his own limited understanding of the accusations hurled at him.
Now, I do not claim Mr. Mistler, or the Sun Journal’s editors, of purposefully trying to pound a nail in the conservative coffin. Heaven's no. What interest would there be in discounting in September a think tank which conservative candidates are sure to lean on as we approach the general election in November?
Rather, I think this story, like last Sunday's Lisbon Street rah-rah, is a perfect example of a newspaper being lazy, and merely finding the story it goes looking for.
All reporters have their biases, of course. The best learn to mitigate those biases. Although such bias is certain to drive what questions a reporter asks, the good reporter tries to ask questions from all points of view and keeps a mind open enough to let the story lead him where it wants to go, not where he or she expects it to end up. A good news story must be not only accurate, and this one seems to be, in a general sense, as far as the facts go, but it must also be fair.
Instead, we have the MHPC pounded on for 15 paragraphs -- including mention of its failed TABOR drives but no reference to Mr. Piotti's failed tax overhaul, which may well give him a mad-on for conservative think tanks of all stripes. Meanwhile, any defense of the MHPC is buried about as far as it can be. At the very least, although it would not have cured all the ills of this article, Mr. Bragdon should have been allowed to express his confidence in the graph immediately following Mr. Piotti's strong accusation.
Until the Sun Journal can do a better job at balancing its coverage, it will continue to be discounted as just another bastion of the "liberal media," and that's too bad, because I know from personal experience that the paper has many outstanding, fair-minded staffers devoted to truth, in all its forms, regardless of the source.
Duke
Meanwhile . . .
Although a reader comment complaining about a typo in the pothole story was deleted, the comment about "contnue" gets to stand, even though it's no longer clear what Ellis was spoofing.
How odd. I guess I just don't get the ethics of newspaper publishing.
Classy
Correcting "right" to "write" was appropriate, but deleting the comment that complained about the typo was not exactly the classiest thing I've ever seen done by the Sun Journal.
We report, we decide
The writer of this piece made a bad assumption, Tron. No true Libertarian I know supports subsidized elections. I assure you. the possibility of "Clean Elections" funding plays ZERO part in out attempt to gain official Party status.
Duke
Retirement pay
Actually, Eastman "retired" in 2005. Since then, he's been raking in roughly $64,000 in annual retirement pay on top of his $103,000 salary, all before benefits.
I wonder . . .
One other thought . . . granted, former selectmen David Ivey and Troy Ripley did a lot wrong during their tenure, but I wonder if Jean and others in her faction might be ready, now, to cut them some slack. Were they really trying to circumvent the law and manage the town to their own ends, as Smart claimed then, or might they have simply been in a position similar to the one Smart now finds herself in, where they "thought, honest to God, [they] had followed the procedure the way [they were] supposed to?"
Only by acknowledgeing that both sides make mistakes can Paris avoid the factionalism we see in state and federal politics, where ethics seem defined as, "deeds that are just fine when done by my side."
Oh, and for what it's worth, with the sweeper only needed for three weeks, did selectmen look into the possibility of renting one, leasing one from a nearby town, or hiring an outside contractor to do the work. All are options, if available, which I have to imagine would cost less than $46,875. Also, I am curious how the FEMA reimbursement money was used to buy a street sweeper. Unless I am missing or misread something, that's kind of money is generally reserved for fixing storm damage, or mitigating the possibility of future damage. I'm not sure how it can be applied to this purchase.
Duke
Funny, ain't it.
Jean Smart talking town business outside of official meetings and arranging for hastily-called special sessions to pass pet projects?! Why, I'd call that "a kind of lawlessness." LOL
Corrected Info
A quick correction to the story, if I may.
The above article -- posted to the Sun Journal website in Sunday, April 18 -- says the Libertarian Party of Maine (LPME) convention "is Saturday." That may cause some readers to think the event will be next Saturday, April 24. In point of fact, the convention was held yesteday, Saturday, April 17.
A press release will be issued early next week, once details of its next meeting are finalized, but I can share now that the new seven-member executive committee elected at the convention is as follows:
Chairman: Shawn Levasseur, of Rockland
Vice-Chair: James Oaksun Dompkowski, of South Portland
Treasurer: Jorge Maderal, of Brunswick
Secretary: Wm. Duke Harrington, of Sumner
1st District Rep.: Sue Poulin, of Casco
2nd District Rep.: vacant
At-Large Rep.: Brent Tweed, of North Berwick
If you are an advocate of smaller government, lower taxes and greater personal freedom, please join us at www.lpme.org, or on the Maine Libertarians page on Facebook.
Is there a copy editor in the house?
I'm not sure what to believe. Either A) Only Oxford voters have a say and residents of the other seven SAD 17 towns can go pound sand, or B) The cat who writes headlines for the Sun Journal does not actually read the stories.
Calling the copy editor
I'm pretty sure this is not what Leslie meant, but the sixth graph makes it sound as if all custodial services are being cut at the high school, and that Paris and Rowe elementary schools will be closed.
Perhaps, " . . . and some custodial services at the high school, as well as at Paris and Rowe elementary schools."
I'm with Patty! And while
I'm with Patty!
And while Tony may poo-poo her history lesson, he can't talk down the history of human behavior, which hasn't changed much since the days of Homer. People want to get something for nothing, and, as such, we can expect people without paid subscriptions to nurf articles from pals with.
Newspaper publishers used to relish this behavior under the old revenue model, to the point of touting it to advertisers as "pass-through readership" i.e. "every issue is read by three people, so our 20k in sales is really 60k in readers."
A move to paid online subscriptions essentially locks out those extra 40k readers, which can only deepen the detrimental affect new media has on dead-tree adver-fieds.
Tony, instead of saying, "If we produce a great product, people will want to pay us for it," you should be telling yourself, "If we produce a great product, people will want to access it, and advertisers will pay to be in front of those eyeballs."
The conventional wisdom that online news sites should be subscription based is as fatuous as the conventional wisdom that the internet was killing print. No, what's been killing print is that the newspaper is stuffed with AP filler from three states away that means nothing to local readers.
Try this, walk up to anyone with a paper in front of them in Simones' and ask, "Anything in the paper today?" I guarantee you said person will look at the three-inch story about some fire in Vermont and shrug, "Eh, there's never anything in here." However, fill that same three inches with last night's knock-down, drag-out selectboard debate, three towns over, about transfer station hours, and you'll end up in a 40 minute row with Mr. Shrugsalot about what a bunch of boneheads they all are in Town Threefromhere.
The news needs to be hyper-local and needs to be tailored so that the content matches the audience and the delivery platform. The worst thing newspapers do is attempt to duplicate their print efforts online. THAT, will cannibalize readers.
Instead, my mantra is, "Web says what; print says why."
Online stories should be short snippets of info as close to immediate as possible, covering who, what, when and where only. For the morning print addition, and subsequent online articles, build on that, adding a bit more color, for a story just long enough to get grandpa through his morning cup of coffee with a little sumpin'-sumpin' left over to fill time at the water cooler.
Make the Sunday edition (or Sun Media's weekly papers) the showcase for expanded feature-length stories, where you add more color, along with generous helpings of the how and the why. Refer from that edition back online for additional data, like video/audio from public meetings, photo essays and interactive maps.
This way, instead of having one product in print and online, and making your readers choose, while your weeklies compete with the daily for readers and ad dollars, you create a circle of information in which your various outlets feed and compliment each other. Some readers will get what they need from just one outlet, while others will follow the full circle.
Add to that new, creative revenue streams. For example, create an online gift registry for your socials. People who see a wedding, birth, graduation, etc. in the paper can then go online, click an icon, and send a gift to the celebrants in question from some local business. A manufacturer or other business with little need for local advertising might, as a community service, sponsor a real-time blog covering a local sporting event.
There are lots and lots of solutions to the downturn of the newspaper industry. Paid subscriptions for online content is not one of them.
I am, as ever, your most humble servant,
Duke