Good topic. Election coverage in the corporate media is soooo superficial! Instead of focussing on Guilliani or Edwards hair, or the cleavage of Thompson’s wife or Mrs. Clinton’s, we need to know where the candidates stand on issues that really matter. We also need to know about the financial backers and financial status of ALL candidates, not just those who claim to be for the less well-advantaged. (The argument that a rich candidate is a hypocrite for wanting to help the poor is specious. That’s like saying that healthy people(doctors, nurses, etc.) can’t really help sick people.) It is quite telling that only wealthy individuals or candidates with considerable financial backing are seriously-accepted for major political offices. The deck is stacked against regular working folks, who must hold their nose while picking the lesser evil. Maybe corporate elitist organizations such as the Show-Me Institute can put together a serious paper on how the average working stiff can effect political change in an environment so stacked against the common people. Wake up, America!

Thanks, Steve, my favorite topic. I see you are still reading my e-mails. Tim “I don’t know” Poor cut me off - he wasn’t helpful anyway.
And before any of you yahoos tell me not to read the PD, stuff it. I like having a morning paper delivered to my house and think the only paper in town should be fair and balanced - which it clearly is not.
I am sure you have never told your liberal callers that they clog up your in- box. Funny how the Editorial Page brought back Maureen Dowd when the libs complained, but refused to bring back Michael Barone. When I complained to Mr. Mink who never returned an e-mail, he said “too bad, I don’t agree, I don’t care.” Apparently you only listen to certain readers.

On the day you were supposed to report the Tony Rodham story, the PD did find room for another Denver sex abuse claim story. The PD has NEVER missed a sex/porn scandal story involving a priest, Christian minister, or conservative Republican anywhere in the anywhere in the country. Yet, when I asked Mr. Poor why he never reported the story of Charles Rust Tierney, ex-ACLU president charged with child torture porn, he claimed there was no relevance to St. Louis. However, he did find relevance about a priest running naked in Denver story last month.

Last month the PD refused to print the NJ corruption scandal where 12 authorities were arrested in a bribery sting with one being Sammy Riveria on Hillary’s Mayors’ Council, Mr. Poor claiming either he never heard of it or not enough room. Yet, the front page had plenty of room for a full-page moneygame ad. The PD needs to decide if it is a serious news product or a game show.

The saddest part of the whole saga at the PD is that you truly believe you are fair, yet refuse to listen to what I say. How would you feel if Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter were the news editors of your only newspaper. Don’t you think it is high time for you all to listen to outside sources. Someone willing to take the time to critique your ineptness for free. Just maybe there is some there there.

When I write to you, it is only to help the paper. Your subscribers are falling off, ad revenues are declining, people are being forced to retire. But, of course, you all are right - no bias whatsoever! You all will be lucky to still be in business after the 2008 election. It is hard enough now for me to find a conservative in town that reads your paper to discuss it with.

Basically, I have files full of examples of the left-wing agenda bias at the PD which is prominent in the front pages and the A & E section, and of course the editorial pages.

As for as your relegating political coverage to the blogs - they are even worse than the print pages. By the time something is posted, if it ever gets posted, it’s days old. I have talked to Kurt about this. I think an open thread where relevant news could be posted would be great, but Kurt said they don’t have the manpower.

I have asked Mr. Robbins about getting an ombudsman to discuss the bias, but he said they don’t have the resources. Why not do it on a blog?

Something is broken, something needs to be fixed. Ignoring the problem is not going to make it go away.

I forgot to mention DC download. Does anyone in your DC office actually work? Their is so little reporting done that I have to look all over the internet to get news as to what the heck they are actually doing in Congress. If is isn’t something wonderful to say about Claire,
they basically don’t give a hoot about reporting it.

Okay, I am laughing! I thought Steve posted this. Mr. Poor has never posted before.

Here is another story the PD didn’t print:

Last Friday a “light, oily substance” was sprayed on 50 to 60 feet of the Vietnam Veterans Memorial wall panels and paving stones in an act of apparent vandalism. All this week, Washington was consumed with the Iraq reports by Gen. David Petraeus and Amb. Ryan Crocker. This weekend, ANSWER and a number of other anti-war groups are planning big demonstrations in Washington. Some veterans groups are planning to parallel the demostrations with lines of volunteers blocking access to the Vietnam Wall and other memorials they believe may be targeted for defacment. The assumption that Friday’s discovery was an act of vandalism connected with the demonstrations seems a logical conclusion.

Let’s see if this gets reported in the PD tomorrow:
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/us/AP-Terror-Investigation.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

In part, I agree with whiterose- the candidates’ stances on issues are the most important. Although, on a side note, I will say it’s embarrassing that celebrities are getting more coverage than some candidates- but I read a ton of news and the PD may not even be doing that…plus I read the PD online more than on paper.

I live in Jefferson County (a few of us do read…), and clear stances of local politicians was somewhat challenging to find. I found the PD online voting guide extremely helpful during elections- please keep that up! As whiterose said, the candidates’ stances are key. Maybe have a graph of candidates & their stances…maybe add a ‘why’ under why they stand the way they do (for instance, supports tax increase to fund such-and-such). Maybe run this several times? Maybe have this on your website? I do think, though, that lesser known candidates deserve more attention overall- not just in your publication, but in general. I agree with whiterose, ‘it is quite telling that only wealthy individuals or candidates with considerable financial backing are seriously-accepted for major political offices.’

Financial backers & status is a little tougher…no one’s going to be clean, and books could probably be written the candidates’ collective dirt. It seems certain demographics of Americans are very unfamiliar with how rampant corruption truly is in the political sphere, and dirty politics will likely be associated with any politician at some point during their careers. That said, some politicians are more devious than others, and I agree political dishonesty does deserve press.

Centrist, seriously buddy, get a hold of yourself. If you want fair & balanced, pick up an indie publication or checkout the bbc online so you can get a variety of sources & conceptualizations. The PD has some weird demographics to write for- apathetic readers, racist readers (I know people who complain there are too many black people pictured in the PD- and probably many more who think that but don’t say it), far-right and far-left readers, sexist readers, professionals and working class readers, religious zealot readers, people who relate to urban related stories and people who don’t, people who have little else to do all day but complain about the PD (though here I am…but maybe I have an excuse…I’m stuck at home with a headcold today…). St. Louis is a huge mix of people, and unfortunately, they have to try to satisfy these readers. I think they walk that line pretty well.

They probably don’t tell ‘liberal callers’ they clog up inboxes, because they don’t. From my experience, conservative people are much less tolerant of true freedom of speech and press than liberal people are. Liberal people don’t complain as often- look at the FCC, for instance!

Thanks for Maureen Dowd- that is one strong critique I have of the PD & media in general. Intelligent, professional women covering issues of depth & substance still lack in mainstream media (even if I don’t always agree, their voices are needed). I know this isn’t unfounded, there is various research backing that up. GOOD female writers, who aren’t afraid to write from experience as women, and whose material is thought-provoking and substantial, is needed, especially on a local level. As a young woman, it’s painful to read female writers who play into female stereotypes, like kids or fashion- if it’s written well & occasional, fine… but it gets embarrassing & frustrating when it’s consistent. We’re more than that. I would be just as frustrated if a black writer wrote of little else but hip-hop artists in the news…even if a part of a reader relates to it, it’s still, by far, not the most pressing issue, plays into very negative stereotypes, and rightfully angers the readers expecting more from a writer.

Maybe the PD reports on Church sex abuse stories because that’s an issue many St. Louisians have personal experience with- I was raised Catholic in St. Louis. I want to know how many scandals they cover up, it’s infuriating it was covered up to begin with. Priests move around a lot, so a priest in another part of the country might have ties to a church in STL. I have no doubt the Archdiocese & cronies hate the bad press…hence the ‘conservatives are less tolerant of true freedom of press & speech’ comment above.

Limbaugh & Coulter are not respectable journalists, Centrist. It seems companies truly run the press in America, and so the PD asking for feedback and seriously considering it is probably one of the best things the PD can do.

Might I suggest subscriptions may be falling off because more people are accessing news online- I know I do. There are few times when I buy a paper- except for a major event such as Sept. 11, or I want holiday ads, or if I won’t have online access.

A cousin of mine is a journalist who recently graduated from U of I- he told me a lot of people he knows were hired by the PD, that you were looking for young people. I’ve noticed different graphics and layouts in recent years. I also LOVE the online entertainment section of the PD- I never have a problem finding something to do in STL, like what’s at the art museum or holiday shows or festivals. Thanks for the calendar, which lists different stuff happening everyday. I use it often. However, I can’t help but notice the PD is sometimes willing to sacrifice substance over style- please don’t. IMO, traditional ways of reporting are more respectable than trying to be hippishly flippant or cutting edge or…something. Or at least, reserve that part for online, where most young people turn for news anyway? I don’t know. I’m not criticizing them personally, just their approach to what they’re doing.

And while I’m throwing out ideas to you…the PD & St. Louis in general seems to be focused on race as a black/white issue. There’s more to the city than that…there’s an increasing Hispanic population, we have a huge Bosnian population, and there are various church services offered in many languages around town (thanks for the coverage of St. Stan, btw). I know you’ve given some coverage to this, it just seems as if you have the tools needed to help people realize how diverse this city is- please keep it up. Not only is it interesting (imo), it is necessary to truly integrate & accurately portray a society.
Also, I’d personally like to see more research reported- especially since people complain about a lack of primary sources here. I see research- especially gender research- absolutely slaughtered (I’ve worked on gender research projects, and the results are often completely twisted by the media) on places like msnbc, but it can be reported responsibly. St. Louis has some great research at our universities here, you have great local resources to consult. Health research, psychological research, research on schools, learning, development, prejudices, politics- all of this would be great to read about and great to get discussions started. Great research is published online every month by various journals. Again, maybe you do do this and I just don’t notice or see it- just an idea.

Thanks.

alsd29 - fine comments.

CENTRIST (if you even know what that means) - I find it amusing that you go around bashing the supposed liberal media, yet it was under Bush’s watch that restrictions were lifted on ownership concentration of media. Please explain to me why, if the media are stilted in some undesirable direction, reducing the number of voices would be a good thing? Every analytical model I can think of suggests that larger independent samples can’t help but regress toward the center; therefore, reducing the sample size would actually tend to stilt coverage more, leading me to believe that media coverage is probably becoming less centered even as we speak.

In addition, CENTRIST, isn’t it rather arrogant to believe that your meticulously handpicked list of stories somehow betters the judgment of the entire editorial staff of this news organization? I find it really tiring when people sit around harping on how things would be better if they were in charge. If you want so badly to be in charge, once again, start your own website…you clearly have access to news organizations; just set up some links to them, advertise a bit and voila - you’re a huge success and the uninformed masses have access to the sort of reporting you crave for them to have. If, on the other hand, you simply want to harass the good folks of the PD, you are being nothing more than an ineffectual buffoon.

Clinton, thanks for the name-calling. I appreciate the intelligent discussion. Perhaps you would like to expound on why the Democrats want to shut down talk radio?

#7 - thanks for coming to Tim’s defense. Hope you are feeling better today.
First, I read many sources and many viewpoints. I would just like to see more of that at the PD.
Second, I take offense at your claim that “conservatives are much less tolerant of true freedom of speech.” Could you please give an example?
I don’t see how asking the PD to stop filtering the news that I am “allowed to read” as limiting their free speech. I am simply asking for ALL views and information be presented, not to not report anything.
The Democrats are the ones protesting Fox News and trying to shut down talk radio. I think you better re-examine your position on that pal.

Finally, I like Maureen Dowd and enjoy reading her and was glad they brought her back. She replaced another woman that just didn’t pack the same punch. I was upset they didn’t listen to my request, however, to bring back Michael Barone whom they replaced with a more left-wing columnist that I don’t care for.

I hope you read Dowd’s column today. It was terrific as usual. As a woman, I really admire Democrat women. They are strong. It’s funny though, the PD has attacked me as being rude and abrasive because I don’t agree with them. Yet, when a liberal woman speaks her mind, she is considered strong. She is dead on right again. The liberal Democrat milque-toast candidates are hiding behind their wives skirts from Hillary and letting their strong wives do their dirty work. This does not surprise me about liberal men at all. Why is it that liberal women are stronger than liberal men? I find this a fascinating fact.
Go Hillary!