Open Letter To The MinnPost Editorial Team
By Mitch Berg
To: Joel Kramer (CEO/Editor), Roger Buoen and Susan Albright (Co-Managing Editors) Don Effenberger (News Editor)
From: Mitch Berg, Uppity Peasant
Re: They Get What They Pay For
Esteemed Editors:
I was never much of a reporter. I could always do the “who, what, when, where, why and how” of a story just fine, and earned a living at it, off and on. But it was never really my thing.
But I do remember, when I worked in the business, that the fastest way to get a reporter, producer or editor up on their back legs was to suggest that journalism partner with business or government to do the job. They would say – with righteousness rivaling any Baptist minister or Trappist monk – that Journalism’s mission was to be a check and balance on government, business, anyone with power. To comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable. Any whiff of filthy lucre was to be kept on the other side of the thick wall and locked door that separated the Sales department from the newsroom.
Media analysts – I’m thinking Garfield and Gladstone’s “On The Media” on NPR, and the whole Romanesko borg – go through gyrations worthy of a Talmud symposium sifting through the ethics of mixing journalism and money.
Now, theMinnPosttalks a big game about journalism. And you’ve certainly staffed your site with a lot of people with long pedigrees in the regional news business. And Brian Lambert.
But I’ve noticed on one issue that your site gets a fair chunk of money from from the Joyce Foundation. The Joyce Foundation also bankrolls most of the major gun control organizations in the United States, including Mayor Bloomberg’s efforts and “Protect Minnesota“.
And along with this financial link, the MinnPost’s coverage of Second Amendment issues has gotten more and more slanted, and not a little bit risible in the bargain:
- Doug Grow has positively fawned over Heather Martens and Jane Kay (of “Moms Want Action”, another astroturf anti-gun group that gets money from the same pool of liberals with deep pockets that bankrolls Protect MN and, I suspect, the MinnPost); his coverage has been less “journalism” and more “holding a rhetorical slumber party”. His piece on Rep. Hillstrom’s counter to the Paymar/Hausman gun grab bills – one of which Martens, a lobbyist, read into the record, a bizarre flouting of House rules – was so devoid of fact I concluded it could only have been written in advance.
- I’ve got nothing but respect for Eric Black as a journalist – but his coverage of Second Amendment issues and their Constitutional history this past year has been a fount of inspiration for us on this blog.
The MinnPost gets big bucks from Joyce, and starts a wave of anti-Second-Amendment (I’ll be charitable) cheerleading. Coincidence?
Which leads us to this week, and Susan Perry’s piece on an academic “study” on gun violence. It was a puff piece about a junk study…
…and it was sponsored – as noted in the story’s headline – by UCare. An arm of the government of the State of Minnesota. Now, leave aside that that government is currently controlled by the extreme metrocrat wing of the DFL party. Here’s the question: if journalism is supposed to hold government accountable, should be finacially beholden to government?
Or does that only count when it’s not a DFL sacred cow being promoted?
Because when your “journalism” is being done at the behest of issue-oriented non-profits and the government you’re theoritically supposed to hold accountable, isn’t it really just public relations? Or campaign media?
Thanks,
Mitch Berg
Uppity Peasant
September 20th, 2013 at 12:07 pm
“Moms Want Action” sounds like internet search that gets a lot of NSFW links.
Just saying.
September 20th, 2013 at 12:11 pm
When they go days without some tidbit supporting the Brokeback mountain crew, you know money has exchanged hands.
Filthy lucre? They don’t even understand the meaning.
September 20th, 2013 at 12:52 pm
First – ditto what Troy said.
Second – I hope you’re not holding your breath waiting for a response. You would be all blue in the face and I don’t think Keegans lets blue faced people in.
Third – With the way 15 so called Mainstream “Journalists” have gone to work in the Obama Administration, does anyone really believe mainstream reporters have any integrity anymore? I don’t mind that they do paid advocacy reporting; I just wish they would admit to doing paid advocacy reporting (the way sports broadcasters declare that they have been approved by and work for the team whose game they are broadcasting) so the less informed reader knows they are being manipulated by one side of the argument.
Fourth – Why was there so much fear and loathing when it was rumoured that the Koch Bro’s were going to buy the LA Times if advocacy journalism is okay when it’s Joyce Foundation/Rockefeller money paying for it?
September 20th, 2013 at 4:40 pm
Speaking of asking for NSFW links, the name “Effenberger” sounds like a good candidate, too.
September 20th, 2013 at 5:33 pm
And Brian Lambert.
*wipes off monitor*
September 20th, 2013 at 7:02 pm
Of course the entire study is crap because it limited the sample. ” Only countries with available data on gun ownership and not currently involved in a civil war were included.”
Then the premise of the study defines a safer nation as one with fewer gun deaths. Then it finds that nations with guns have more gun deaths.
So let me suggest another study to them. There is a widespread belief that a watchdog will safeguard a home. Then start with the premise that a safeguarded home has fewer instances of dog bites. It might be just a coincidence then when a nation with more watchdogs has more instances of dog bites. What do you think the odds are of that. I can see the headline now. “Watchdogs do not make a nation safer.”
September 20th, 2013 at 7:57 pm
From the 70’s TV show All In The Family:
Liberal daughter Gloria Stivic and her father Archie Bunker debating the gun issue.
Gloria: Do you know that 60 percent of all deaths in America are caused by guns?
Archie: Would it make you feel any better, little girl, if they was pushed out of windows?
Crime is less serious if committed using other means … except to the victim.
September 24th, 2013 at 12:01 pm
[…] fact that they were accepting sponsorship for their “news” coverage – let alone sponsorship from non-profit issue advocacy groups and the government that journalists are supposed t…- with professional journalism’s purported ideals and […]
September 27th, 2013 at 12:16 pm
[…] a mainstream media figure – is your industry’s adherence to Democrat narratives (and in some cases money) worth the damage your credibility is taking among people who pay attention? This […]
October 8th, 2013 at 12:15 pm
[…] few weeks ago, I pointed out that not only does the MinnPost appear to be selling news to the highest bidder (or, more accurately, biggest contributor), but that MPR News appears to have done the […]
October 25th, 2013 at 7:07 am
[…] presume this means “expanding on their current strategy of having their plutocrat benefactors sponsor friendly media and pay for sympathetic “news” […]
October 29th, 2013 at 12:15 pm
[…] is on top of Joyce’s purchase of $50,000 worth of the MinnPost’s “Journalism” on the subject (to say nothing of their sponsorship of Minnesota Public Radio coverage of the […]
November 12th, 2013 at 12:00 pm
[…] if Chris Dorr testifies in front of the Public Safety committee, you think Doug Grow (of the Joyce-Foundation-sponsored MinnPost) won’t bring that up to discredit all gun rights advocates? You think “Protect […]
January 15th, 2014 at 12:00 pm
[…] this in Minnesota; in addition to the phony “sportsmens’” groups (not to mention buying instant media), the entire Tom Horner campaign was floated (or, more accurately, funded) by the left to try to […]