In the candidate coverage up to now, it appears that the articles have derived from interviews with the candidates.
This time I smell a rat, and I've verified with Paul that Cindy's story includes information from outside that context, reference to his protest a couple of years ago that got some public attention but is probably seen in a negative light at the Courier. That was the only inserted information. From this I think we should be concerned about editorial interference with the election, and watch this coverage more closely for bias.
No comments:
Post a Comment
I encourage you to share your own views and experience with me and other readers. How you do that matters, and I'm committed to maintaining a place where readers and commenters can feel safe from adolescent BS. So here's the deal:
There are two kinds of anonymous comments: those by people who have a genuine fear of revenge from the dark side, and those from darksiders just hiding to avoid accountability. You may post comments anonymously, but I reserve the right to treat anonymous comments as found items that belong to me and do with them as I see fit.
If, on the other hand, you're willing to stand by your convictions and post under your own name or a regular handle, your comments belong to you, and I'll edit them only on egregious violations of respect for others.
If this doesn't work for you, I'm sure you'll be happier somewhere else.