In the Sunday Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, editor George Stanley’s column highlighted some of his answers to questions from readers during a recent online chat. He stressed the Journal Sentinel’s “commitment to impartial, independent reporting.” Comments like that from an editor always sound noble and great; we only wish that were the case. As we all know, the Journal Sentinel is not a niche publication. It is our city’s daily paper, the “newspaper of record.” As such, it has the responsibility to strive to be balanced and fair and in return it receives financial rewards from the state including special interest legislation that allows the newspaper to be paid to print public notices. There are many people who no longer believe the Journal Sentinel is anywhere near being balanced and fair in its reporting and editorials.
This was not always the case. When Milwaukee had two independent newspapers, the conservative Sentinel and the liberal Journal, both were considered very good to excellent. Milwaukee citizens were well served. With the merger of the two newspapers in 1995, things radically changed. This merger was viewed by many as a case of the new whole being less than either of the parts when it came to quality journalism.
Changes After the Merger
After the merger, when the conservative Sentinel’s editor became the publisher of the new Journal Sentinel, the paper shifted to the right. For example, in 1996 the Journal Sentinel was one of the few newspapers in the state to endorse Republican Bob Dole for president over Bill Clinton. That endorsement was a clear statement of the new right-wing direction of the now combined newspaper. Milwaukee is a Democratic city and Milwaukee County is a Democratic county, but the Journal Sentinel appears to view its audience as the Republicans in the surrounding counties.
Unfortunately, in today’s economic reality, there will not be another daily newspaper in Milwaukee. We can only hope to see some positive changes in the Journal Sentinel and that George Stanley will keep his promise of “impartial, independent reporting.” After listening to complaints about the Journal Sentinel for many years and suggestions for its improvements, we want to propose three frequently mentioned changes that would be a good start to re-creating a real fair and balanced daily newspaper.
Three Suggestions from the Citizens of Milwaukee
One: Currently there is a very conservative political columnist, Christian Schneider, on the Journal Sentinel staff. Readers question why the Journal Sentinel doesn’t have a credible and respected liberal in-house political columnist. What’s wrong with a competing point of view? It would not be a great cost to hire a solid liberal writer to write a couple of columns each week to provide balance. If the Journal Sentinel can’t find such a writer, we would be happy to find one for them.
|
|
Two: Currently the Politifact section is referred to by many in Milwaukee as “Politifiction,” both for its perceived naïve analysis (especially if the issue is the least bit complicated) and the unfair ratings on their “truth-o-meter” when the person being fact checked is left of center. People have suggested that the Journal Sentinel bring together a balanced advisory board of qualified and known community leaders whose names are public and who would question the researchers on their analysis and then decide the ratings. This would create the credibility that many feel this column lacks, especially when the fact checking is done on a local issue by the Journal Sentinel staff. The Tampa Bay Times’ Politifact, which fact checks national issues, however, is often viewed as not much better.
Finally: The Journal Sentinel has won Pulitzer prizes for investigative pieces, which we applaud. However, virtually all of the investigative work is about government programs and low-income people. People complain that if our electric company, a regulated monopoly, lobbies the Public Service Commission for permission to raise our rates, the newspaper never speaks up. However, readers argue, if an elected official proposes a tax increase for social services much lower than the utility rate increase, you will probably see something critical in the newspaper. They argue that both are essentially a tax since the utility company is a monopoly, so, Journal Sentinel, please understand things like that and try to be consistent and fair.
