Friday, January 20, 2017

Chronicle: Going to women's march? You're fired!

Newly named Chronicle Editor in Chief Audrey Cooper Photo: Mike Kepka / The Chronicle / ONLINE_YES
Audrey Cooper, Chronicle Editor

From the Cal Alumni magazine:

...San Francisco Chronicle Editor-in-Chief Audrey Cooper raised eyebrows recently by notifying newsroom employees that participation in the January 21st Women’s March on Washington, or any similar marches, would be considered a violation of the newspaper’s ethics policies, a potential firing offense.

“No newsroom employee, regardless of job function or title, can participate in political demonstrations of any sort,” Cooper wrote, as part of a longer email to staff. “This is effective immediately.”

Political reporters, especially at legacy media, generally embrace stringent limits on personal expression. Most commonly, journalists are forbidden to donate to candidates or political causes, or take public positions on issues they are assigned to cover, specifically including participation in marches or protests.

But the Chron’s non-marching orders apply equally to workers far removed from political coverage: copy editors, page designers, sportswriters. And while the Women’s March was specifically made off-limits, the Chronicle has long encouraged employees to participate in San Francisco’s annual Gay Pride Parade, with staff and management marching beneath a Chronicle banner.

“I believe [management’s] argument has something to do with Pride being a celebration, and the Women’s March, while billed as a civil rights event, is perceived as more of a protest,” said a Chronicle staffer, one of several who declined to be identified for this story. “But a lot of people see equal pay, gender equality, and reproductive rights as civil rights. Nobody can tell us why the Women’s March is considered political and Pride is not.”...(Non-Marching Orders: Newspaper Bars Employees from Women’s March)

Labels: , ,

Streetsblog worries about high-speed rail project

This project is like all big rail projects: it begins with lies by its supporters to get it started. See Megaprojects and Risk: An Anatomy of Ambition, by Bent Flyvbjerg, Nils Bruzelius, Werner Rothengatter.

The authors studied a lot of infrastructure projects and came to this conclusion: "Cost underestimation and overrun cannot be explained by error and seem to be best explained by strategic misrepresentation, namely lying, with a view to getting projects started" (page 16, emphasis added).

Once a project is started, it's hard to stop, and good money has to be thrown after bad. Besides, even dumb projects create jobs for powerful construction unions, a major part of the Democratic Party's base here in California. 

And for Streetsblog's readers the great thing about trains is they aren't cars and are therefore morally superior. Only bicycles rank higher in their estimation.

Randal O'Toole nailed this delusion: "All you have to do is mention the words 'public transit,' and progressives will fall over themselves to support you no matter how expensive and ridiculous your plans."

Labels: , , ,

We're also going to miss Michelle

She couldn't even pretend to be polite, unlike her compulsively civil husband.

A comment: What's Obama saying to Trump? "You're in big trouble now, you stupid bastard."

Labels: ,

Tjeerd Royaards

Labels: ,