Get Discounted Tickets to Avenue Q
Enter to Win "Love Under the Sea" Dinner Reservations
Browse News+Opinion
Browse Calendar+Scene
Browse Arts+Movies
Browse Food+Drink
Browse Music+Clubs
Sunday, March 14, 2010
Where Are the Editors at The Post and Courier?
Posted by Will Moredock on Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 1:12 AM
I have been reading Charleston's daily newspaper for eight years and am constantly astounded at the mean, ignorant, superstitious and misleading things which appear on that benighted newspaper's editorial and op-ed pages. I have written about this in my weekly column several times, but I know the futility of trying to write a letter to the editor of the P&C. Therefore, I am emailing this to the editors of our dear city's daily, and posting in on my blog so that others may have a chance to see it and, hopefully, gain a little insight.
Yes, it is true that the editorial and op-ed pages of the P&C have improved remarkably since Barbara Williams was replaced as editorial pages editor by Charles Rowe two years ago. We now have a number of liberal and enlightened syndicated columnists — including Maureen Dowd, Nicholas Kristoff, Paul Krugman and Bob Herbert — but the op-ed page is still overwhelmingly rightwing blather from The National Review, the Hoover Institute, the Club for Growth, the Heritage Foundation, the S.C. Policy Council and other corporate mouthpieces.
The editorials are no better. This is a paper that has not endorsed a Democrat for president since 1932. That means three endorsements for Richard Nixon, two for George W. Bush, to say nothing of a host of largely forgotten figures who were briefly in the national spotlight and in the hearts of the P&C editorial board. As predictable as the tourists returning to Market Street in the spring, the editors of the P&C rouse themselves from sleep each morning and report to work for the purpose of bashing Democrats, especially President Barack Obama. In light of their long love affair with George W. Bush, their regular lacerating of Obama is especially hypocritical and implausible. But it is what generations of Charlestonians have come to expect and one must assume it is what generations of the Manigault family, who own the paper, have come to demand. And so the editorial board grinds out its daily drivel as the rest of us grind our teeth, clench our fists, and endure.
Yet, perhaps the worst of the editorial and op-ed pages is given over to letters to the editor. Here we see a perfect reflection of South Carolina's public education system, as local philosophers and historians write in to denounce evolution as a Marxist conspiracy, to call President Obama a socialist, to deny that the Civil War was rooted in the conflict over slavery, and otherwise demonstrate the ignorance that has made South Carolina a national laughing stock and given us a regular place on "The Daily Show."
Apparently, the editors take the position that if somebody else writes it, they take no responsibility for the content or veracity of it. Their only job is to print it in the paper.
How else to explain the letter which ran a few weeks ago, claiming Obama's current budget carries a $15 trillion deficit? The whole budget is less than $3 trillion and carries a$1.6 trillion deficit. But if the letter bashes Obama, who on the editorial board would quibble over details?
On March 13 came another absurd letter, this one from Thomas C. Mobley of Johns Island. Mobley claims that the State of Oregon recently did away with a subsidy on hybrid vehicles because tax revenues on gas had dropped so precipitously. He used this "fact" as a jumping off point to rail against the use of any tax as an incentive for good behavior or penalty for bad behavior: "The call to tax the next guy today is a call to raise taxes on yourself tomorrow. Giving the government a free hand to use taxes to force smokers to quit is also a free hand to force you to quit whatever it is that you're doing, at least as long as the government is taking your money, forcing you to quit."
If the editors had not been so credulous and happy to believe this libertarian claptrap, they might have been suspicious of Mobley's initial claim. Had hybrid cars actually sent Oregon's gas tax revenues into the toilet? If the editors had been more diligent in their task, they might have asked Mobley for some proof of his claim. Failing that, they might have gone online to see what they could find.
What they would have found was that Oregon did, indeed, end the $1,500 hybrid tax incentive on January 1, 2010, but it had nothing to do with plummeting gas tax revenues. The state now offers a tax incentive for the purchase of electric "plug-in" cars, which use no gas at all! This is, in fact, a more aggressive effort to ween drivers off gasoline.
The 11,000 hybrid owners who have claimed the tax break since 1999 hardly represented a threat to Oregon's gas sales. Any knowledgeable person would have been immediately suspicious of Mobley's claims to the contrary. It seems the editorial page editors at the P&C were not very knowledgeable or very curious. If they had been, they could have put the whole question to rest at http://archives.chicagotribune.com/2009/jun/12/news/chi-ap-or-electriccars-taxc
Comments (19)
Showing 1-19 of 19
you have the name of the paper wrong,i think you are talking about the post and communist daily paper.it appears you really can't read. barbara is a liberal(socialist).i have to give her credit, she is doing fine job turning the local paper into the a communist cazette.
like
dislike
I guess anything right of the "Kos" is too conservative for you! Where did you get your "Progressive" training, Columbia University? I can't even use your rag for bird cage liner any more. Poor Polly just spins around in left-handed circles squawking, when I do...
BRAVO!!! MY SENTIMENT FOR SO LONG!! THAT IS ONE OF THE REASONS I DON’T BUY THAT (FOR LACK OF A BETTER WORD) DARN CRAPPY NEWSPAPER. I PURCHASE FROM PUBLIX THE NEW YORK TIMES. AS FOR THIS LOCAL PAPER AND THE LOCAL NEWS CHANNEL LIVE AT 5, I CAN LIVE WITHOUT IT. POST AND COURIER YOU HEARD THE WRITER IF YOU WERE FORTHRIGHT AND REPORTED THE NEWS IMPARTIALLY YOU’D PROPABLY HAVE A LOT MORE READERS. I KNOW OF SEVERAL TRANSPLANT FROM ALL OVER THIS COUNTRY WHEN FIRST COMING HERE PURCHASED YOUR PAPER BUT SINCE NO LONGER READ IT FOR THE VERY SAME REASONS THAT THE WRITER WROTE. YOU ARE AN AVENUE TO DISSPELL LIES, MYTHS ETC. AND ABLE TO CHANGE THE ATMOSPHERE OF THIS HOLY CITY, ARE YOU USING IT, NO. YOU CONTINUE TO PERPETRATE AN ATMOSPHERE OF DESCENSION IN THIS AREA THROUGH WHAT YOU ALLOW TO GO TO PRINT. REMEMBER GOD KNOWS THE INTENT OF THE HEART AND HE ALSO EXPOSES IT EVENTUALLY THEN DESTROYS IT. HE SAID WHEN IT IS IN YOUR POWER TO DO GOOD, DO IT. YOU ARE DOING A DISCREDIT TO YOUR SELF AND TO SOUTH CAROLINA.
TRANSPLANT FROM NEW YORK.
Yes, I agree, the P&C needs to adopt Moredock's and Hunter's fine example of journalism: start off with an obscure or untraceable quote or statement and apply circular logic. And the letters - of course the City Paper doesn't just print the letters they want us to read, everything is put out there.
The City Paper is obviously a counter-balance to the P&C, and while I much prefer the views of the City Paper, they don't show a lot more journalistic integrity in their opinion section than their opponent.
I agree, but I pose a greater question..... WHERE ARE THE WRITERS AT THE CITY PAPER????? The posts by readers of the City Paper are consistantly much better than the articles in which they are responding to! All of the local news in Charleston is a joke which is no longer funny. All of the local media approaches the subject matter like OC Welch tries to sell cars....... oh and the worst of all, "Do you have poison in your medicine cabinet"?, "Tune in at 11 and find out...... "
In terms of political slant, The Post & Courier is a moderate Republican newspaper, much like the City Paper is a moderate to liberal Democratic weekly.
The P&C doesn't always agree with Jim DeMint and they hardly ever editorialize or run pieces that favor the positions of Ron Paul, but I can't recall the P&C ever disagreeing with Lindsey Graham or John McCain (and George W. Bush). Fairly moderate, mainstream neoconservative Republicanism (war, spending, torture = good, limited government conservatism? pretty much an afterthought). The P&C also adores Mayor Riley (who endorsed Lindsey Graham in 2008--once again, there's that establishment, "respectable" center).
The CP is pro-Obama, pro-Riley, and pro-Democrat in general. Like most liberal publications, there is a heavy focus on identity politics and a reluctance to admit the similarities between this president and the last (in the CP's defense, their focus is local, not national, much less Obama-specific). The crazy thing is,%2
For some reason that last post was cut in half. Here's the whole thing:
In terms of political slant, The Post & Courier is a moderate Republican newspaper, much like the City Paper is a moderate to liberal Democratic weekly.
The P&C doesn't always agree with Jim DeMint and they hardly ever editorialize or run pieces that favor the positions of Ron Paul, but I can't recall the P&C ever disagreeing with Lindsey Graham or John McCain (and George W. Bush). Fairly moderate, mainstream neoconservative Republicanism (war, spending, torture = good, limited government conservatism? pretty much an afterthought). The P&C also adores Mayor Riley (who endorsed Lindsey Graham in 2008--once again, there's that establishment, "respectable" center).
The CP is pro-Obama, pro-Riley, and pro-Democrat in general. Like most liberal publications, there is a heavy focus on identity politics and a reluctance to admit the similarities between this president and the last (in the CP's defense, their focus is local, not national, much less Obama-specific). The crazy thing is, the CP is fairly moderate in the same way the P&C is, just slightly more Left. The P&C and CP both endorsed Lindsey Graham, and generally agree with Graham-like "center" positions (cap and trade, Sotomayor, amnesty, etc.) Though the CP doesn't write editorials explicitly endorsing such positions, like the P&C, there have been things written praising Graham's "reasonable" approach, unlike that wacky DeMint.
I enjoy both the P&C and the CP (though I think the CP might have the edge in investigatory journalism, just saying), while still recognizing these slants, much like I'd expect readers of The American Conservative (where I also contribute) to appreciate a good article or a thoughtful opinion, recognizing that magazine's paleoconservative or libertarian slant.
My question to you Will is, why get upset about these things? What publication doesn't have a political slant? What bothers me most is when publications pretend that they aren't biased. Recognize these slants, call them out on occasion, but isn't political bias pretty much inevitable? When have newspapers not been biased in some fashion? And I say this as someone who generally despises the neocon columnists at P&C (Rich Lowry, Charles Krauthammer, Jonah Goldberg as well as the icky liberals, Maureen Dowd, Paul Krugman, etc.) I do like William Murchinson though.
I love the "Southern Avenger" criticizing "identity politics" as if his entire ideology was not rooted in his identity as a besieged and aggrieved minority. You are the definition of identity politics from which your tortured defense of the confederacy and embrace of manly free market libertarianism springs. Unless, of course identity politicians are only those angry non-white, women, and gays.
There's nothing wrong with a publication having a robust political ideology (although it is a problem that the daily paper is controlled by a reactionary monopoly). The poor reporting is another matter and Moredock raises good points about the letters to the editors.
The CP is pretty disappointing in this regard as well. It often seems more like a collection of Blog postings, rather than rigorous analysis based on research.
Jack Hunter's near plagiary of a discredited article on global warming was an egregious example of this:
http://www.charlestoncitypaper.com/charles…
Drawing entirely from an online posting in Forbes magazine, Hunter repeated several outright falsehoods and cited non-existent sources to raise suspicions of the scientific consensus on climate change. Unfortunately, it was picked up by the blogosphere and blasted all across the Tea Party nation.
CP needs big editorial help as well. The writing is often substandard, and the research and editing are poor.
Ha! I would like to note that Mario's perception of me and what I do is a near picture prefect example of liberals' obsession with identity politics.
We all have identities and argue from our own particular circumstances. The difference is, liberals always "go there" assuming any and all disputes, at root, must be racist, homophobic, etc. See Maureen Dowd's reaction to Joe Wilson's outburst or Paul Krugman's take on the tea parties, for example.
There are issues that should be addressed of particular interest to gays, women, minorities etc., but these groups are more diverse than the convenient labels they are given, might imply. I have good friend who is fairly conservative and gay, who gets offended when others try to whittle down her entire identity to her sexuality. She also recognizes that this as a fairly common liberal impulse.
She must be homophobic. I'll check with Maureen Dowd. Or Mario.
Your politics (as are mine) are an expression of your identity because as you note "we all have identities and argue from our own particular circumstances." My only issue is that you see yourself as being somehow separate from and above identity politics. I'm merely suggesting that your identity as "true conservative", "southern avenger," "free market libertarian," "devolutionist," "Ron Paul's fluffer," or whatever are no more or less socially constructed than the head of the NAACP, "wise Latina" Sonia Sotomayor, or your good lesbian friend.
The P&C can write what it wants in it's editorials. That is the editors perogative. I would suggest that the op-eds be more balanced. The newspaper should get arguments from both sides to enlighten it's readers. As it is now, I don't read the op-eds. It is a constant feed of anti Obama with no balance. If not for the local news, there would be no reason to buy the P&C.
Both papers have astoundingly bad craft beer writing and reporting which is what I really care about as goverment and politics can not be saved.
Jack: Identity politics bad!
Mario: Jack, you are totally identity politics!
Jack: Liberals are obsessed with identity politics!
Ogre: WHARGARBL!
Bad craft beer writing? I beg to differ. Ballard knows his stuff. The BOC drinking section was a craft beer lovefest.
Thank you, Mr. Moredock. The P&C editorial page is a joke. Much of the time they print editorials filled with lies and half truths to suit whatever republican talking point they are promoting. If one sends a letter to their editor pointing out the facts good luck. They will not print anything that is remotely critical of an editorial. Thanks, Will Moredock, for having the courage to say what's on a lot of people's minds.
On a less serious note, Deidre Schipani's restaurant reviews for the P&C are some of the worst I've read. Their content consistently is uninspiring, and she either ignores or doesn't know many basic rules of grammar. I often wonder where her copy editors are, and how hard it would be for me to snag her job. ;)
to chrishaire: Ballard is learning on the job and while his beer writing is not offensive, it lacks the depth of knowledge necessary to make me seek it out.
to danielleunc: yes, the reviews in general are poor. Also, the guy who dabbles in pub reviews (Jack Hunter I think) is just as bad.
- Brian Hicks speaks out at The Post and Courier9 comments
- GOP conference organizers might soon fire back at Charleston Place1 comment
- Woman's cat died during Ravenel Bridge traffic snarl19 comments
- The horrors of the gluten-sensitive sufferer5 comments
- Gisele doesn't know her place, and Tom Brady is too whipped to keep her in line5 comments
- Everyday Sunshine looks at Fishbone's wild ride1 comment
-
Oscar's Restaurant
Overrated. I will take Moe's any day over this. -agentguerry
-
Bighorn's Sports Grill
This is an awesome place to see bands - big stage, awesome sound and you… -wyjess9290
-
Savannah Bee Co.
Savannah Bee is definitely one of my favorite places on King St. The staff are… -Suggestionlol
-
Raul's Taqueria & Mexican Grill
I desperately wanted to like this place but I would be lying if I said… -mustbe
-
Raul's Taqueria & Mexican Grill
The mole is one of the best I have ever had. Raul said it is… -Charles Robinson
-
Brian Hicks speaks out at The Post and Courier
The Courage of His Convictions
-
Woman's cat died during Ravenel Bridge traffic snarl
Gridlock delayed trip to veterinary clinic
-
GOP conference organizers might soon fire back at Charleston Place
SRLC lawyer preparing a responsive pleading
-
Gisele doesn't know her place, and Tom Brady is too whipped to keep her in line
And damn, did you see his ridiculous haircut?
-
Charleston Place sues Republican conference organizers
Says GOPers didn't pay $227,000 hotel tab
