Statesman Journal "Editorial Board" is a farce -- all members are newspaper staff

In its bi-ennial ritual of kissing up to the Salem Chamber of Commerce and their biggest advertisers, the so-called Statesman Journal Editorial Board is rolling out its endorsements for Mayor and three contested City Council races.

(So far they're two for two in endorsing Chamber candidates; in 2014 the newspaper was four for four.)

I feel justified in using the term so-called to describe the Editorial Board, because all of the six members are employed by the newspaper. No community members are on the Editorial Board. 

So when the newspaper says, "The Editorial Board endorses...," it would be more accurate to say "Six Statesman Journal staff members endorse..." 

Tonight the newest endorsement (for Ward 5 City Councilor) turned up online. Jim Scheppke left the first comment on the Statesman Journal's endorsement of Tiffany Partridge over Matt Ausec.

Please inform your readers about the "six-member Statesman Journal Editorial Board." Who are these people that are making these "composite decisions?" Do they include any members of the community? The Salem Weekly discloses the names of its Editorial Board members in every issue. They include four community members plus the editor. Your readers demand to know who is on your Board.

I was happy to answer Jim's question after doing a bit of Googling.

Jim, each of the six members of the Statesman Journal Editorial Board are newspaper staff. There are no members from the community. They are listed at the bottom right of the Opinion page.

Ryan Kedzierski, SJ Publisher
Michael Davis, SJ Executive Editor
Dick Hughes, SJ Editorial Page Editor
Paul Nettland, SJ Media Distribution Director
Kaellen Hessel, SJ Reporter
Carol McAlice Currie, SJ Reporter

So it's not surprising that the political endorsements are almost always in line with the Chamber of Commerce, and out of touch with how candidates are viewed by the broader community.

The Statesman Journal Editorial Board really should be referred to as "Statesman Journal Staff." As in, "Six Statesman Journal staff members have endorsed _____." irksome about this

Here's a specific example of what's irksome about this farce of an editorial board: After the board endorsed Chuck Bennett for Mayor over his opponent, Carole Smith, editorial board member Kaellen Hessel switched to being a reporter and wrote a news piece, "Familiar faces running for Salem mayor."

So after being part of a group of Statesman Journal staff who said they favor Chuck Bennett for Mayor, we're supposed to believe that Hessel is capable objectively reporting on the Mayor's race? Give me a break...

Anyway, returning to the comments on the Ward 5 City Council seat editorial, Alex Kohan weighed in with a perceptive comment on the endorsement of Ausec's opponent by the Six Statesman Journal Staff Members.

"We evaluate each race and each candidate and recommend whoever we think is most competent, effective, experienced and skilled" SJ endorsement criteria.

It is very clear listening to Tiffany Partridge speak that she does not have the grasp or depth of policy nor the experience that Matt Ausec has. There is also her troubled term on the Culture and Tourism Commission. One term is supposed to be three years on the board, however she only lasted two years on the commission, probably because she only went to 4 of the 13 meetings during those two years. Does the SJ really want someone that unreliable on the city council?

Comparing Matt Ausec and Tiffany Partridge's voter's pamphlet statement it is very clear that Matt is the more qualified and knowledgeable candidate.

Tiffany
Current: Event Planner, Communications Chair (does not specify employer)
Occupational Background: Operations Director, Volunteer Coordinator, Administrative Assistant, Restaurant Manager (apparently Figaro's Pizza) (does not specify employer for other jobs)
Governmental Experience: Cultural and Tourism Promotion and Advisory Board (see note above about attendance record), Communications Chair for Women's Caucus of Democratic Party of Oregon

Matt
Current: Senior Policy Analyst, Office of the State Chief Information Officer
Occupation Background: Lead Policy Analyst, Oregon Health Authority; Board Member, Institute for Culture and Ecology; Policy Analyst, Oregon Health and Science University; Human Resources Analyst, Nike; Data Management, US Bank; Business Analyst, Sanofi Pharmaceuticals; Public Information Specialist, Federal Election Commission

It is clear Matt Ausec is by far the most qualifed candidate for the job. He has far more experience working with policy and experience in government.

Come on Statesman Journal, do your research before you decide to endorse candidates!

Alex, that's an entirely reasonable expectation. But here's the larger question: why are Six Statesman Journal Staff Members making political endorsements at all? 

I wrote about this back in May 2014. Here's an excerpt from "Statesman Journal shouldn't make election endorsements."

I hope Statesman Journal executives will consider how jarring it is for readers to be told for 363 days a year that their community newspaper is committed to pursuing journalistic truth wherever it lies, fearlessly investigating wrongdoing by politicians and government officials.

Then, on two days of the year, before primary and general elections, the Statesman Journal wholeheartedly expresses the support of its small editorial board for certain politicians -- after which the newspaper repeatedly urges readers to vote for them.

Yet us readers are expected to believe that the same Statesman Journal executives -- publisher, executive editor, editorial page editor -- who were so supportive of politician X won't let their personal political views influence subsequent news and editorial content decisions.

Understand: I'm not saying that newspaper staff shouldn't have political opinions.

But recently a reporter at the Statesman Journal explained why she doesn't sign initiative petitions or otherwise get personally involved with supporting certain candidates: it would make readers think she wasn't capable of reporting fairly and independently.

Well, why doesn't this apply equally (heck, even more so) to the newspaper executives who are deciding what news and opinion pieces get published in the Statesman Journal? How ethical is it that Steve Silberman, publisher of the paper, is about to join the Chamber of Commerce board of directors?

The Chamber endorsed four candidates for City Council. The Statesman Journal editorial board endorsed those same four candidates, offering up very little solid policy reasons for doing so. Just because, basically. 

Naturally the editorial board would take offense that their personal political views, as expressed in the newspaper's candidate endorsements, have anything at all to do with their supposedly journalistically pure assessment of each city council candidate's qualifications.

Many readers, including me, are skeptical about this.

So wouldn't it be better, as the Chicago Sun-Times editorial board concluded, to give up the charade that in this 21st century, a few people who happen to be newspaper executives have the right to use their community journalism platform to tell everybody else in Salem how to vote?

As the Sun-Times said, community newspapers supposedly represent and serve everybody. This makes the Statesman Journal different from our alternative newspaper, Salem Weekly, which unabashedly has a liberal slant. And different from the Chamber of Commerce, which unabashedly has a conservative slant.

I've lost confidence that the Statesman Journal really cares about everybody in Salem, in part because of its editorial page endorsements. Maybe the newspaper doesn't care about me, and so many others, feeling this way.

But it should.

Comments

[Jim Scheppke]

Here's how I think editorials in the SJ really work. Dick Hughes writes them (his slightly unhinged and semi-uninformed writing style is easy to spot). Then the Editor Michael Davis takes a glance at them and might consult with the Publisher, who until recently was the advertising manager and probably doesn't know anything about Salem anyway. Then they appear. I don't think there really is a "Board" process at all. I think that's a myth. It's really all Dick Hughes. I can't wait until he realizes it's time to retire. He's really an embarrassment to the Gannett Corporation.

[Salemander]

Haha Jim, I was about to write that I am just waiting for Dick Hughes to write a poorly thought out rebuttal to these facts that is laced with uneducated smugness.

Dick is the same guy who clearly showed that he has no clue how financing a huge costly project like a 3rd bridge works while blindly cheerleading for it. He thinks it will "only" cost 400+ million to build and seemed dumbfounded that there is also the matter of an expected 500+ million additional cost of financing.

Dick also advocated building a busy road through the riverfront carousel parking lot, with his silly frequently used coup de gras reasoning of "It will not be any busier than the Costco parking lot, it will be safe!" as if that is some sort of reassurance that it is safe. I have yet to see him taking his children/grandchildren to go play in the Costco parking lot.

[Brian Hines]

I agree with Jim that likely Dick Hughes is the "editorial board." But if Dick wants to play the Wizard of Oz game -- pretending there is more behind an editorial than one guy's personal opinion -- he needs to own the fiction.

This includes the fact that three of the six members of the editorial board are part of the News Team. So when the news side of the Statesman Journal looks at City Hall goings-on, these are the same people who were part of a Chuck Bennett for Mayor endorsement.

Citizens have good reason to doubt the journalistic objectivity of an Executive Editor and Reporter who are part of the editorial board that endorsed Chuck Bennett and another Chamber of Commerce backed candidate.

[B.C.]

It's hard to overstate how much fun this is to watch both your and Scheppke's heads explode when the SJ endorses a candidate you oppose. Rather than acknowledge that their editorial board simply has a different philosophical viewpoint than yours, you try to attack their motives by insisting they are beholden to the business community. Never mind the fact that if this were the case, the SJ would've opposed the transit payroll tax (which as we know, they didn't). One of these days, progressive candidates will wake up and realize that support from you and Scheppke is a likely kiss of political death. Or perhaps they won't, and they'll just keep getting their asses handed to them on Election Day by the voters.

[Brian Hines]

B.C., my head isn't exploding. It is just irritated at the usual oligarchical crap going on here in Salem. Along with how far down the journalistic slope the Statesman Journal has slid. There's not only very little original local investigative reporting happening at the paper, the odds are excellent that the opinion pages is dominated by copy-cat Chamber of Commerce endorsements.

Currently the Statesman Journal has endorsed six Chamber candidates in a row: 4 in 2014, 2 so far in 2016. Assuming a 50% probability that the Chamber candidate actually is the best candidate (I'd put those odds a lot lower, but I'll be generous), this means there's a 1 in 64 chance of the six Chamber endorsements in a row happening -- same as if all heads came up in six coin flips.

Thus it sure looks like the Statesman Journal is following the Chamber party line. This wouldn't be objectionable if the newspaper openly said, "We lean right-wing," but supposedly the Statesman Journal is a paper that represents the entire Salem community.

So it isn't that the Statesman Journal endorses candidates I oppose. It's that the newspaper isn't making fact-based, reasonable decisions about political endorsements. This is bad journalism, and also bad for Salem.

[Jim Scheppke]

B. C., my head is not exploding either. And we will see who wins on May 17th. For City Council I am betting on Sally, Cara and Matt because they are by far the most qualified and the most in tune with voters in their wards. I trust the voters to make the right choices this year despite what Dick Hughes thinks.