Bad Journalism + Biased Editor = The Gray News

Tuesday, May 16, 2006

Clark vents over radon

May 12 “Council debates radon solutions”

Ray Clark wrote:

Example #1: Council Vice-Chair Andy Upham suggested that the problem can be eliminated by having the town’s maintenance man drill a hole in the concrete floor and put in a pipe and a fan. The problem, however, is more complicated than that.”

BiasBust 1a: Mr. Clark is wrong. The issue is not complicated. Mr. Upham’s resolution for radon abatement is exactly on the money, according to the remedies outlined at Radonzone.com:
"A variety of methods can be used for radon gas protection in your home. In some cases, radon reduction may be attained by sealing cracks in floors and walls. In other cases, simple systems using pipes and a radon exhaust fan or radon vent fan can be used to reduce radon. Such radon reduction systems are called "sub-slab depressurization," and do not require major changes to your home. This radon abatement method removes radon gas from below the concrete floor and the foundation before it can enter the home.”

BiasBust 1b: Telling the reader that something is complicated is editorializing, not reporting. If something is complicated, show the reader with proof, through examples. Otherwise the reporter is making judgments for the reader and that is not the reporter’s job.

Example #2: “Bennett will put out a request for proposal for a more professional approach to solving the radon issue. But even that may be a problem: Mr. Upham has demanded at least three estimates,”

BiasBust 2a: Mr. Clark is wrong. The Town Administrative code outlines bidding. It includes a protocol for soliciting three bids through a formal process.

BiasBust 2b: Using the word “demanded” characterizes. Reporters do not characterize for the reader, they chronicle by using neutral language.

BiasBust 2c: Using the words ‘more professional approach’ Mr. Clark is making judgments for the reader. If including more specifics as noted above, it would allow the reader to make his or her own judgments as to the level of professionalism. The goal is always to provide enough neutral information written in neutral language that allows the reader to decide.

36 Comments:

  • Thank you for capturing the essence of the problem.

    Innocent people read Clarks reporting and do not see the corrupting effect of bad reporting.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 11:35 AM  

  • You're welcome. There are two problems with the Gray News, the inaccuracies and outright falsehoods; and the cumulative effect of using unethical language. Both leave a bad impression and have a corrupting effect.
    Thank you for reading.

    By Anonymous BiasBuster, at 11:42 AM  

  • I extend my appreciation, as well, for your efforts in pointing out all of inaccuracies and outright falsehoods expressed by Ray Clark in the Gray News! His unethical language does have a corrupting effect; and is purposefully generated to leave a bad impression on the readers of his editorials. Ray lacks professionalism..Big Time..and YOUR efforts to 'set the record straight' are so welcomed! Thank You!

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 1:16 PM  

  • Clark has, I believe by his own admission, made a career of writing junk mail. He has exercised those skills in the GN to accomplish his ends.

    Elizabeth recognized the vacuum of reporting and created the Monument, at great personal risk, as a gift to the citizens of Gray. Many recognize that and are grateful. Others resent it and yearn to continue with their heads in the sand.

    Gray is at a new crossroads. Are we ready to grow up, or do we wish to remain as children believing in fairies.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 2:05 PM  

  • Don, take note.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 2:12 PM  

  • Controlling information flow is power. The Gray News controlled the information flow for many years but did not take their position seriously enough. Eventually, as absolute power tends to do, it corrupted absolutely. Proper dissemination of information is a duty, not a right to be asused, and the Gray News would do well to remember that.

    By Anonymous Biasbuster, at 2:14 PM  

  • Hey there BiasBuster a.k.a. Elizabeth Prata clone,
    You are using semantics as a weak attempt at discrediting Ray Clark’s article
    If you were there at the meeting, you know well that this council was unprepared to deal with the air radon mitigation proposal report given to them well in advance of this meeting. Did you miss the suggestions from Gary Foster & Company to open the windows to mitigate the interior air radon gases? As you end your posting, I quote you as saying “The goal is always to provide enough neutral information written in neutral language that allows the reader to decide.” – You really need to practice what you preach here!

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 3:45 PM  

  • Please pass that along to Elizabeth Prata...

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 3:46 PM  

  • On Example #2
    That is exactly what Andy Upham said... "3 bid minimum"...

    So, when You twist words back to reference the Administration Code you are merely agreeing with Ray Clark

    How stupid do you think the citizens of Gray are?

    Get a life-- would you!

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 3:49 PM  

  • "Elizabeth recognized the vacuum of reporting and created the Monument, at great personal risk, as a gift to the citizens of Gray"

    O.M.G.... make me puke!

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 3:51 PM  

  • Hey, Biasbuster-- Concerning Example #1--

    I for one and many agree... want the RADON MITIGATION SYSTEMS installed by licensed professionals... not the town "maintance man"

    Have you even read the reports provided by Air & Water Quality of Freeport??????

    Hmmmmmm... I didn't think so!

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 4:04 PM  

  • Ray Clark wrote that Upham 'demanded three bids', I referenced the Admin Code to let you know that he was proper to make that statement (note I did not say 'demand'). Do you think the Administrative Code should not be referenced when quoting it?

    By Anonymous Biasbuster, at 4:27 PM  

  • Radon abatement is taken care of by venting it. That's all it takes. The Buildings and Grounds Director (note I did not say 'maintenance man') can do that. He already has, in town office.

    By Anonymous Biasbuster, at 4:29 PM  

  • Hey Elizabeth,

    You should get a real job.

    Love,

    Gray

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 7:02 PM  

  • Elizabeth who?

    By Anonymous Biasbuster, at 10:14 PM  

  • Gary who?

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 7:27 AM  

  • if biasbuster is not sharp enough to figure out who Elizabeth is (maybe try looking in the mirror?), why should we think you are sharp enough to be "busting" the Gray News?

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 6:06 PM  

  • Well, I am sharp enough to know that Elizabeth is not behind everything. I also know that the Gray News had a factual comeuppance Tuesday night that was long overdue.

    By Anonymous biasbuster, at 6:34 PM  

  • Naw.. that was just Baby-Ass-Gary stiking out like a wounded pup! Whining and wimpering about whole-lot-a-nothing!

    He is so pissed at Nathan for reporting about the Attorney General investigating WHY Gary deleted his own Town Records of Emails as Town Councilor---

    There's just no getting around that one Biasbustah!

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10:24 PM  

  • He said he deleted one e-mail but that since custodial care of that one e-mail was already in the hands of the chair and the manager it was not deemed a problem, since the e-mail still exists, ergo, not deleted from the public.

    By Anonymous Biasbuster, at 4:50 AM  

  • I am going to watch for these words in this week's Gray news. Apparently, seemingly, likely, those kind of words. I never thought about that before but putting them in does color Ray's news reporting doesn't it.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 5:30 AM  

  • Your attempt to shrink Gary Fosters {Watergate} tactics of deleting emails are not convincing

    Gary Foster has entrenched himself in a poor posture with the Town of Gray

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 6:29 AM  

  • Well, it is a fact. Gary deleted one e-mail that Pam and Mitch already had. Therefore, not deleted from the public. Since the e-mail exists, it is not a violation. Get over it.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 6:48 AM  

  • Your version of this does not "wash" with the public-
    Gary Foster's image is tarnished
    Even his Mommy & Daddy can not find enough polish to fix the flaws

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 4:44 PM  

  • Sorry, there are no 'different versions' of the facts. They are provable and here they are again from anonymous above, which I have verified and you can do the same (that's what makes them facts):
    "Gary deleted one e-mail that Pam and Mitch already had. Therefore, not deleted from the public. Since the e-mail exists, it is not a violation."

    Please do not bring his family into any negative talk. We are speaking about Gary and where you believe his statements are not truthful.

    By Anonymous biasbuster, at 6:08 PM  

  • The A.G.s office investigated Gary Foster... this is a fact!

    Gary Foster deleted emails... this is a fact!

    His parents have not got enough polish to fix his flaws... this is a fact!

    No skirting around the facts

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 8:15 PM  

  • As E.P. says herself... I just state the facts... if you think they are "negative" so be it

    I have no control of the facts...
    Just report the facts

    The citizens will draw their own opinions and come to their own conclusions!

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 8:17 PM  

  • The A.G.s office investigated Gary Foster... this is a fact!
    Nooo, the Gray News complained that Gary deleted one e-mail. AG called Gary. AG said, it's not an issue. Done. FACT.

    Gary Foster deleted emails... this is a fact!
    he deleted one e-mail already under care of pam and mitch. FACT

    His parents have not got enough polish to fix his flaws... this is a fact!

    C'mon, this is totally unncessary to say and comments like that are not appreciated on this blog. Please make no personal statements here.

    No skirting around the facts
    Then I do not understand how you can continue to do so.

    By Anonymous biasbuster, at 8:44 AM  

  • "Please make no personal statements here."

    Every posting you have made is personal

    Why don't you stop!?!

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 5:21 AM  

  • How so? I use actual examples from the Gray News and provide industry information as to how and why the examples are not ethical or correct. Here is an example of a biasbuster correction using facts including source information, and a personal statement:

    "biasbuster: Bennett will put out a request for proposal for a more professional approach to solving the radon issue. But even that may be a problem: Mr. Upham has demanded at least three estimates,”
    BiasBust 2a: Mr. Clark is wrong. The Town Administrative code outlines bidding. It includes a protocol for soliciting three bids through a formal process.

    A personal statement would be, say, "Clark is a friggin idiot and is stupid to be so wrong when he can read the damn code for himself and see just how stupid he is."

    See the difference?

    By Anonymous biasbuster, at 6:53 AM  

  • What makes you think that you are the expert on
    "industry information" ?

    And there you go--breaking your own rules by using {vulgar language}...
    tisk tisk.. Why do you feel you can not express your constructive comments without such vile words?

    Shame on you biasbuster

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 7:19 PM  

  • "BiasBust 2a: Mr. Clark is wrong. The Town Administrative code outlines bidding. It includes a protocol for soliciting three bids through a formal process."

    You have taken Ray Clarks words and twisted them around to serve as an arguement... Do you lack trust in other people reporting the Town Council meetings?

    We know what was said by Dean Bennett--Andrew Upham doesn't even want to listen to what Air & Water Quality have to say to explain or support their Air Radon Test Results and the plan for mitigation of the Air Radon..
    Andrew Upham insisted (demanded) that they get three bids before moving forward to the mitigation systems project--

    Meanwhile, back at the GYM... we allow radon to seep into the tiny lungs of our children!

    Why don't you wake up biasbuster and smell the roses!
    Before the children & adults using the GYM are pushing up daisies

    Thanks to Andrew Upham & Company

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 7:32 PM  

  • Why is it that Andrew Upham & Company do not have to get three bids from three different companies to do the systems check @ $125. per hour for the computer network audit?

    To a huge tune of monies planning to be spent shortly....

    $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

    This issue is coming up as an article {wanna be}
    @ June 6th meeting

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 7:36 PM  

  • Why is it that Andrew Upham & Company do not have to get three bids from three different companies to do the systems check @ $125. per hour for the computer network audit?

    I believe the trigger for bidding is $10,000. The computer audit did not reach that threshold, being only about $1200. That is why. Are you interested in the order coming up on June 6? is there something that the Gray News reported about it that concerns you as a biased piece?

    By Anonymous biasbuster, at 8:03 PM  

  • To Biasbuster,
    I hope you are the gentle soul I think you are, because you are going to need all your patience and all you inner calm to deal with some of the people who will write here (like some of the people who wrote stuff in the BWG hate blog) It will be difficult to keep the poison at bay. It can be quite insidious.
    Hope you succeed.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 4:59 PM  

  • Hi anonymous,

    thanks very much. I think some of those guys are a pretty tough crowd, too. But in the end, I think it will be OK. Thank you for the encouragement, it is welcome.

    By Blogger BiasBuster, at 5:30 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home