Bad Journalism + Biased Editor = The Gray News

Wednesday, May 17, 2006

Council Chair BUSTS Gray News!

Chair of the Gray Town Council, Gary Foster, finally had enough, too. He read a lengthy report into the record that corrects Gray News falsehoods. BiasBuster will post those corrections.

But first, BiasBuster will bust the lie that Nathan lied about in his apology about the lie:

Tuesday night, Mr. Foster said: "Mr. Tsukroff specifically asked Andy after a Council meeting if he opposes the Celebration, and Andy responded, No,"

After asking that question and getting that answer, Nathan of The Gray News had written for his headline and first sentence: "Upham opposes fire department celebration... Gray Town Councilman Andy Upham opposed Gray Fire-Rescue's planned 125th Anniversary Celebration during discussion at Tuesday night's town council meeting at Stimson Hall."

Mr. Foster's statement Tuesday night prompted Nathan to go to the microphone and say that he was sorry, the headline 'could have been better' but the 'whole of the story was correct.’

That is not true, Nathan's first line also contained the falsehood.

36 Comments:

  • How boring are these posts. How invested you must be in your strange sense of righteousness. But I digress.

    Some sharpie observes: "But the news reporters are unethical and their reporting is deeply flawed."

    THAT IS THE MONUMENT IN A NUTSHELL.
    No wait, The Monument is WORSE because the Monument has pretensions, actually brags about itself, yet it is a bastion of bias, manipulation and hate. Who'd be insane enough not to see what's really happening?

    "Not all conversatives are stupid, but stupid people are all conservative."

    By Anonymous Blue Moon, at 9:48 AM  

  • hello blue moon. Can you offer some specifics as to where you think The Monumeent is biased? Here, on Biasbuster's site, we try to avoid unfounded allegations. You may think these posts are boring, and I am sure they are to you after reading the juicy and petty arguments on the hate blogs, but this blog is neutral and allegations are made with facts behind them. Please advise as to substantiating your allegations of bias in The Monument.
    Thank you.

    By Anonymous biasbuster, at 9:56 AM  

  • The truth is obvious to those who can see. If you can't or won't see it, there's little anyone can do to convince you otherwise.

    I can't imagine why anyone would work so hard to prove bias against Ray. That in itself tells me more than I need to know.

    By Anonymous Blue Moon, at 11:58 AM  

  • because so many people are blind to it. The problem is, when Ray and Nathan's lies get out and become fact and settle in the minds of the readers and then the citizens, it actually harms the community. It is that which I care about, the pervasive and corrupting effects of lies told as truth. That's never acceptable.

    By Anonymous biasbuster, at 12:10 PM  

  • Amen!

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 12:28 PM  

  • Well, well BiasBuster--
    You say that you care about the 'pervasive and corrupting effects of lies told as truth (that's never acceptable) ---
    Then...
    You MUST be E.P. because-
    Only E.P. is close enough to her own bias, slanderous lies that lay between the pages of the Monument that she refuses to acknowledge or change them!
    {That's never acceptable}

    You really can not have it both ways-Biasbuster]

    Didn't your Mama ever teach you that two wrongs do not make it right?

    You have dug yourself a grievously LARGE hole here on your negative blogspot...

    Speaking ill will toward Ray Clark and Nathan is not making you look virtous at all

    Please do the honorable thing and shut your mouth...

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 5:21 PM  

  • to blue moon,

    "I can't imagine why anyone would work so hard to prove bias against Ray." On the one hand I completely agree with you. It is hard to believe why proof should be required when bias is so obvious.

    On the other hand, some vocals in Gray need a whack by a 2X4 on the side of the head to wake up.

    Reading is good. Thinking is better. Specifics, as posted here, serve to focus on facts not on emotion. We are all subject to emotional connections, but those who can think about facts get my attention and respect. Those who rant are clowns.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 5:28 PM  

  • Did you miss the facts in Gary's article? He had dates, examples. As a result Nathan admitted it. It's always a positive thing when the person who has been charged with a lie, fesses up. Recovery can then begin.

    By Anonymous biasbuster, at 5:29 PM  

  • "Can you offer some specifics as to where you think The Monumeent is biased?"

    This is like trying to find a book in the Gray Public Library... the question is so easy to answer...you can almost not choose the example.

    An easy example would the the article that E.P. published a bit back...I think it was titled "Stuff I learned" or something like that...

    She "simply reported facts", however it was only targeted toward people that she thought were on the impeachment panel. Is that really neutral reporting? Is it even reporting at all? It is more like intimidation, and unfortunatly it works.

    She is a rat.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 6:13 PM  

  • Stuff I found was a lesson on right to know. It was presented about people in Gray and New Gloucester. No matter who was chosen, no one would have liked the choices, for no one likes to be under the microscope. The annual salary survey report she does is equally disliked....by the officials whose salary she publishes. It is loved by citizens who have a right to know where their tax dollars are going.
    I rather liked the information and the lesson that empowered the citizens to find out more.
    Publishing public information about public officials is no more biased than the salary survey or any the public information available to people.

    By Anonymous biasbuster, at 6:30 PM  

  • Well Hey I'll give some bias about Elizabeth's paper. How many examples do you want?
    (1) A 30 vote margin for a 1500 plus or minus total was a mandate, but only "slightly more" of one side than the other were in attendance at the town meeting. Statistics not her thing, huh?
    (2) Calling Donnie Carroll's actions a personal sandbox. Clearly Donnie followed the letter of the law, and used the example in the agreed upon handbook. How that was manipulative is beyond me.
    (3) The phony secretive "other buyer" for Pennell, right before the Pennell Vote
    (4) The double standard about the voters always having the final say (uh, except at town meeting).
    (5) For a journalist who says she doesn't use extraneous adjectives irrelevant to a story, I sure have seen the phrase "Armenian" a lot. Not so for those of any other ethnicity.
    (6) False outrage over being given the finger. Oh, so delicate and offended ... until it appeared on the web site
    (7) Being incensed that an organization would use the town name, logo, or stationary, then using same info on her blog to create a mock logo for GPLA

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 7:21 PM  

  • (1) A 30 vote margin for a 1500 plus or minus total was a mandate, but only "slightly more" of one side than the other were in attendance at the town meeting.
    Andy got twice as many votes the second time around than the first. A mandate.

    (2) Calling Donnie Carroll's actions a personal sandbox.
    That was in the editorial, an opinion, clearly labeled as so. Not bias. It WOULD be bias if it was in the news reporting.

    (3) The phony secretive "other buyer" for Pennell, right before the Pennell Vote
    You forget, it was not a secret, it was announced at the SAD 15 meeting by the buyer themselves, who exist and are not phony. You forget, Gray news reported that exact same thing as well. Busted!

    (4) The double standard about the voters always having the final say (uh, except at town meeting).
    That was in the opinion section of the paper, not the news reporting. When an illegality occurs it is a newspaper's job to bring that to the attention of the people. Not bias.

    (5) For a journalist who says she doesn't use extraneous adjectives irrelevant to a story, I sure have seen the phrase "Armenian" a lot. Not so for those of any other ethnicity.
    Those were on her opinion blog. Not in any news report. And isn't Paul in fact Armenian? Fact. Not bias.

    (6) False outrage over being given the finger. Oh, so delicate and offended ... until it appeared on the web site
    It was something thing that happened at a meeting and she reported it. Second, where was the outrage? Not in any news report.
    She also editorialized about it in her opinion section, clearly labeled as such. No bias.

    (7) Being incensed that an organization would use the town name, logo, or stationary, then using same info on her blog to create a mock logo for GPLA
    It is against the law for outside organizations to use municipal statienery to solicit. There is no law against spoofs.
    It would be bias if the finger shown in the photo was digitally manipulated to appear upraised. But alas, as we all know, that really happened.

    Your examples use the opinion pieces from her blog and her editorials. Bias comes from slanted NEWS reporting, not clearly labeled editorials. Not one of your examples is legitimate. Try again please, from a news report like my examples from the Gray news.

    By Anonymous biasbuster, at 7:43 PM  

  • Hey Bias-Buster, Fuck You.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 8:36 PM  

  • OK if you must
    (1) Yes he doubled the votes for. He also doubled the votes agin'.

    (2) The sandbox blurb in the editorial but clearly reflected in the news "story" as well.

    (3) Simply untrue. She pulled it out of her fat ass. The purported buyer admitted later she responded to a question from Elizabeth with too vague an answer; Elizabeth completely misread the situation. Purported buyer was approached by Elizabeth, did not approach anyone herself.

    (4) Again, false. Nothing illegal happened. Elizabeth KNEW nothing illegal happened. We have times, dates, on our side honey, she can't deny she knew nothing illegal happened. Unless she confesses to being stupid and unable to comprehend the English language.

    (5) Yes, he is Armenian. Irrelevent piece of info unless meant to be inflamatory somehow.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 8:46 PM  

  • YESSAH!!!!
    You kicked her arssss!!

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 9:59 PM  

  • @ 7:30 BiasBuster said:

    1.} "Stuff I found was a lesson on right to know.
    ***{Why does Liz feel she has to TEACH or PREACH}

    2.} "No matter who was chosen, no one would have liked the choices, for no one likes to be under the microscope.
    *** { I rest my case on that one --Liz loves to place a select target of people under the scrutiny of her private 'microscope' }

    3.} "I rather liked the information and the lesson that empowered the citizens to find out more."
    ***{Inquiring minds follow Rag Sheets for the very same reasons}

    4.} "Publishing public information about public officials is no more biased than the salary survey or any the public information available to people."
    ***{The Winks Are Not Public Salary People-- Mitch Berkowitz was a private citizen at the time of that press release (Not Public Enemy # 1 anymore) The Sanborn Brothers are private citizens too }

    ***Private Citizens Were Deliberately Targeted In Liz's Malevolent Fashion
    There is NO DENYING IT-- SHE HAS NO SCRUPLES--NO SENSE OF ETHICAL BEHAVIOR

    NONE WHAT-SO-EVAH!

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10:18 PM  

  • This whole thing is an exercise in bullshit. Like last night at the meeting with Foster taking the Gray News to task and John W. asking if next week he'll take the Monument to task for its inaccuracies. Equal time and all. Ain't gonna happen because Foster's in bed with Prata, checks with her before he does anything. She's big momma, probably the only woman willing to cozy up to him. She's got him believing people are out to get him, and it's like a self-fulfilling prophesy.
    If you are serious, you need to look at the real problem in Gray, and it's sitting on Main Street wallowing in muck. I'd call it yellow journalism, but it isn't real journalism. It's crap.
    Elizabeth Prata is one sad puppy, with no life to speak of except for her precious Monument. No friends. No outside interests. No family. No one to give her the love and adoration she craves. No nothing. So she substitutes the Monument for love and affection. She lives for the attention she gets as the town divider. She's a small fish in a tiny pond who climbs on the back of beter swimmers to stay afloat. She's made a deal with the devil and will pay for it. That you buy into it is downright pathetic.
    Focusing on Ray, as opposed to Prata, is laughable. Or it would be if it weren't so sad. He's such a good guy.

    By Anonymous Blue Moon, at 10:34 PM  

  • OK if you must
    (1) Yes he doubled the votes for. He also doubled the votes agin'.
    The point was he earned more votes, therefore the focus was on people wanting to get rid of him, so the news was that hey look, not so, more people voted for.

    (2) The sandbox blurb in the editorial but clearly reflected in the news "story" as well.
    News was news, editorial editorial. You could not find an example from the NEWS report of bias, that's because there isn't any.

    (3) Simply untrue. She pulled it out of her fat ass. The purported buyer admitted later she responded to a question from Elizabeth with too vague an answer; Elizabeth completely misread the situation. Purported buyer was approached by Elizabeth, did not approach anyone herself.
    'fat ass'? nice argument.
    Also, the Gray News reported that as well, you forget.

    (4) Again, false. Nothing illegal happened. Elizabeth KNEW nothing illegal happened. We have times, dates, on our side honey, she can't deny she knew nothing illegal happened. Unless she confesses to being stupid and unable to comprehend the English language.
    Elizabeth reported what was said at the meeting. the Council said it was illegal. She reported that.

    (5) Yes, he is Armenian. Irrelevent piece of info unless meant to be inflamatory somehow.
    Paul participates in Armenian things. The Gray news reported on that recently.

    By Anonymous biasbuster, at 4:35 AM  

  • You can defend Elizabeth until the cows come home. Doesn't matter. She colors her "news" with opinion because she is simply unable to see anything objectively. She's way too close to the situation.

    If the previous council had made an ubsubstantiated claim of illegal wrongdoing against one of her allies, would she have simply "reported" that as news? Hogwash.

    The woman is a farce.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 4:58 AM  

  • Here's my issue. If Elizabeth constantly editorializes on the issues and the people, and we know she does, how can we possibly take ANY of her paper as objective?

    WheN I read the Nation I know exactly what I'm getting. News gathered from people who have a certain view of the country. They don't pretend not to have a point of view. They still have to tell the truth 100% of the time, but their editorial mission comes out in the stories they choose to tell.

    Elizabeth, on the other hand, touts her objectivity. And she has none.

    She could perhaps cover a Raymond town meeting or a dog sled race, but her view of the personalities in this town colors every word she tries to write.

    When criticized she digs her heels in further and pretends to be a newswoman. She simply is not.

    The new publishers will figure it out for themselves; we don't need to point anytnig out.

    By Anonymous MediaWatch, at 5:11 AM  

  • Current Publishers have already figured her out. That's why they bought the paper- they wanted to add another good one to their fleet.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 5:20 AM  

  • " Elizabeth constantly editorializes on the issues and the people, and we know she does, how can we possibly take ANY of her paper as objective?"

    Editors editorialize. Duh. and it's constant because the paper comes out constantly. Ray's problem is that he uses opinion in his news articles. Constantly.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 5:21 AM  

  • Nathan lied in his headline. He lied in his first line. He lied in his apology. How can a paper support a liar? His lack of ethics spreads over to the rest of the paper and poisons it.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 5:28 AM  

  • I see alot of stretching the envelope in the stories I read

    Simply calling Nathan a liar does not make it a fact

    Elizabeth has you duped to the point of no return You have no reasoning abilities left!

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 6:26 AM  

  • Current Publishing have already figured EP out...
    Looking for a NEW Editor for the Monument!

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 6:32 AM  

  • Well, that is not true. you guys are spinning out of control, spooked by Gary's factual statements revealing the Ray Clark and Nathan Tsukroff lies. sigh

    Nathan asked Andy a question. The answer was "NO". Nathan wrote YES. that has now been proven. And when revealed, Nathan admitted it. So, Nathan is a liar. You cannot deny reality.

    By Anonymous biasbuster, at 6:45 AM  

  • {Gary's factual statements}

    Now that is an oxymoron using GARY and FACTUAL in the same sentence!
    Gary Foster's Letter will be part of his downfall

    He has aspirations of higher political gain--
    He-Never will get there!

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 4:41 PM  

  • What is unfactual to you about his statement? It is on the town website so you can read it and let me know where you believe the non-factual statements are.

    By Anonymous biasbuster, at 6:05 PM  

  • I think that any editorial regarding a person is not taken well by that person, his/her friends or their family - whether it's the Times, the Post, the Nation, or The Monument.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 7:33 PM  

  • Editorial smeditorial...
    Don't hide behind that excuse!

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 5:20 AM  

  • Here is how newspapers are constructed:
    --Editorials are opinions of the editor.
    --Op/Eds are citizen commentary or solicited newsmaker commentary.
    --Letters to the editor are also opinions from citizens.

    These are usually on the same pages, and they are separated from news reports and clearly labeled. All newspapers have these sections in the paper.

    By Anonymous biasbuster, at 6:48 AM  

  • HaHaHaHaHa HaHaHa Ha...

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 7:15 PM  

  • The comedy section is on the Sunday Comics under "Funnies."

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 8:01 PM  

  • Come on guys...The Monument is flourishing, and the Gray News is 'Sinking Fast'!! Your jealousy is showing and will certainly add to your 'downfall'! The comedy section from my prospective is in the GN under IMHO!!!

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 9:01 AM  

  • it is obvious the Gray News is less of a paper than ever. That pleases me. I will look forward to this week's Monument and see how many ads this week are in that paper and no longer in the Gray News. That will please me too. Nothing like the marketplace to settle differences.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 10:04 AM  

  • Isn't it Wonderful how 'everything has its Season'! I look forward to this week's Monument, too!

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 12:37 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home