As predicted, JS endorses Aaron Schock, and as predicted, the piece is full of half-truths, omits key details and deliberately misinforms readers
I knew from before he announced he was going to run against Aaron Schock (R.-92nd Ill House) that the Journal Star was going to come after Bill Spears*, both on the news pages and even more so on the editorial page. So I wasn’t surprised at the smarmy little comments they tossed his way in today’s endorsement for Schock.
Spears is a member of the Peoria City Council, and tends to vote with the council’s “essential services first” wing. You know, the people who are in favor of the sort of things the Journal Star editorial board has always been in favor of, such as the downtown museum project, as well as most of the cockamamie taxpayer-supported economic development projects that have come down the pike.
You cannot underestimate how much the Journal Star powers-that-be hate these people and wants to see them punished for opposing their agenda.
Honestly though, while the piece was annoying and insulting, it could have been worse. They could have used the tactics they tried during the last municipal election, and try to make Spears out to be a racist. That was what they did to Mayor Ardis other ‘essential services” candidates. There’s still more than a week until the election, so we may yet see a few convoluted attempts to make Spears out to be a bigot.
That this piece lacks a blatant race card is the best thing I can say about it. It truly is a hatchet job.
They accuse Spears of having all sorts of expensive goals, but with being “vague on specifics” about how to pay for them. Then, they complain that he doesn’t support building more prisons. If Schock mentioned specifics, I didn’t see them mentioned.
This paragraph was especially misleading:
He’s no fan of Ameren and would freeze electric rates until there’s marketplace competition, which makes for a good sound bite but represents a real Catch-22 for the utilities and their customers who desire both affordable and reliable power. Given the God-awful deregulation bill the Legislature passed in 1997, competition may never develop for residential users. A forever freeze is not the answer.
Ummm … excuse me, but doesn’t supporting a freeze “until there’s marketplace competition” mean that Spears specifically does NOT support the “forever freeze” that has the editorialists so worried? And Spears’ position is misrepresented. He wants a freeze NOW to keep the rate hike from going into effect while a compromise or at least a better bill is worked out. Spears supports a specific bill, Schock does not, although he says he wants a compromise.
And the award-winning (snicker) editorial page leaves out a few important details, such as the fact that Schock has received campaign donations from the energy companies that are benefiting from the high price of fuel. The Journal Star has criticized Spears for “negative campaigning” for daring to mention this fact in his ads. Well, it’s a good thing that Spears mentioned it, ’cause that’s the sort of embarrassing information that Peoria’s one and only newspaper of record doesn’t go out of its way to print in regular news articles. Growing up in Peoria, I didn’t realize until I left that most newspapers actually actually like it when they get to tell their readers information like that.
And get this:
As a former School Board member, he’s knowledgeable on school finance issues and wants to reduce the reliance on property taxes.
(Easy there, stomach. This will all be over soon)
Would this be Peoria School District 150, whose budget collapsed like a house of cards during Schock’s tenure as board president? This was the same budget he bragged about during his first campaign? The same budget he told conservative voters he personally went through and cut line item by line item? That same budget he later claimed was 100 percent the fault of Kay Royster? Is that what the JS means by “knowledgeable on school finance?”
And let’s discuss this phrase “wants to reduce the reliance on property taxes.” Really? Is that what Mr. Schock was doing when he testified to fellow legislators that virtually everyone in Peoria — including, incorrectly, the Peoria City Council — was in favor of to Senate Bill 2477, which would allow the Public Building Commission to authorize bonds for construction and levy property taxes on District 150’s behalf. Governor Blagojevich vetoed this bill, but if the Senate overrides it, then taxpayers will be forced to pay for the district’s unpopular building program — through property taxes.
I got a kick out of the editorial’s description of Spears as “the 49-year-old Democrat, Peoria city councilman, local plumber and salesman.” Heh. Spears was certainly a plumber. He seemed to know what he was doing, because Plumbers and Pipefitters Local 63 chose him to be their business manager. Google is filled with examples of the JS describing him as a “plumber turned salesman.” Hmmm … I wonder if the JS ever described their “wonder boy” as a former ticket-scalper turned investor in student rental property.
The editorial says “[n]otably, he has been one of the few legislators to stay above the fray this election season, refusing to go negative.” That’s not what Spears says, claiming that Schock has been very negative about Spears in face-to-face encounters when there isn’t a camera there collecting evidence. What’s more honest, a “negative” campaign ad that relates unpleasant but accurate details to voters, or whisper and smear campaigns? The JS editorialists prefer “plausible deniability” when it comes to negative campaigning.
Also, I suggest that it’s fundamentally dishonest for any newspaper editorial to praise a candidate for running an honest campaign while ignoring the fact that this same candidate has been using the same campaign tactics he not two years earlier criticized his opponent for doing. Schock complained Ricca Slone was using her franking privilege to send “information” to constituents that were little more than campaign ads. Schock has done the exact same thing this year, but managed to dishonestly imply that he was enjoying the support of politicians and public officials who most certainly were not supporting him.
And finally, there is this:
This is the most hotly contested race in central Illinois, with mind-boggling spending. Spears’ record as a councilman speaks better of him than his performance in this campaign. But elections such as these are always a referendum on the incumbent. Aaron Schock has done a good job, and he is solidly endorsed.
First, Schock is solidly outspending Spears. Second, if Spears were running for re-election to the city council against an opponent with a chance to win, they world have absolutely no praise for his record as a city council member. None. Trust me on this. And what’s with “elections such as these are always a referendum on the incumbent.” Says who? The JS? Hey, we’re not hiring an employee. Were electing a a policy maker and a leader. Decisions like this must be based on issues of character and honesty as much as whether they are “hardworking.” For this job, you pick someone who’s relatively independent and honest and shares your values.
* In the interest of full disclosure: Bill Spears is a personal friend of mine, and my support of his campaign extends beyond just writing favorable articles.
Billy Dennis is a former reporter and editor at small daily and weekly newspapers in Illinois and Missouri. He comments on media, news and politics. He also owns and operates 
Just how close is the Spears/Schock eletion anyway?
I know, the PJS seems to be acting as part of the Schock campaign.
Oh well, that will get me out there with my walk list.
Bill’s headline screams:
“As predicted, JS endorses Aaron Schock, and as predicted, the piece is full of half-truths, omits key details and deliberately misinforms readers”
I sez: You are right to complain about this, Bill. They are definitely ripping off your ’style’.
Once again, Mouse, I point out that this is a blog created SPECIFICALLY to offer my opinions on news, politics and the media. If you can point to a FACT that I got wrong, I’ll correct it.
Bill sez: If you can point to a FACT that I got wrong, I’ll correct it.
I sez: When I do point to facts you get wrong, you just shuffle and side-step. You put forth “half-truths” and deliberately “misinform” your readers.
Case in point:
http://peoriapundit.com/blogpeoria/2006/10/19/is-the-schock-campaign-diverting-services-from-battered-women/
You got called on this by a lot of folks, not just by me, and you simply brush it off as “honest” “bias.” No, sir, you do not correct your errors and misdeeds with any kind of consistency or accuracy.
The thing that bothers me is that there are folks out there who take what you say at face value. In fact, it scares the hell out of me.
You throw the rocks at the PJS but don’t like it when they are thrown back at you. LOOK at this headline. LOOK at the other headline I referenced. Tell me how these headlines are ethical? (simle test – replace “Schock” with “Spears” and tell me how they feel – be honest).
You have a history of talking the talk but no walking the walk. You, sir, are a hypocrite, plain and simple (and I do mean ’simple’).
Two more weeks, just two more weeks….then we can turn to other issues and perhaps a more balanced presentation of the issues (sorry but the damn Spears campaign logo on the site makes me skeptical of whatever is written relative to that particular race).
But since we’re still on this topic for now:
Bill says: “Decisions like this must be based on issues of character and honesty as much as whether they are “hardworking.— I agree. And I think that the campaign run by Spears (if in fact he’s in control of his campaign) says alot about his character as duly noted when the PJS states: “Spears’ record as a councilman speaks better of him than his performance in this campaign.”. They hit is right on the head on that one. While it’s a little backhanded, they were giving him a compliment on his actions as a Councilmember. But the fact is, he’s not running for Councilmember but State Legislator and I think we should expect more of him because of that.
And I don’t see why you continue to rail on the PJS for their actions when you commit the same “sins” to a greater degree. Your post could be accurately titled:
“As predicted, Peoria Pundit endorses Bill Spears, and as predicted, the piece is full of half-truths, omits key details and deliberately misinforms readers”
Ding ding ding ding ding ding! We have a winner folks!
Woner ifStates Atty Lyons will look at why Wonder Boy is pay not for profits to staff his campaign. What kinda dodge is gonig on here?
Yeah, yeah, yeah. I’m just as bad as the JS. Your tactics are typical of those who cannot or will not address the substance of what I have written. I went through the Journal Star paragraph by paragraph and found it lacking. It left out key details, the lack of which tended to suppor ttheir candidate. If you believe I or this blog has left out specific facts about Spears, lets hear them.
A newspaper editorial — even though it’s still opinion — is supposed to follow certain ethical guidelines, one of which is to not attempt to sway opinion by omitting facts that made their guy look bad.
On a lighter note, it cracks me up that we constantly read letters the PJS editor blasting them for their “typical liberal views” and “left wing media blather” and on and on and on…
…and then come election time, EVERY time, the PJS endorses GOP candidates about 40 times more than they do Dems. The PJS has NEVER endorsed a Democrat for President or, to the best of my knowledge, Governor of Illinois since I’ve lived in this area.
Like Eric Alterman says: “What Liberal Media?”
BJ: the PJS gets blasted because they, from time to time, actually print a somewhat liberal columnist and that they don’t automatically rubber stamp Bush’s positions.
Remember the readership: the average PJS reader probably views Jerry Klein as an “intellectual”.
Bill Sez:
“Yeah, yeah, yeah. I’m just as bad as the JS. Your tactics are typical of those who cannot or will not address the substance of what I have written.”
I sez: I have stated before, I have no interest in the Schock/Spears race. None at all. I have no intention of addressing “the substance” of what you have written. I am attacking the way you present your opinion. If you would read what I posted (something you commonly chastise others to do) you would see that I said, “You are right to complain about this, Bill. They are definitely ripping off your ’style’. ”
The problem I have, repeatedly, is with YOU, Bill. The hypocracy of you slamming the PJS and then doing the exact same thing. It amazes me that you have absolutely no shame.
PART 1: Journalistic Ethics.
Bill,
First thanks for sending me on an intellectual journey this evening. I’ve learned a lot about journalistic ethics. First, professional journalists do subscribe to a very lengthy set of ethical principles. The Society for Professional Journalists has a code that can be found at the following link (http://www.spj.org/ethicscode.asp?). Based upon my reading of these ethical guidelines, it is unfair to compare you to professional journalism because much of what you state, do and exhibit on this site would never be allowed at a professional journalism newsoutlet. Nonetheless, that’s part of your schtick that makes people coming here. However it makes you a little disingenuous to call them out for your perceptions of their ethical lapses while committing numerous ethical lapses in doing so.
“What’s good for the goose is good for the gander?”
Interestingly, cyberjournalist.net has created a blogger’s code of ethics modeled after the Society of Professional Journalist’s Code of Ethics. While a little more lax than that of the SPJ it’s a good document. So I say, if you want to hold the PJS to an ethics policy, let’s see you adopt the Blogger’s Code of Ethics and adhere to it. Then the playing field is level and you can throw stones at glass houses all you like.
“Involvement in Politics”
I also found interesting in my research that many newspapers go beyond the standard ethics policy and adopt more stingent standards in certain areas including political activity. For example, the Milwaukee Journal Sentinal states the following regarding Advocacy and political activity: “We should avoid active involvement or membership in any causes — politics, community affairs, social action, demonstrations — that could compromise or appear to compromise our ability to report and edit fairly.
We should refrain from signing petitions or otherwise identifying ourselves with public issues, groups or causes. This is not intended to discourage staff members from voting, but we should avoid political activity beyond that, including campaign contributions. Any request for a leave of absence to join a partisan political activity will not be granted.
Staff members who are related to or close friends with a person involved in a political campaign or organization should refrain from covering or making news judgments about that campaign or issue.”
So clearly there is a different standard between what a journalist is held to and what you apply to yourself since you clearly don’t conform to this level of objectivity in your reporting.
“Editorial Defined”
Bill says: “A newspaper editorial — even though it’s still opinion — is supposed to follow certain ethical guidelines, one of which is to not attempt to sway opinion by omitting facts that made their guy look bad.” However, my research indicates that:
“ed‧i‧to‧ri‧al  [ed-i-tawr-ee-uhl, -tohr-] Pronunciation Key – Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun
1. an article in a newspaper or other periodical presenting the opinion of the publisher, editor, or editor.”
and from http://www.geneseo.edu/~bennett/EdWrite.htm
“An editorial is an article that presents the newspaper’s opinion on an issue. It reflects the majority vote of the editorial board, the governing body of the newspaper made up of editors and business managers. It is usually unsigned. Much in the same manner of a lawyer, editorial writers build on an argument and try to persuade readers to think the same way they do. Editorials are meant to influence public opinion, promote critical thinking, and sometimes cause people to take action on an issue. In essence, an editorial is an opinionated news story.”
Clearly editorials include opinion, selected facts and logic that supports the writer’s viewpoint. Your only problem with the PJS editorials is that they differ in conclusion with your own….reasonable minds can disagree on facts and conclusions. But many of your posts, if not post, are more along the line of editorials than news stories.
Enough of this, but thanks again for the intellectual challenge this evening.
Part 2: The Substance of What You’ve Written.
While not wanting to prolong this dialogue, I think it is fair that I address some of your “facts” used to base your opinion on so that you can see how I differ in my view.
You continually raise the race card in your posts regarding this campaign when this has NEVER been an issue at any time in this campaign contest. You ALLUDE to your opinions about events that occurred two years ago in a council race and SURMISE that it’ll be done again (if it was even done in the first place) to paint Spears as a bigot. Let me state it again, you are the only one that has raised this as an issue. Lame attempt to discredit the JS.
You state regarding Spears that: “He seemed to know what he was doing, because Plumbers and Pipefitters Local 63 chose him to be their business manager” Yeah and they also threw him out of office – so draw your own conclusion.
To refute their statement regarding Schock’s more statemanship like campaign, you state: “That’s not what Spears says, claiming that Schock has been very negative about Spears in face-to-face encounters when there isn’t a camera there collecting evidence. ” So am I to believe that Spears (the candidate and your self-described friend and hopeful next legislator) told you or what we can see with out own two eyes on T.V. and in print based upon the advertisements that he’s run? I’ll believe what I can see and hear.
Regarding the rate hike, you state: “He wants a freeze NOW to keep the rate hike from going into effect while a compromise or at least a better bill is worked out. Spears supports a specific bill, Schock does not, although he says he wants a compromise.” What specific bill does Spear support? That’s a FACT that I must have overlooked in your reporting. From the way you wrote this it sounds like they both want the same thing, a compromise that’s better than where we’re currently at but you’re willing to give Spears credit for the right answer?!?!
You criticize the JS for not pointing out that Schock has taken campaign contributions from utility companies. First, I’m not sure it’s news in the small amounts contributed but if it is, should we also be concerned about the amount of funds Spears has received from Labor Unions? A special interest is a special interest. And last I heard at the Council Meeting, the City of Peoria is facing millions in dollars in unfunded liabilities for health insurance benefits granted to retirees (by Councilmembers) and for pension benefits (granted by legislators) that will be paid for my local taxes. These benefits are the direct result of labor union activity at the local and state level.
I’d point out some other fallacies in your “facts” that were reported, but I couldn’t find many facts in the post and it’s late. I have to get ready for Halloween.
People seem to conveniently forget about the Aaron Schock who ran against Ricca Slone. If everyone takes the time to think about that fun-time, then the true colors of Aaron Schock will come through. What you see in this campaign is a mirage… the kids is ruthless, but he is in a vacuum of his supporters telling him that he’s been a shoo-in from the start.
He’s gonna be unpleasantly surprised. Just wait.
In the end, the proof is in the pudding. And, if people are able to remove their heads from their butts for a few moments on Novemeber 7, they’ll realize that Aaron has done very little for his district… save for the happy crappy photo ops while doing the dog and pony show regarding those “important” bills he pounded his name onto.
I think the Journal Star pretty much ran stories about how Ransburg had the race sown up, last time around.
Whoops.
Facts the JS left out:
Bill Spears was defeated for re-election as an at-large city councilman a decade ago for some reason.
Bill Spears was defeated for re-election as Business Agent for the plumbers union because on the Council he voted against a ton of projects that created jobs and because he was lazy in fighting for the union’s interests.
Crime has gotten out of control while Mr. Spears has sat on the Council. Was it this bad 14 years ago? Did Councilman Spears sit idly by or was he ineffective on the Council for 14 years? How long does he need to be elected to be effective–25 years? After 14 years on the council, is crime in the city trending better or worse?
If CeaseFire is the answer to rising violent crime, why didn’t Spears make a motion on the Council months ago and adopt it?
Most people can’t think of a thing Spears has done on the Council in 14 years.
District 4’s drainage and flooding problems persist. Other areas of the city have had projects to recify their flooding problems.
If Spears cares so much about fire station 11 as an essential service priority, why wasn’t it fully reopened last year? Priorities come first.
The JS’s endorsement of Schock could have been far harder on Spears than it was…just by listing more FACTS.
Bill Spears is a good man from a great family, and you have a right to like him a lot. Sticking by friends is admirable. This doesn’t change the facts about Spears’ record in office–it is sorely lacking no matter how you objectively look at the facts. There is just no category in the job of State Rep that Spears could do a better job than Schock.
The problem for Spears in this election is that he ran for the wrong reasons. He didn’t truly find fault with Schock’s performance and decide he needed to offer a better alternative. Spears was an unabashed opportunist in thinking that his family ties combined with Madigan’s money and campaign expertise and the district’s overwhelming Democratic composition would make the race an easy mark for him. Once in office, his party affiliation would be all he needed to survive without working very hard. He thought wrong.
Insight: And if you want to base your vote on any of these facts or your interpretations of them, fine by me. And the Journal Star would have been well within its right to do the same, just as I have to right to criticize the JS for cherry picking those facts that support Schock.
Peoria Proud: I’m glad you actually went and did some research. As you discovered, ethical standards call for these sorts of unsigned editorials should be the result of the majority vote of the editorial board. Not being present at editorial board meetings, I have no idea if votes actually are taken for endorsements. I know that BIG endorsements — president, governor and perhaps senator — are made by Copley officials in California.
Too bad the Copley Press organization doesn’t practice transparency and reveal the votes from editorial board meetings, or be up-front with readers about the role of the corporation in selecting candidates for endorsement. To be fair, this is the case with most media corporations.
And I want to address the issue of the race card. Absolutely true. I’m the one bringing it up. Nothing the JS has written has mentioned race. For that I’m glad. So why did I write that I’m waiting for the JS to bring it up. I’m doing it because this editorial board has a proven history of doing so. Read the links to previous posts. This was a tactic they used last in the municipal elections. Call it a pre-emptive strike on my part. Unfair? Nope. Not given the JS’s history.
Billy,
Unfair …yes. I fail to see how you can feel justified in using race “preemptively” in any positive fashion. It’s the lowest form of fear-mongering and usuallly indicates a lack of factual basis to argue about.
I don’t think anyone in the Peoria community is really surprised that the PJS takes sides in an election. In fact, that’s been one of the primary roles of newspapers from inception is to influence people. You continue to harp on the fact that they are unsigned — there’s a reason for that — one they are supposed to reflect the official position of the newspaper and not the individual position of one individual. Perhaps some of the best writing ever done in this country was done anonymously and through the media – read Federalist Papers and the Anti-Federalist Papers. Great examples of, for the most part at the time, anonymous opinion pieces designed to influence the public and decisionmakers.
The fact remains that the newspaper is bound by an ethics policy and you’re not…..so while that makes you free to use the tactics without “violating journalistic ethics” it doesn’t give you more credibility in doing so.
Insight, you’re writing your piece as if Aaron had already won. Nothing could be further from the truth. You’re basing your feelings on your warm leanings towards Aaron and his Cult of Personality. In the end, it’s all about the votes. Just because Aaron has brought along a couple dozen African-Americans does NOT mean that the entire Black Community will be behind him. Not by any stretch.
In the end, Aaron was part of some of the worst years District 150 has seen. I’ve asked many times, and I’ve yet to get ANY type of definitive answer… WHAT has he done for HIS district? There are a number of Central Illinois Zombies that fall for his sh*t, just like folks fall for the sh*t from George W. Bush… they’re blinded by almost a religious experience.
I’m betting that the religious experience hasn’t spread nearly as far as the Journal Star, Vonster, you, or anyone else who thinks like you thinks it has. In the end, if the turnout is what it should be, Spears will win.
JS endorsed a Democrat lady for Governor of the State of Illinois the same year Jan Deissler was elected to District # 150 school board. 1994, I believe. The Democrat lady lost badly. The JS endorsed a lot of women that year and called it the “year of the woman”.
Anon E. gets no further response from the elitist “pro” journi Billy Dennis. What a hoot.
I love it when a blogger is above addressing his critics in full (because he is paying for the space). It is their prerogative. If I put up then you can shut up I suppose is what these elitist bloggers are saying. End of conversation. Bada boom bada bing. Vonster is the otherside of these —-s. How mein kampf (I use this since it is vogue to label everything and everyone with Hitler).
Eat Meat!
No shame. No shame a’all!
I can’t believe the Aaron Schock commercial showing the folks down at the Galena Park Home along “Interstate” 29. Schock is portrayed as the Wonder Boy who championed an $800,000.00 STUDY as to the problems along “Interstate” 29 in Peoria Heights and Peoria.
Guess what? I can do a study for $5.00 and tell you what the problem(s) is/are. Number one… there is NO stop lights along the damned thing ANYWHERE. Number two… the speed limit is too damned high. Number three… the Illinois State Police avoid it like it’s the Plague.
Now, I read that the estimated cost of putting a fifth lane along Galena Road is 10 MILLION BUCKS. So, we taxpayers not only pay for the STUDY of $800,000.00, but the chance of this fifth lane ever being put in is about NIL. Won’t happen. You think that the State of Illinois will pony up $10 million anytime soon? And, $10 million is a LOW estimate at the end of the day. Yet, here is Wonder Boy acting like he’s putting the fifth lane in himself, over Christmas Break, and there’s the old folks nodding their heads like they’ll be helping him wheelbarrow the rocks out.
This makes me want to puke. All I read about was the mayor of Peoria Heights wanting a stop light down there, and lowering the speed limit, and IDOT saying “no,” cause apparently they want a few more injuries and deaths down there… just for the fun of it.
Now, it’s a political fun-day for Wonder Boy. He is so slick that rain beads on him. And those old folks in the commercial have gotten sucked along for the ride, never stopping to think that it’s THEIR money being wasted on a study for a plan that will never happen, and yet the commercial makes it appear that it’s on the horizon THANKS to Wonder Boy.
[...] over Bil Spears in the last 92nd Illinois House District race. Of course, its endorsement was full of half-truths and misinformation. And here’s another difference an endorsement from Mayor Ardis and the Journal Star: Ardis [...]
[...] its editorials and coverage to promote some local candidates at the expense of others (here’s one example, out of many). According to this site, another GateHouse newspaper is getting in on the act: [...]