Tag Archives: newspaper endorsements

media news

Incumbents quite often got our nod

I published a blog post this week in which I declared that the Amarillo Independent School District board of trustees needs to get a serious electoral wake-up call from voters this year. The board has delivered shabby treatment to a young high school girls volleyball coach, meaning that it didn’t measure up to its public office.

Then came a question from the reader of the blog. He wondered how many times during my years as an opinion writer and editor I endorsed those who challenged incumbent officeholders.

That was what I described to him as a “tremendous question.”

I edited editorial pages in Texas for nearly 30 years: 11 at the Beaumont Enterprise and nearly 18 years at the Amarillo Globe-News.

I had the pleasure of interviewing likely hundreds of political candidates during all those years.

I told the reader of my blog that during that time our newspapers recommended the re-election of incumbents far more frequently than we recommended the election of newcomers.

Why stay the course? Well, I suppose we placed a huge premium on experience. Absent overt malfeasance or incompetence on the part of incumbents, we usually gave them the benefit of the doubt. If the communities they served were doing well economically, they quite often deserved some measure of credit for that performance.

Sure, we would go with challengers on occasion. In Beaumont, the Enterprise once recommended the election of former Beaumont Mayor Maury Meyers, a Republican, over incumbent U.S. Rep. Jack Brooks, the irascible Democrat who chaired the House Judiciary Committee; Brooks won re-election anyway, but held a bit of a grudge against yours truly for authoring the editorial. Many years later, the Amarillo Globe-News recommended the election of Patti Lou Dawkins over incumbent Randall County Judge Ted Wood in the county’s Republican primary; Wood defeated Dawkins.

Perhaps the most controversial non-incumbent endorsement we made in Amarillo occurred in 2010 when we recommended former Houston Mayor Bill White over Texas Gov. Rick Perry. White, the Democratic nominee, got thumped by the Republican governor. The reaction from our readers was ferocious. But . . . we called it the way we saw it.

But over the span of time, we usually went with the incumbent mostly on the basis of the experience they brought to the office.

All of this, I suppose, is what got my blog reader’s attention when I recommended that the AISD board of trustees incumbents get shown the door when Election Day rolls around later this year.

I just try to call ’em the way I see ’em.

local news, media news, political news

Why endorse in primaries?

A newspaper editorial endorsement for a political primary election brings to mind a decision I made several years before the end of my own journalism career.

It was that we shouldn’t make such an endorsement unless a primary race was tantamount to election, meaning that there would be no contested two-party primaries for that particular office.

The endorsement that got me thinking about the issue came from the Minneapolis Star-Tribune, which recommended former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty in that state’s Republican primary.

Read the endorsement here.

It wasn’t always that way. I used to work for newspapers in Beaumont, Texas and in Oregon City, Ore. We made primary endorsements at those newspapers.

Then I moved to Amarillo to become editorial page editor of the Globe-News. After a period of time, I persuaded the publisher that primary endorsements were not nearly as relevant as general-election endorsements. So, why do them, especially when the candidates had another election in the fall?

Amarillo is in the middle of heavily Republican territory. In many instances, particularly in Randall County — which comprises the southern half (roughly) of Amarillo, Democrats damn near never run candidates for local offices. That means the GOP primary means the winner is all but assured of election, barring a surprise and successful write-in campaign.

We elected then to endorse only in those primary races featuring contests in just one party. That meant the Republican Party.

I came to realize that primaries are essentially a political party function. They are run by the political parties. The local party chairs are in charge of managing the ballots and ensuring that all the fees are paid.

If by chance there would be contested primaries in both major parties, we would take a pass on offering a recommendation in the primary; we preferred to wait for the general election campaign to make our recommendation known.

That was then. I now wonder whether newspaper endorsements mean anything any longer. Texas Gov. Rick Perry decided in 2010 to forgo any editorial board interviews with Texas newspapers; he was angry at the way newspapers treated him. The Globe-News that year endorsed former Houston Mayor Bill White, as did the vast majority of Texas newspapers. Gov. Perry won big anyway.

Donald Trump got few newspaper endorsements in 2016. You know how that election turned out.

If I had to do it all over again, I think I’d do it the way I decided to do it. No primary endorsements unless a party’s primary meant virtual election to office.

I also might give serious thought to giving up on the idea of offering endorsements for any race … ever!

I mean … what’s the point?

media news, national news, political news

‘Media bias’ is a non-starter, Rep. Kingston

newspapers

Jack Kingston today made arguably the most absurd assertion I’ve ever heard about alleged “media bias” in covering the 2016 presidential election.

The former Republican congressman from Georgia — who supports Donald J. Trump’s election to the presidency — actually said the lack of newspaper endorsements illustrates the point that the media are biased against his candidate.

Kingston took  that leap today on MSBNC. He was reminded immediately, however, that many of the newspapers that have endorsed Democratic nominee Hillary Rodham Clinton have adhered to historically conservative editorial policies. Thus, the papers’ aren’t traditionally “liberal” organs.

UNITED STATES - Dec 12: Rep. Jack Kingston, R-GA., address the media during a press conference in the House Studio B in the U.S. Capitol on December 12, 2013. (Photo By Douglas Graham/CQ Roll Call)

Kingston stuck to his mantra. The media are biased, he said, continuing the line that Trump, VP nominee Mike Pence and campaign manager Kellyanne Conway have been reciting whenever possible.

Oh … my.

The media always are a convenient target for losing political campaigns. That part of this tactic from Trump isn’t particularly new or original. I’ve heard it for decades.

Trump’s floundering campaign has revealed only the profound failure of the candidate. It has shown us this man’s unfitness for the job he seeks. His lack of knowledge of anything speaks volumes. His desperate tactics as the campaign draws to a close only affirm the wisdom of the newspapers’ editorial positions.

Donald Trump is losing this campaign. Moreover, he is acting like someone who has lost his mind.

As for former Rep. Kingston, he is smarter than he demonstrated today with that ridiculous assertion about media bias.

media news, national news, political news, State news

Before we cheer these endorsements, consider this …

newspapers

Hillary Rodham Clinton is rolling up some impressive support among the nation’s major newspaper editorial boards.

Let’s see: The Houston Chronicle, the Dallas Morning News, the (Phoenix) Arizona Republic, the Cincinnati  Enquirer, the San Diego Union-Tribune all have weighed in on Clinton’s side in her campaign against Republican Donald J. Trump.

All the papers mentioned have something else in common: They virtually never have endorsed Democrats for president.

Clinton also has racked up more endorsements from normally friendly editorial boards, such as the New York Times and the Washington Post.

It’s impressive. But will it be decisive? Will these media giants’ editorial opinion on the merits of Trump and Clinton determine the electoral outcome all by themselves?

Trump has earned, all told, zero editorial endorsements from major newspapers. He might get a smattering of endorsements from papers of smaller size. As a point of personal privilege, I’m waiting to see how my former employer, the Amarillo Globe-News — which is owned by the very conservative William S. Morris family of Augusta, Ga. — weighs in on this campaign.

I pose the question about whether these endorsements will make the difference for a good reason. Let’s flash back to 2010.

Texas Gov. Rick Perry was running for re-election. He faced a stout challenge from within his Republican Party from then-U.S. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison. Perry defeated Sen. Hutchison handily in the GOP primary.

Then he faced former Houston Mayor Bill White, a conservative Democrat, in the general election. Perry then did something quite interesting: He declared he wouldn’t meet with any newspaper editorial boards. The governor didn’t need to talk to us ink-stained wretches. He’d talk “directly to the people of Texas.”

The result was that Perry got virtually zero editorial endorsements from newspapers around the state. Even the Globe-News, as reliably Republican-friendly as any paper in Texas, backed Mayor White.

What was the electoral result? Gov. Perry cruised to re-election. He barely broke a sweat while defeating White 55 percent to 42 percent.

Rick Perry knew how to win in Texas. He was first elected to statewide office in 1990 and was as familiar with the state’s political landscape as any politician anywhere.

I make this point to caution those out there who consider these media endorsements to be deal makers and/or deal breakers for the candidates involved.

There might be plenty of other issues that swing this election toward Hillary Clinton’s favor. I’m dubious, though, about believing that newspaper endorsements will be among them.

As my friends on the right are fond of reminding me: Newspapers don’t pack as heavy a punch as they did in the old days.

media news, national news, political news

Do endorsements matter? Yes, if you disagree with them

th

A curious dichotomy appears to be unfolding way out yonder in the Valley of the Sun.

The Arizona Republic — for the first time in the newspaper’s history — has endorsed a Democrat for president. Hillary Rodham Clinton got the nod from Arizona’s largest newspaper over Republican presidential nominee Donald J. Trump.

The reaction from around the country has been stunning, to say the least. But get this: The endorsement has ignited a firestorm in the Phoenix community, with subscription cancellations out the wazoo — and even reportedly a death threat against someone high-up in the paper’s management chain of command.

Here’s the dichotomy.

Critics of the so-called “mainstream media” keep saying that newspaper endorsements don’t matter, that they no longer carry the weight they once did in an earlier era when papers were run by media titans named Hearst, Chandler, Graham and Pulliam.

Why, then, has there been such a reaction to the Arizona Republic’s recommendation? Is it that average rank-and-file Americans really do care after all?

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/arizona-paper-faces-death-threats-cancellations-after-clinton-endorsement/ar-BBwKJck?li=BBnb7Kz

I kind of feel the pain their experiencing in Phoenix. In 2010, the paper where I was working at the time, the Amarillo Globe-News, decided to endorse a Democrat for Texas governor over the Republican incumbent. We backed former Houston Mayor Bill White over Gov. Rick Perry. We might as well have endorsed Satan himself. The reaction from our readership was ferocious.

The good news, though, is that I don’t believe we received any death threats.

Part of the criticism we heard, of course, was that our voice “didn’t matter.” If so, then why firestorm of anger over what we said?

The same question perhaps needs to be asked now as we digest the reaction to a major newspaper deciding to go against tradition by — for shame! — backing a Democrat for the presidency of the United States.

media news, national news, political news

Newspapers forced to explain reasons for endorsement

th

I am getting a sense that newspapers across the country are doing what the Cincinnati Enquirer has just done.

It made an endorsement in the race for the presidency and then the paper’s vice president for audience/engagement, Peter Bhatia, explained why the paper made the endorsement in the first place.

http://www.cincinnati.com/story/opinion/columnists/2016/09/23/why-were-endorsing-president/90832776/

The Enquirer broke with a century-old tradition and endorsed Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton over Republican Donald J. Trump. I’ll let the editorial stand on its own. It’s a pretty compelling statement.

http://www.cincinnati.com/story/opinion/editorials/2016/09/23/enquirer-endorses-hillary-clinton-donald-trump/90728344/

Bhatia’s rationale of “Why do we do it?” glosses over what I believe is a fundamental truth about contemporary society. Although it is true, as he noted, that people get their news and opinion from a huge — and growing — field of sources, they still have this “thing” about newspaper editorial pages.

Readers might not follow a newspaper’s editorial philosophy or march off in lockstep with what it says. Still, I have this view that readers still expect their newspaper to take a stand … if only to give them grounds to criticize it.

I did this kind of work for more than three decades. I found it invigorating to discuss with my colleagues, with readers and with candidates about whether the newspaper should endorse their candidacy.

And sure, I took my share of broadsides from readers who disagreed with whatever position we took on an election.

I will continue to believe that for as long as there are newspapers being tossed on people’s front porches — or their lawns or under their cars — that readers will want to see what that paper thinks about political campaigns and candidates.

The bigger question, though, might be: How much longer will those newspapers be delivered and will those who produce the “digital product” that replaces them be willing to step up and continue to make these statements?

local news, media news, Uncategorized

Non-endorsement sends dubious message

Let’s talk about newspaper endorsements and what they intend to accomplish.

Editors and publishers will tell you they aren’t intended to make voters cast ballots in accordance with what the newspaper management wants. The folks who run these media outlets seek to stay on the moral high ground. “We just want to be a voice in the community,” they say. “It’s enough just to make people think. We know we cannot make people vote a certain way and that’s not our intention.”

It’s all high-minded stuff. I used to say such things myself when I was editing editorial pages for two newspapers in Texas — one in Beaumont and one in Amarillo — and at a paper in my home state of Oregon.

But the reality, though, is that newspaper executives — publishers and editors — never would complain if elections turn out the way they recommend.

Is there a dichotomy here? I think so.

Which brings me to the Amarillo Globe-News’s non-endorsement today in the upcoming election for mayor. The paper chose to remain silent. It wouldn’t endorse Paul Harpole’s re-election to a third term as mayor, nor would it recommend voters elect Roy McDowell as mayor.

The paper did express a couple of things about Harpole. It said it is disappointed in the missteps and mistakes that have occurred on Harpole’s watch and it also predicted that Harpole would be re-elected on May 9.

Newspapers fairly routinely encourage community residents to get out and vote. They encourage them to make the tough choices. Pick a candidate, the newspaper might suggest. Hey, none of them might not be statesmen or women, but they’re committing themselves to public service.

Suppose for a moment that Amarillo voters — all of them — took the Globe-News’s non-recommendation to heart. What if no one voted for mayor? What if no voter decided that one of the two men seeking the office deserved their vote? Would the paper declare that a victory? Or would it lament the chaos that would ensue?

This is why I disliked non-endorsements back when I toiled for daily newspapers. I’ve always believed voters expect the newspaper to recommend someone in a race, even if no candidate deserved a ringing endorsement. If nothing else, some voters do rely on newspapers to provide some guidance to voters who might not have sufficient knowledge of all the issues that decide these important elections.

Recommending no one? That’s their call. However, it’s fair to wonder whether a newspaper should ask voters to do something its management wouldn’t do, which is make a choice on whom to support at the ballot box.

 

local news, political news

'Reading between the lines'

A column in today’s Amarillo Globe-News encourages folks to “read between the lines of newspaper endorsements.”

OK. I usually do that. I also read between the lines of this particular essay, which contained a couple of points worth noting.

One is the timing of a particular endorsement mentioned by the author of the essay, Globe-News director of commentary David Henry. He writes about the paper’s impending endorsement in the Leticia Van de Putte-Dan Patrick race for Texas lieutenant governor. More on that in a moment.

Second is this: “The reason Patrick isn’t piling up newspaper endorsement is — let’s face it — his habit of saying politically incorrect things, and some editorial boards consider themselves above such behavior.”

I am almost ready to lay down some real American money and suggest that the Globe-News endorsement, when it comes, will back Patrick in the race to become the state’s next lieutenant governor. Columnists and editorialists usually don’t refer to political correctness unless they intend to make light of it, denigrate it, or say they outright they oppose it. The tone of the statement quoted on this blog suggests one or both of the first two points.

That’s fine. Any newspaper is surely entitled to endorse whomever they wish.

However, the timing is a bit troublesome.

The election occurs on Tuesday. The endorsement will come out on Election Eve or on Election Day. Either way, the response time from readers either endorsing or opposing the newspaper endorsement — whichever way it goes — is extremely limited. Readers likely will have little or zero time to write something, submit it and then get it published prior to the time voters go to the polls.

Oh yeah. They’ve got the digital edition. Readers can post comments online. Good luck getting to them if you don’t pay to read the digital version of the newspaper.

Back in the old days, when I ran editorial pages in Amarillo, in Beaumont, or back in Oregon, we had a policy that cut off campaign-related letters to the editor one week before election day. We sought to avoid what a former editor of mine would call a “last-minute dump” by foes of a candidate who would disparage a candidate without giving the other side enough time to respond.

Accordingly, we usually managed to get our editorial recommendations on races published well before Election Day. With the advent of early voting, indeed, it became imperative that we get our endorsements on the record prior to the start of the early-voting period.

I guess that’s changed these days. The timing of the newspaper’s endorsement in this highly important race amounts, in my mind, to a last-minute dump.

That’s their call. I’m still looking forward to reading what my former newspaper has to say regarding this important statewide race.

I might be surprised. Then again, probably not, if what I read between those lines is accurate.

 

local news, national news, political news, State news

Ernst follows Perry model: Who needs editorial boards?

1 Comment

Joni Ernst is staking out an interesting — but not unprecedented — tactic in her campaign for the U.S. Senate in Iowa.

The Republican is forgoing interviews with major Iowa newspaper editorial boards. Media observers in the Hawkeye State are wondering whether she’s afraid of being questioned by the editorial boards. She’s canceling interview appointments left and right.

Her opponent, Democrat Bruce Braley, is meeting with them, hoping — I can assume — to gather up newspaper endorsements.

http://mediamatters.org/blog/2014/10/23/iowa-newspapers-speak-out-over-joni-ernst-snubb/201292

Do you remember when Gov.Rick Perry kissed off newspaper endorsements in 2010 when he was running for re-election in Texas? He stiffed newspaper editorial boards all over the state. He was quite clear: I don’t need no stinkin’ editorial endorsements; I’m going to “talk directly” to Texans.

Texas newspaper editors and publishers took the snub personally, with most of them endorsing his Democratic opponent, former Houston Mayor Bill White. The paper where I worked at the time, the Amarillo Globe-News, followed suit. We backed White and when we did, you’d have thought Planet Earth had just spun off its axis. The reaction from our deeply Republican readers in the heart of the Texas Panhandle was ferocious.

Not to fear, Perry’s handlers reckoned — correctly, I should add.

The governor was re-elected handily four years ago with a 13 percent victory over White.

I figure, though, that Perry knows Texas voters as well as any politician who’s ever held public office.

Does Joni Ernst know Iowans as well? We’ll find out in about 12 days.