 |
 |
Is the Press Democrat out of touch with the voters in Sonoma County?
It’s a charge that’s directed at the newspaper every election cycle when its Editorial Board issues its list of endorsements.
Complaints come from across the political spectrum. On the right, for example, many Republicans hated the Editorial Board’s endorsement of Mike Halliwell over Jim Judd in the 6th Congressional District GOP primary, where the victor will challenge Democratic Rep. Lynn Woolsey.
“This ‘endorsement’ is yet another glaring example of Lib-media establishment types trying to convince us to nominate the weakest possible candidate, to create the obvious result — our defeat,” one person declared in a comment posted to WSC.
“I am sorry but your endorsement of Halliwell just shows how your paper owned by the most liberal news agency in the country, New York Times, is out sync,” another stated.
On the left, many Democrats skewered the Editorial Board’s endorsement of Michael Wilson over Michael Allen in the 7th Assembly District Democratic primary.
“I’m not sure who is more disconnected from this community, the PD Editorial board or Michael Wilson. I’ll take a person who supports workers (Allen) over the guy who is bought by oil and real estate interests (Wilson) any day of the week,” one person posted on WSC.
“The PD has shown themselves to be irrelevant and still clinging to the business and developers and real estate interests who have had a stranglehold on this area for years. Thank God their endorsement is basically as worthless as their pro business and anti union ideology!” another stated.
So back to the original question: Is the Editorial Board out of touch with voters?
To answer that question, Watch Sonoma County went back and examined the PD’s track record for its endorsements over the last eight years.
It suggests that 24 of the 30 candidates and ballot measures endorsed by the newspaper will be victorious on Tuesday.
Excluding its endorsements in uncontested races, the PD has backed 320 candidates and ballot measures in Sonoma and Mendocino counties in 11 primary and general elections going back to 2002. Local voters agreed 80.3 percent of the time.
Take away the ballot measures? Local voters agreed with the PD Editorial Board on 76.8 percent of the candidates it recommended in contested races.
The Editorial Board and local voters have tended to act more tightly in sync during general elections than primaries.
In the last four general elections, voters elected 81.7 percent of the candidates backed by the Editorial Board.
In the last five primaries (there were two in 2008), voters backed 66.0 percent of the candidates picked by the Editorial Board.
Paul Gullixson, PD editorial director, was surprised at the numbers.
“Eighty percent? I never would have guessed it was that high. I would have thought it would be more around 50 or 60 percent at best. We’ve never kept track,” Gullixson said. “You have too much time on your hands.”
Unlike a handicapper in a horse race, the Editorial Board is not trying to pick the winners. It issues its endorsements to the candidates and ballot measures it thinks should win, not necessarily the ones it thinks will win, he said.
“The fact is, as most readers know already, we don’t make our endorsements based on who we think we win. We support the candidates we believe will do the best job and represent the interests of local residents. And we support the ballot measures we believe make the most sense,” he said.
The endorsement decisions are made by three people who sit on the Editorial Board: Gullixson, Editorial Writer Jim Sweeney and PD Publisher Bruce Kyse.
It spent 45 minutes to an hour interviewing each candidate — nearly 30 in all — in this election cycle. If you include talking to advocates of various state and local ballot measures, it has interviewed about 50 people for this round of endorsements.
“It’s certainly gratifying when voters agree with us, but I wouldn’t say they follow our endorsements. Local voters make up their own minds using whatever information is available to them. Our endorsements are just part of the information many use,” Gullixson said.
So what do you think? Which of the 30 picks by the Editorial Board will be rejected by voters tomorrow? Which ones did it get right?
Post your thoughts below. And CLICK HERE to sign up for a live chat with Gullixson and Sweeney at 1 p.m. Monday to discuss Tuesday’s election.
— Ted Appel
Watch Sonoma County
Subscribe by Email
Follow us on Twitter
What ever happened to fair and balanced? The PD editorial staff leans so far left they would swamp a sail boat if they were sailing in SF Bay. The staff is very predictable and boring. When they come to a fork in the road they always turn left even if the sign says it is a dead end. They continue to support dead ideas about taxes, government spending, government debt and union causes in government at the expense of taxpayers. What they say is laughable.
There won’t even be a Press Democrat to be out of touch if they don’t get in touch soon. Switch to right wing politics and the papers will fly out the door and the advertisers will flock to buy space.
After all, it’s just an entertainment business. No one is going to watch the unfunny clown or the juggler who keeps dropping the balls.
It makes no difference if Sonoma County’s politics are left wing. They will buy the papers and be infuriated while the right wing will have their opinions validated and buy the paper too.
I suppose the talent pool at the Press Democrat can’t pull off this kind thing even to save their jobs.
It appears the answer is yes. The Press Democrat apprears to be out of touch with the voters in Sonoma County.
Just received this editorial from a European newspaper – tell it like it is!
The following is from the Prager Zeitung, translated from the German:
“The danger to America is not Barack Obama but a citizenry capable of entrusting a man like him with the Presidency. It will be far easier to limit and undo the follies of an Obama presidency than to restore the necessary common sense and good judgment to a depraved electorate willing to have such a man for their president.”
“The problem is much deeper and far more serious than Mr. Obama, who is a mere symptom of what ails America. Blaming the prince of fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of fools that made him their prince.”
“The Republic can survive a Barack Obama, who is after all, merely a fool. It is less likely to survive a multitude of fools, such as those who made him.”
The PD doesn’t REALLY like Woolsey either. They will choose a moderate Republican over a flaming liberal Democrat any day.
People who rely on a newspaper’s endorsement on how to vote – and do not do their own research – are a part of the problem, not the solution. Being uninformed and voting based only on party affiliation – similar to voting for your favorite sports team, which is an emotional choice – has led the state and country to the verge of a cliff.
As far as being out of touch, some of the lefty looney fringe comments here reveal that the PD editorial board members are not the only ones with a serious bias problem.
I’ve been reading the Press Democrat since I was very (very) young. That’d be 40+ years. As our great State of California has changed and has moved from the center-right to the left-left (notwithstanding the New York Times’ influence), I have found that our beloved PD pushes back hard against conservative candidates and thought. Reading the Press Democrat is fun and frustrating at the same time.
I wish the PD would dedicate more resources towards conservative issues. That would be great.
As far as the PD endorsement of Mike Halliwell goes, it does seem to be a bit strategic as the PD may have a unique interest and benefit in keeping Lynn Woolsey in play or a republican candidate that fits a more liberal mold.
I love you PD but it’s clear I’m not your “favorite child”
Brian Brown
I care not a whit who the PD endorses, but I care a lot about their coverage of political issues and candidates. It’s bad, really bad.
The fundamental, core issues before voters and the candidates they’ll choose are simply ignored or beyond the grasp of PD reporters.
What the PD covers is the horse race, tit-for-tat charges and petty exchanges between candidates and of course the endorsement scorecard. Come on PD! offer information to thinking voters, else why should I subscribe?
I think that it is just adorable that you guys still print a voters guide for the dozen or so people who still read the paper. I especially like how you pretend that the elderly and middle aged people who would actually spend money to hear yesterday’s news aren’t already set in their political ideologies, and that a little two sentence blurb will weigh heavily on their decision making. I guess it’s like that saying “Dress for the job you want. ” Just keep dressing up your paper like it’s actually influential and relevant to voters, and who knows? Maybe someday, it will be.
I’m glad the Press Democrat endorses candidates and they should continue doing so. I don’t vote with all of their recommendations, but I enjoy reading their opinions. These reporters do more investigating, researching, listening, questioning, and note-taking than anyone else, so they are among the most knowledgeable group when it comes to local politics and current events. Therefore, we should at least take note of what they have to say. Hopefully most people in the community will vote with their own knowledge/opinion/gut based on independent research anyway. But for those that don’t take the time to educate themselves about each candidate and measure, it’s a positive for them to have the Press Democrat to help them along.
Voters often complain that politicians don’t act/vote the way they want. What many of them don’t understand is that politicians are supposed to act/vote on what is best for the constituency, not necessarily what their constituency wants. There is a difference and it doesn’t necessarily mean they are out of touch with citizens. Similarly, the editorial board makes endorsements for the good of the community. If people disagree–and someone always will–too bad. Posters (excessively) criticize the board in such a way that makes it seem like posters believe anyone who has a different opinion is a complete idiot just for that. They ruin their credibility by slamming the whole newspaper and industry with each post.
“To endorse candidates can only be seen as an attempt to influence elections.” Umm… duh! Newspapers endorsing candidates is common practice. The justification comes from newspapers being a community institution. The PD editorial board makes decisions on what they feel is best for the entire community, just like everyone else does. And they–again, just like everyone else–try to override their natural bias with objective consideration. If there is a left-leaning reporting it’s because we’re in a left-leaning community. Go to Utah and listen to what liberals have to complain about with the Desert News. I find it disturbing that Karla suggests writing center-right opinion as news, with profit as the objective. Someone will always be complaining; there will never be a media institution that makes everyone happy… or any type of organization for that matter. The Press Democrat fits well in this community and will remain the most valuable resource for local news for a long, long time. And it’s ridiculous to blame the state of the local economy on the Press Democrat’s endorsements or endorsed candidates… as if Sonoma is the only county suffering in California and the rest of the United States. Oh, and another poster apparently thinks the whole state and even the entire country wouldn’t be broke had we ignored the insights of the PD and the like. Are newspapers to blame for all of the world’s problems?
Then there are those who keep saying they won’t take note of the Press Democrat’s opinions, but they keep coming back over and over to read more PD articles. Some say they don’t read the paper–that they gave up on the PD since it’s so biased… yet here they are reading and commenting on yet another article. The fact is that the vocal minority is the majority only on Press Democrat’s comments and do not represent the general public (as BillBill put it in the election chat the turned into an attack on the PD). The PD deserves credit for acknowledging the dissatisfaction of some of its readership and for allowing them to offer the PD perspective. Providing constructive criticism for specific articles is beneficial for the author, PD, and community. But constantly whining over the entire media industry, progressive, conservatives, etc. or blaming the PD for the community’s problems… pointless.
WOW. I love reading the comments. This is going to be a great campaign. I can not wait until November 3rd, 2010…the date of Lynn Woolsey’s Retirement Party.
Judd Rocks > http://www.jimjudd2010.com
Sir Winston Churchill once said: “The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter.”
I guess the best argument against the Press Democrat making endorsements is this year’s PD endorsement list.
The media has been far left for years. Its now such an epidemic that if you think otherwise your wrong or racist. I have given up reading all papers years ago. I cant wait for some true journalism to come back questioning both sides.
I like the fact that the editorial staff has opened the forum to examine the results of their opinions. It is an act of bravery no matter what ones’ occupation.
For myself, I’ve always distrusted the influence of the owner of the PD. The New York Times has proven itself an enemy of freedom that is run by billionaires who hate America and everything we have stood for as the greatest nation in history.
Despite this alliance with the journalistic version of Satan, I believe the PD staff do a tremendous job trying to inform and entertain the wildly diverse readership. Yet until the NY Times is out of the picture I won’t trust the editors opinions to be solely their own.
After all, if you bite the hand that feeds you eventually you will have nothing to eat.
Tedd, you said “many Republicans hated” Editorial Board’s endorsement of Mike Halliwell.
I looked everywhere to find words and/or phrases that used that terminology. Couldn’t find the “h” word.
Are you yourself being a little Press Democratty?
Brian
The fact that the extreme left and extreme right are poo-pooing your endorsements and think you’re beholden to the other shows you may be on to something. Most of us voters are repulsed by extremists on either side.
Like most media outlets the PD is not un-bias as they should be. They become the news and the reporters are very left of center. Most outlets are though so a person must do research to find the real truth not the truth according to the PD. It would be really nice if there were no bias in the media but I guess it’s a money issue or something. If the truth was printed so many people who only look at one source for news would be better informed. I bet you could trace some benefit to the PD based on the choices they suggest in the election.
So that’s how it works? You discover that you’ve picked 80% of the winners since 2002 and seeing that you are so gloriously correct you then ask the question if you’re in touch with voters? Wow, you guys are soooo cool….
The problem with the people who work for the North Bay Labor Council and Michael Allen is they don’t represent anything other than the left most wing of the Democratic Party and that is a narrow group. A newspaper needs to refect the opinions of a much broader group.
I think it’s good that PD is actually interviewing candidates for 45 minutes and giving us the benefit of the results. What other organization performs that kind of service?
The individual who say they get information online and on these blogs are the ones who are the lemmings. The politicians with the money pay people to come on here and spread misinformation as a strategy.
This question doesn’t even need to be asked. As a newspaper, the PD shouldn’t be endorsing ANYONE. Report on candidate’s viewpoints, various qualifications, party affiliations, etc…but the purpose of media is to inform while remaining impartial. Newspapers, new broadcasts, and websites shouldn’t be in the business of endorsing any one candidate / party over another.
Bah, PD is irrelevant. Ian North nailed it.
The PD has every right to make endorsements on the editorial side, but what I and a lot of my colleagues resent is how the news department is used to drive the editorial agenda. We’ve seen that with the attack on Michael Allen, in which the PD has served as a platform for the sketchy front groups out to tar any candidate backed by unions and progressive groups.
Contary to what a lot of the conservative posters think, the PD is not a ‘left-wing’ publication. The editorial position is in line with the main economic interests in the county. They are corporate Democrats, who represent the Chamber/developer faction who have run this county for years. They oppose progressive Democrats like Lynn Woolsey or Michael Allen. They are pretty consistent in their endorsements, because they reflect their political values and are grounded in enduring economic interests.
I think the answer to this question depends on the race. The PD’s endorsement of Sharon Wright over Shirlee Zane in 2008 demonstrated a significant disconnect with local voters. However, I think the PD’s endorsement of Debra Fudge is interesting. As the PD has been a strong supporter of Paul Kelley and his old supporters seem to be supporting Mike McGuire.
The article is sadly typical of the bias the PD has had for years. IF there was objective, factual coverage of all valid candidates and issues then the liberal endorsement and subsequent “findings” of the research presented may have some merit because voters would have more accurate information upon which to decide their votes. But in that the PD has consistently biased journalism and matching endorsements the whole concept is skewed.IF there was an objective source of accurate political journalism I sense the election results would be different from the Alice in Wonder land mirror of the PD’s endorsements.
Whether or not the Press Democrat is out of sync with voters is of no importance to me whatsoever. They are a newspaper with an editorial staff (i.e., opinion), and they can endorse whoever they want. Those who accuse them of being out of touch with voters, do so because they believe that the PD endorsements will influence the election. Perhaps it is the complainers who are out of sync by believing that the rest of us are just a bunch of lemmings.
I was not saying that the PD endorses “who or what they want”. I’m not going to say for certain but they may or may not actually choose the candidate that is best for the job.
What I am saying is that the PD has a lot of power in its endorsements. Because average voter doesn’t take the time to research the candidates and issues for themselves, they rely on the endorsements of the “experts” to determine who they will vote for.
I opened a Twitter account this week. Follow me @DissentingTom.
Quite frankly, the Press Democrat should refrain from involvement in politics and stick to reporting the facts.
To endorse candidates can only be seen as an attempt to influence elections.
Such behavior is unethical at best.
I think it is fine to endorse candidates. These are open endorsements, done in a straight forward way. Like Ian, I resent it when you continue to editorialize in the news stories and in their placement in the paper. Examples of this occur all the time, especially when the article is about public employees or Pat Wiggens. Just make your point and shut-up about it.
That being said…What do you really have against Lynn Woolsey?
I would like to have you write an article on how your progressive stance and that which is rampant in our counties, state and federal landscape offer anything but financial collapse…this ridiculous article is like having a last supper on the deck of the Titanic. When your paper starts turning a profit, let me know and I’ll perhaps take note of your opinion at that point…
Yes Watch Pup, the PD is certainly NOT left-leaning. Look at all of the DINO’s (Democrat In Name Only) on the Board of supervisors and on out local city councils that the PD endorseed in the past.
And Dissenting Tom hit the nail squarely on the head with the overall picture! The PD endorses who or what they want, rather than necessarily who or what is best for the people and some voters respond like lemmings. Just look how terrible or local economy is and how many sitting councilmembers and supervisors got there because of PD recommendations. For instance, they endorsed Mike Healy for District 2 supervisor in this election. They boast of his 10 years on the Petaluma City Council yet ignore the fact that Pamela Torliatt has more experience than him. Healy’s lack of campaign contributions show how little real public support he has.
But the truth is out there and is becoming more widespread via the Internet and voters that are simply fed up with the status quo. The mass media’s failure to deliver the truth is the very reason that PD has lost a huge number of subscribers. Boo hoo.
So the voters went with the PeeDee’s thoughtful recommendations 80 something percent of the time in local and state elections over the past few cycles. Let’s see…….
** Cities all across the county are broke.
** The county is broke.
** The state is beyond broke and is well past structurally insolvent.
The people and ballot measures that the PeeDee endorsed are most responsible, after gullible, uninformed voters, for the situation we now find ourselves in.
So how’s all that insight on the part of the PeeDee working for you?
linda last i checked self proclaimed “liberals” are the ones enacting laws requiring the purchasing of a product from a private company (healthcare) as a condition of living here, they are the same ones suggesting that we should restrict internet access and regulate what the media publishes. for promoting liberty those who claim to be “liberals” sure are spending alot of time and muscling thier political might around trying to control as much as they can. shame a group that had roots in the establishing civil liberties now seeks to spend much of its time taking away and dictating to as many people as possible how to live life under the new “liberal” rules.
Yes the PD is very out of touch with local politics taloring much of its message to the majority but not the broader client base. too many negative articles about local businesses and practices i get tired of hearing about all the horrible things plenty of good being done here also
These statistics are not as valid as this story makes them out to be. I don’t believe thatthe Press Democrat endorses correctly 80% of the time, but rather people listen to the Press Democrat 80% of the time.
I believe that because there is not a lot of exposure to specific candidates and issues in local elections, as opposed to national elections, people are more inclined to go with whoever the “experts”, being the Press Democrat, endorse. The average voter does not take the time to research the issues and candidates in local elections.
LOL – like saying “liberal” is a bad thing when everyone knows the “liberals” are the true patriots of this country and stand for what this country really is about while the “conservatives” try to act like they are the end all of America. We all live her and have to existing – get over it. The liberals are right.
For me, the question isn’t about whether the PD picks are in line with those of voters — but what are the standards and values by which you are endorsing and how transparent are they? Unless a publication has a stated political point of view (and Karla, the PD is NOT left-leaning!), like the Bay Guardian and Bohemian types, what business does a so-called objective, mainstream paper have making endorsements anyway? If we were like the major cities in Europe whose several dailies each has a certain political bent, I could see it, but not with the PD being the only paper in town — and the values it upholds in its endorsements not being out front.
I think that a newspaper has every right to endorse a candidate for office in their editorial page.
What I have a problem with is that the paper promotes those candidates further in the news stories with bias, prejudice, omissions and non-corrections. It’s subtle but obviously present and undermines my confidence in the organization.
Don’t hide your politics behind the journalism.
The Press Democrat could become a solvent, popular and meaningful part of Sonoma County if they did a 180 on their politics. All the “news” in the Press Democrat is left-leaning opinion disguised as “news.” If you want to sell the papers, just disguise center-right opinion as news and you’ll have immediate success and profitability again. Also such a change will put the Press Democrat back in touch and in sync with voters. WHy this hasn’t happened already is a mystery.
We, as a state and county, will go broke unless we elect those will not keep pandering to the demands to the government employees that have had their way far too long. The P. D. is right to take the lead and endorse those who will not loot the treasury. I voted for the folks who have gotten us into this mess and I am sorry now. Never again!