An opinion piece in Sunday's Anniston Star is certainly worth a read. Its about incentives paid by the state of Alabama, and claima a downside, even if the incentives attract or retain business.
It is well thought-out, persuasive writing, and when I finished looked to see if it was a signed editorial, or just a general statement by the paper's leadership.
That's when I saw it was written as an outsider opinion by Gerald W. Johnson, identified as an Auburn University political science professor emeritus.
And he is.
But Dr. Johnson is also a head of the Alabama Education Association's polling unit, and that gives him the biggest canine of all in any fight over state funding.
When he writes...
...he is defending his own employer and, at least indirectly, his own employment. The MMMM interest in this? The Star should have provided full identification for Dr. Johnson. It's a paper's job to provide context, to allow readers to know where writers and people quoted in stories "are coming from". It allows them to determine if there is a self-serving element to their arguments.
I know who Dr. Johnson is, and I don't argue with his conclusions. But readers should be fully informed about his job at AEA.
[ALSO: The weekly column from Alabama's soon to be TDAW papers, answering questions about the transition, is strictly a one-direction piece today. It discusses the reporting structure of the enterprise, interesting to me, for sure, and maybe to others. They'll get back to answering reader questions next Sunday.]
[The Monday Morning Media Memo is a regular feature of www.timlennox.com.]
It is well thought-out, persuasive writing, and when I finished looked to see if it was a signed editorial, or just a general statement by the paper's leadership.
That's when I saw it was written as an outsider opinion by Gerald W. Johnson, identified as an Auburn University political science professor emeritus.
And he is.
But Dr. Johnson is also a head of the Alabama Education Association's polling unit, and that gives him the biggest canine of all in any fight over state funding.
When he writes...
What is bad, shortsighted and counterproductive in this new round of Republican neo-socialism is the diversion of scarce taxpayer dollars to the private market that are needed for schools, health care, roads, prisons and other essential state services — services that provide the base for economic development.
...he is defending his own employer and, at least indirectly, his own employment. The MMMM interest in this? The Star should have provided full identification for Dr. Johnson. It's a paper's job to provide context, to allow readers to know where writers and people quoted in stories "are coming from". It allows them to determine if there is a self-serving element to their arguments.
I know who Dr. Johnson is, and I don't argue with his conclusions. But readers should be fully informed about his job at AEA.
[ALSO: The weekly column from Alabama's soon to be TDAW papers, answering questions about the transition, is strictly a one-direction piece today. It discusses the reporting structure of the enterprise, interesting to me, for sure, and maybe to others. They'll get back to answering reader questions next Sunday.]
[The Monday Morning Media Memo is a regular feature of www.timlennox.com.]
No comments:
Post a Comment