My "bias"
In the post directly below this an anonymous commenter left a comment raising a few questions relating to my perceived bias in the primary. I think it is important to be clear about my intentions with this blog. You can read the comment here;
Do you even pretend to be unbiased? In the past week alone the Council of School Supervisors and Administrators, the Civil Service Employees Association and the Communications Workers of America endorsed McMahon yet you don't mention it. The League of Conservation Voters endorse McMahon but you don't mention it. McMahon calls for a light rail to help commuters but you don't mention it.
You do, however, misrepresent what McMahon says about off-shore drilling. You neglect to mention about stopping oil company subsidies and $1,000 rebates.
If you really target retaking NY-13 then you should be unbiased. If you are only going to talk about Harrison then change your website name.
For those of you who are semi regular readers of this blog you will recall that I routinely invite both the Harrison and McMahon campaigns to share press releases, fundraiser announcements and any other campaign news. Up until today I have not had ANY communication with the McMahon campaign. Until recently the only contact information for him was his Council office which can not be involved with his congressional race which complicates my ability to communicate with him or his campaign staff. This morning for the first time I received an official email from the McMahon campaign with his first newsletter, which I will try to post later. In comparison Harrison's outreach is much more active. I receive more press releases from Steve's campaign than I end up posting mostly out of concern of appearing biased. There are a lot of judgment calls in what is news worthy, typically any club endorsements with a press release makes the cut as long as it is current news. So to the reader who left those comments I welcome you to share McMahon campaign news with me, as always my email is on the right hand side of this page (it has always been there).
This blog has had as its purpose defeating Vito Fossella first and foremost, and that objective has now changed to electing either of our Democratic candidates. And no I am not going to change the name of the blog because of a complaint from an anonymous commenter.
posted by me @ 10:33 PM
8 Comments:
If you're not biased, then why do you have a guest blogger from the Harrison campaign? You shouldn't be letting anyone guest blog unless you're balancing it with an opposing POV, which you have not done (apparently because McMahon's people aren't reaching out to you).
I support Harrison, but won't abandon his values in order to elect him.
Until you find a McMahon supporter willing to guest blog, you shouldn't have a Harrison guest blogger. Otherwise, you're an e-rag.
Sorry to be so tough.
I agree, there does seem to be some bias here with a clear leaning towards Harrison. I'm considering not reading this blog anymore until there is much fairer coverage.
If your so concerned about bias, ask to be a pro-McMahon blogger. Tell McMahon's press secretary to forward releases. Harrison's been running for this seat since 06 and his campaign knows which internet resources cover the district. McMahon's internet campaign seems to consist of only mean spirited anonymois posters on silive bringing up old donations (While McMahon has donated more money and given more recently than to right wing causes).
1:28, The first two posts flew over your head completely. No one here is supporting McMahon or apologizing for his poor outreach.
i think what's ignored here is that the internet plays such a tiny role in this election. Harrison, by internet accounts, would appear to be the heavy favorite. I haven't received ANY Harrison literature in the mail, but have received McMahon literature in the mail.
In reality, who has the biggest facebook group or most comprehensive website means very little. If you're not even introducing yourself to the real mailboxes of people, how do you expect to win anything? I know for a fact 10 voting bodies in my immediate residential area do not have internet access.
They've already been introduced to McMahon via mail, but Harrison remains largely quiet. Harrison hasn't sent actual mail out in months, upon months.
http://www.silive.com/news/index.ssf/2008/08/staten_island_dem_picks_up_3_e.html
McMahon picks up 3 endorsements
http://www.nydailynews.com/blogs/dailypolitics/2008/08/news-of-the-day-310.html
The New York Times endorses Mike McMahon, "saying his opponent, Steve Harrison, lacks a "record of accomplishment."
Those 2 articles took 2 minutes to find using the news search option on Google.com. If you're simply not reporting it because McMahon doesn't care about your website, and hasn't reached out to you, that's petty and useless for voters who want to learn about everybody running.
And finally, It's funny that you won't take seriously an anonymous post when this entire blog is anonymous. Your name isn't posted anywhere. We have no idea who you are. If you won't accept an anonymous post, why should we accept an anonymous blog?
in response to the 7:54 comment; i made the same offer to both the McMahon campaign and Harrison campaign through the blog to let them both guest post. Only Harrison responded. It is somewhat ridiculous to suggest that because one campaign was very slow with internet outreach that the other campaign should not share campaign information. If and when McMahon's campaign asks for guest blogging access I will welcome it.
5:17 That New York Times endorsement came out this morning, I posted the endorsement once I got home. As for the 2 minute google search, I agree it doesn't take long to find those articles. I have quite a few Google alerts set up to pull RSS feeds of articles like these as they came in. However as I said yesterday I do not post every article that Harrison sends me, likewise I do not post every McMahon news piece I read.
NY-13, after reading your response to my initial posting, I reread my own carefully. We anonymous writers should agree to disagree on this matter and move on.
Post a Comment
<< Home