Placido Salazar

psalazar9@satx.rr.com
While the topic of the present discussion is FAIR, HONEST, UNBIASED JOURNALISM,
regardless of ethnicity toward every candidate in every election, past, present and future, it
should be noted that this Sundays Express News article was careful not to mention that Ivy
Taylor LIED her way into the honorable position of San Antonio Mayor. She lied to sitting
council members when she promised that she would not run for election at the next regular
election. Had she not made that FALSE PROMISE, perhaps any of the other council members
could have thrown their hat in the ring. If Manuel Medina is accused of lying, which he has
made every effort through other media to clarify, why is a double-standard applied?

As a Bexar County Democrat Precinct Chair, I emphasize that Manuel Medina has always
been up-front with members of this organization, which Im convinced is why he has
managed, through skilled leadership and motivation, to increase the number of Precinct
Chairs to a record number. It was through his exceptional leadership skills that Manuel
Medina got almost 100% of the Democrat candidates elected, which has not been
accomplished in quite a while.

I urge every voter within the City of San Antonio to take a close look at the honesty and
leadership skills of each candidate for themselves; I am more than certain that Manuel
Medina will be your top choice.

Placido Salazar, Precinct 4194 Chair

PETER Vallecillo
el12valle6@yahoo.com

Newspapers Endorsing Political Candidates: Media Bias Or A Generator Of Dialogue?

By Joey LeMay | October 16, 2012

(MintPress) In Sundays edition of the Winston-Salem Journal, the newspapers editorial board gave
President Barack Obama its full endorsement for Novembers upcoming election. It was the first time
since 1964 that the publication gave the nod to a Democrat Lyndon Johnson at the time. But political
endorsements by media publications come with a varying degree of both ethical debates and
effectiveness. Traditionalists often see the practice as a way to put months of research to work while
demonstrating their role as a civic leader. Others argue that showing support during election season
stokes a political bias from a source of media that is otherwise meant to be objective.

The practice of endorsements is as old as news reporting in America itself. From the 19th century until
today, endorsements have meant funding contributions to campaigns, advertisements for candidates and,
most commonly, opinion pieces written by the editorial staff declaring support for a candidate. In
Americas infancy, many newspapers in circulation were owned by political parties, often times making
them more propaganda than practical. The publications used the space to talk up the attributes of their
esteemed candidate with the intention of swaying a vote in their favor.

Today, however, newspaper ownership is very much out of the hands of politicians and at the helm of
those with political and ideological differences. Yet, upward of 30 percent or more of newspapers across
America continue to endorse both local and national politicians before major elections. That leaves
around two-thirds of publications opting out of a show of support for a candidate, and according to
Kathleen Hall Jamieson, its for a simple reason: Endorsements simply are not that effective.

Jamieson, the director of the Annenberg Public Policy Center at the University of Pennsylvania, said there
is rarely a tangible result of a newspapers endorsement. She pointed to a study done during the 1996
presidential election, in which a mere 1 percent of respondents polled said their newspapers
endorsement played a great deal in their voting habits. Only 10 percent said it played somewhat of a
role in how they voted.

The direct effect of editorials does not appear to be significant enough to find, Jamieson told the
American Journalism Review. The effect of newspaper endorsements is largely created through
advertising about them that is sponsored by the candidate. Many Americans in 1996 had no idea
which presidential candidate their newspaper supported; many more had the wrong idea.

A Second City split

The furor of the endorsement debate has manifested itself in Chicago, Ill., where the citys two competing
newspapers recently adopted different policies on their role of backing a candidate. At the Chicago
Tribune, its editorial staff published a letter in January explaining why they endorse political candidates.
The editorial noted that newspapers make up such a strong part of life in Chicago that they essentially
become a part of public citizenry. The publication said it tries to provide guidance for those who feel they
are on the fence with their vote or do not feel informed enough on a decision.

We want to inform our readers and encourage them to push an agenda for a more vital community. The
most direct way they do that is in choosing who will lead their government, the Chicago Tribune said. In
our editorials, we explain what we think should be done about government pension costs, educational
shortcomings, political dysfunction and more. Not least important, we endorse candidates, from the top
of the ballot to the bottom. To arrive at our choices, we send out questionnaires, scrutinize voting records
and public statements, and interview hundreds of candidates. We make our evaluation of which ones will
best serve the interests of the public. And then we tell our readers.

The Tribune also noted that it has no way of gauging its effectiveness of endorsements, but said that it
does not matter how they are interpreted or their influence they will continue to publish them. The same
cannot be said for the other big player in town, however. Also in January, the Chicago Sun-Times
implemented a new policy that saw the newspaper end its tradition of political endorsing. The Sun-Times
said that it is simply a matter of practicality: With research showing that opinions pages do little to sway
votes and the multitude of news sources in the digital age, the practice can be seen as pretentious.

The publication said readers would be better served with clear and concise political reporting, rather than
opining. The newspaper likened endorsements to partisan news coverage on cable television, which it
said only serves the confirmation bias of its target demographic.

Most good newspapers today attempt to appeal to the widest possible readership, including people of
every political persuasion, by serving up the best and most unbiased news coverage possible. They want
to inform you, not spin you, the Sun-Times wrote. We will provide clear and accurate information
about who the candidates are and where they stand on the issues most important to our city, our state
and our country.
Is a fix needed?

TIME Magazine managing editor Richard Stengel has a theory of where criticisms of
endorsements stem from: Theyre all generational. Stengel believes that those who have not
spent their whole life around newspapers are raising the issue because it does not fall in line
with the rest of the media they are consuming. Newspapers are original in that they are one of
the very few news outlets that regularly endorse political candidates based on years of tradition.

Young news consumers are suspicious about traditional authority. They prize objectivity,
straightforwardness and transparency and most of the ones I talk to ask the following: How
can a newspaper be objective on the front page when it endorses a candidate on the editorial
page? Stengel noted. A free press, as Jefferson noted, is part of our system of checks and
balances; it is one of the few guarantors of democracy. But for the press to remain free, we
need to preserve both the reality and the appearance of that freedom, and endorsements
undermine that.

For Emily Gruenke, the practice isnt as much about as telling people who to vote for, but rather
creating dialogue and conversation within the community that touch on important issues.
Gruenke, an editor at the Albany Enterprise, a weekly newspaper in Central Minnesota, said
that while her newspaper does not permit candidate endorsements, she personally sees their
benefit. In an interview with MintPress, Gruenke said newspapers offer a forum for civil
disagreement and that endorsements are a prime example.

Voicing an opinion isnt so much important to persuade others to your point of view, but it is
important because it makes readers more vocal about their point of views, Gruenke said. It
opens up discussions, because if a reader doesnt like my column about gay marriage, they are
more apt to write a response versus that column never being published at all. It could be
interpreted as bias, but in reality, a paper is never truly objective. For the sake of intellectual
conversations, I think it is necessary to have that bias once in a while, to stimulate the readers.
On Monday, April 17, 2017 2:55 PM, PETER Vallecillo <el12valle6@yahoo.com> wrote:

"Newspapers, in particular, have a longstanding practice of endorsing candidates in competitive

political races. Although some readers think these endorsements signal a bias in the
publications news coverage, SPJ encourages editorial pages to promote thoughtful debate on
candidates and politics; letting readers know through endorsements which candidates share the
newspapers vision is part of that discussion. Part of an editorial pages responsibility, though, to
take every appropriate opportunity to explain the firewall between news and opinion.

Reporters are not columnists or editorial writers. SPJs recommendation is that reporters not
take a position on an issue, or in a candidate race, that they are covering. They may do so
privately, but they definitely should not do so in a public or visible way.

Ironically, journalism is a profession protected by the same First Amendment that grants to all
citizens the right to run for office or to support, by word, deed or cash, the people they would like
to see elected. But journalists who want to be perceived as impartial must avoid any display of
partisanship." Taken from the Society of Professional Journalism.

Peter Vallecillo
On Monday, April 17, 2017 12:46 PM, Jaime Gomez <jaimeg@sandbarfilms.com> wrote:
http://VivaGus.com

From: PETER Vallecillo [mailto:el12valle6@yahoo.com]

Sent: Monday, April 17, 2017 10:36 AM
Subject: Boycott Express-News

To all:

A meeting is being convened to discuss the boycotting of the Express-News. The meeting was agreed to
by several organizations: LULAC, Ignite the Vote, Dr. Hector P. Garcia AGIF Organization of Texas,
Bexar County Tejano Democrats, and the Southwest Institute on Poverty and Civil Rights. The meeting
will take place at 11:am at Estela's Restaurant 2200 W. Martin Saturday April 22, 2017.

Let it made clear, this movement is not focused on the prejudicial manner in which the Express-News has
portrayed Manuel Medina; but a historical pattern on how the Express-News does or does not report
issues relevant to the Hispanic issues. On the matter of Manuel Medina, as someone pointed out, this
Sunday's edition of the Express-News gave Ivy Taylor front page coverage and the article was very
positive; however, the Express-News ignores Taylor's involvement with SAHA and how the same City
Council members it is endorsing determined she violated no ethics associated to her involvement with
SAHA and her ownership of section 8 housing.

The points to consider at the meeting are what demographic population is primarily the Express-News
targeted communities; whether engaging in making recommendations as to who they support for a public
elected office is outside their journalistic jurisdiction; and whether by recommending individuals for
elected office makes the Express-News a political organization. It is understood that any action to move
forward to boycotting the Express-News is a lenghty process and will take time to organize, this is a
primarily meeting. You are welcomed to attend.

Thank you,
Peter Vallecillo
Southwest Institute on Poverty and Civil Rights