Yesterday my local NBC affiliate News10NBC here in Rochester New York posted some “reflections” on the Republican National Convention which amounted to a not-so-subtle suggestion that the convention was working to hide the Party’s racism. How nice of the affiliate to follow NBC News which refused to post any speeches of minorities at the convention on their web site and MSNBC which refused to air them.
At the GOP Convention Tuesday night the Republicans tried to give the American viewing public new insights into Mitt Romney while also showcasing the “hidden” diversity of the Republican Party. Alas, they failed. We learned little about Romney we did not already know. Instead, we learned more about the speakers than the presidential candidate. There was also much more diversity on the stage than there was in the seats of the thousands of Republican delegates.
First off, I would love to see the statistical model that determined there were more minorities on the stage than in the audience. I doubt there is one. It is an awful assertion that Democrats have repeatedly used during Republican Conventions. It is race-baiting that has been especially on display at MSNBC throughout this campaign. It is sad to see it show up on my local affiliate.
How does the author know there is more diversity on stage than in the audience? It is just his assertion, likely either taken from the left echo-chamber or devised while watching television coverage. I doubt the author is at the convention, spoke with anyone at the convention or was sitting at home actually counting minorities in the audience. I certainly hope he wasn’t doing the last one, because that would be pretty pathetic. We have no way of knowing though, the author doesn’t tell us.
Speaking of the author. I noted my disgust on Twitter where News10NBC replied:
@roaring_repub This blog represents the opinion of our political bloggers.
— news10nbc (@news10nbc) August 30, 2012
That is the absolutely astonishing part about what was written. If you visit the article (screenshot below) you are given no indication that this is an editorial or a political blog. It looks like every other news story on their site. There is no indication it is even in the politics section. There is no disclaimer that the opinions are not being sent directly from the company, its editors, its reporters etc. The author of the article is noted as “Dr. Timothy Kneeland” with “| WHEC.com” next to his name, indicating this is an employee of the company. I googled him and the author appears to be a college professor at Nazareth college. Yet the article doesn’t specify allowing the reader to assume he is an employee of WHEC. He might be. There is no link to more information about who this person is and there is no information about him given in the article itself. So this article, asserting a Party that represents a very large chunk of America is racist, appears to simply come from WHEC and the viewpoints expressed are endorsed by the company.
I bring this up because this is not only a factually flawed, demeaning and divisive work but because it is a pretty good example of terrible journalistic practices. If this is an editorial work by someone inside or outside of the company, it should be noted. If the reader is not supposed to assume the work represents the opinions and beliefs of the company, it should be noted. Its title should read something like “Reflections on the GOP Convention From a Democrat Observer: Part I” and note in the article who this is and where their affiliations lie. Instead the article says nothing.
News10NBC can do what they please. If they want to post what appear to be liberal blogs making wild and demeaning assertions and let them appear to represent their company, fine. Personally I would imagine it would be in the best interest of a news organization to have universal appeal by specifying what is editorial and what is not. It might even be nice to provide voices from both sides.