| Revision as of 15:38, 26 May 2005 editKatefan0 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users13,081 edits sentence 3: removed unsourced speculation about authorship of memo← Previous edit | Revision as of 15:42, 26 May 2005 edit undoKatefan0 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users13,081 edits Restore context about light rail controversy itself. It is only fair to DeLay, Lanier etc. to list their positions if you want to get into the specific charges the memo makes. They are all sourced.Next edit → | ||
| Line 22: | Line 22: | ||
| :"I propose a series of editorials, editorial cartoons and Sounding Board columns leading up to the rail referendum, with this specific objective: Continuing our long standing efforts to make rail a permanent part of the transit mix here. The timing, language and approach of the paper's editorials would, of course, be the decision of the Editorial Board. But I suggest that they could be built upon and informed by a news-feature package with an equally specific focus" | :"I propose a series of editorials, editorial cartoons and Sounding Board columns leading up to the rail referendum, with this specific objective: Continuing our long standing efforts to make rail a permanent part of the transit mix here. The timing, language and approach of the paper's editorials would, of course, be the decision of the Editorial Board. But I suggest that they could be built upon and informed by a news-feature package with an equally specific focus" | ||
| The memorandum then proposed several "investigative" news stories and editorials designed to examine "the campaign led by ] and ] to defeat rail expansion." |
The memorandum then proposed several "investigative" news stories and editorials designed to examine "the campaign led by ] and ] to defeat rail expansion." Lanier, the former mayor of Houston, had long opposed light rail. DeLay, who for years had blocked federal light rail funding for Houston until voters approved it as part of the 2003 ballot referendum, argued that not enough people in Houston, which has an enormous freeway system, would use light rail to justify the large expenditure. But proponents of light rail have said DeLay's reasons for opposing light rail were more rooted in significant contributions made over the years to his political campaigns by the highway building and contracting lobby. (DeLay's campaign contributions by industry for the 2004 campaign cycle, from the Center for Responsive Politics ) | ||
| The document was online for only an hour, but long enough to be viewed by some readers. Two days later the ''Houston Review'', a conservative publication, published its full text and an accompanying commentary that criticized the paper for bias. The memo's publication immediately launched the paper's critics and opponents of METROrail into a furor. Several other local weekly and monthly newspapers including the '']'' and the ''Houston Forward Times'' seized on the scandal, as did local ] stations, ], and the conservative ] internet forum. | The document was online for only an hour, but long enough to be viewed by some readers. Two days later the ''Houston Review'', a conservative publication, published its full text and an accompanying commentary that criticized the paper for bias. The memo's publication immediately launched the paper's critics and opponents of METROrail into a furor. Several other local weekly and monthly newspapers including the '']'' and the ''Houston Forward Times'' seized on the scandal, as did local ] stations, ], and the conservative ] internet forum. | ||
Revision as of 15:42, 26 May 2005
 | The neutrality of this article is disputed. Relevant discussion may be found on the talk page. Please do not remove this message until conditions to do so are met. (Learn how and when to remove this message) |
 | This article is actively undergoing a major edit for a little while. To help avoid edit conflicts, please do not edit this page while this message is displayed. This page was last edited at 15:42, 26 May 2005 (UTC) (19 years ago) – this estimate is cached, update. Please remove this template if this page hasn't been edited for a significant time. If you are the editor who added this template, please be sure to remove it or replace it with {{Under construction}} between editing sessions. |
The Houston Chronicle is a daily newspaper in Houston, Texas. It is one of the 10 largest newspapers in the United States, with a circulation of more than 549,300, and with the demise of its long-time rival Houston Post, its nearest major competitors are located in Dallas-Fort Worth. It is owned and operated by the New York based Hearst Corporation.
Its opinion page editor has stated that "The Chronicle's editorial policy is neither liberal nor conservative, but based upon principles and pragmatism that transcend, or, less grandly, avoid partisan ideology."
History
The Houston Chronicle was founded in 1901 by a former reporter for the Houston Post who obtained financial success on an investment he made while covering the Spindletop oil well boom. The paper was once owned by Jesse H. Jones
Criticism
On the political right, the paper's main critics are conservative talk radio stations including KSEV radio and an affiliated weblog entitled Chronically Biased. The paper's editorial page is often a target for satire and derision in Houston political circles for what critics perceive as an overbearing habit of promoting light rail transit. Chronically Biased features a cartoon character named "Captain Chronicle" who espouses light rail transit as the solution to all of Houston's problems including those unrelated to traffic.
In May of 2005 the Harris County Republican Party joined a boycott of the newspaper, which had previously been espoused by KSEV hosts. The Republican Party accused the paper of having a liberal political slant, of biased coverage of the light rail project, of supporting Planned Parenthood, and of waging a "personal smear campaign" against Houston congressman Tom DeLay.
The newspaper also has critics on the political left. The Houston Press, an alternative weekly paper that often takes a liberal perspective, frequently runs a column entitled "News Hostage", which critiques the Chronicle. The Houston Press described the paper as a "tireless promoter of rail" and mocked its editorial board's habit of portraying rail as the key to making Houston a "world class" city.
Light Rail memorandum controversy
In late 2002, Chronicle website managers accidentally posted an internal staff memorandum on the paper's home site, . The memorandum outlined a draft agenda proposing a coordinated package of news articles and editorial commentary to be published by the paper regarding a contested mass transit referendum to expand Houston's controversial METRORail system on the 2003 ballot, which was later approved narrowly by voters. The memo's anonymous author suggested in part:
- "I propose a series of editorials, editorial cartoons and Sounding Board columns leading up to the rail referendum, with this specific objective: Continuing our long standing efforts to make rail a permanent part of the transit mix here. The timing, language and approach of the paper's editorials would, of course, be the decision of the Editorial Board. But I suggest that they could be built upon and informed by a news-feature package with an equally specific focus"
The memorandum then proposed several "investigative" news stories and editorials designed to examine "the campaign led by Tom DeLay and Bob Lanier to defeat rail expansion." Lanier, the former mayor of Houston, had long opposed light rail. DeLay, who for years had blocked federal light rail funding for Houston until voters approved it as part of the 2003 ballot referendum, argued that not enough people in Houston, which has an enormous freeway system, would use light rail to justify the large expenditure. But proponents of light rail have said DeLay's reasons for opposing light rail were more rooted in significant contributions made over the years to his political campaigns by the highway building and contracting lobby. (DeLay's campaign contributions by industry for the 2004 campaign cycle, from the Center for Responsive Politics )
The document was online for only an hour, but long enough to be viewed by some readers. Two days later the Houston Review, a conservative publication, published its full text and an accompanying commentary that criticized the paper for bias. The memo's publication immediately launched the paper's critics and opponents of METROrail into a furor. Several other local weekly and monthly newspapers including the Houston Press and the Houston Forward Times seized on the scandal, as did local talk radio stations, bloggers, and the conservative Free Republic internet forum.
The Chronicle's response was notably muted. Its only official response appeared in the "corrections" section later the same week stating:
- Document mistakenly posted to site
- "An internal Houston Chronicle document was mistakenly posted to the editorial/opinion area of the Web site early Thursday morning. We apologize for any confusion it may have caused."
Later, the Houston Press tracked down Chronicle editor Jeff Cohen, who defended the memorandum in unapologetic terms:
- "I make no apologies for having a thorough discussion of the issue. We have nothing to apologize for…There was an inadvertent posting of it to the Web site, and I'm sorry about that, but I make no apologies for the contents of it."
In subsequent weeks several Houston bloggers reported writing letters to the editor about the memorandum, though none were ever published . Beyond the correction statement and Cohen's comments, the newspaper maintained complete silence about the memorandum scandal or the allegations of bias it produced.
Further, in keeping with the indications of the memorandum, the Chronicle editorial page became a vocal public advocate of the METROrail referendum in late 2003 and repeatedly endorsed its adoption. As the bond referendum approached rail critics argued that their fears of bias were confirmed by the paper, which they contend became a partisan participant in the campaign. Both the Houston Review on the right and the Houston Press on the left accused the paper of having a bias towards rail. During the campaign the Houston Chronicle's lawyers filed a criminal complaint under chapter 273 of the Texas Elections Code with Harris County, Texas District Attorney Chuck Rosenthal accusing Texans for True Mobility (TTM), the main organization opposing the bond, of fundraising improprieties. The complaint alleged that TTM had violated Texas statutes requiring PAC fundraising disclosures, although TTM was registered as a 501(c)6 organization rather than a PAC. Rosenthal later dismissed the Chronicle's complaint, finding it without merit on the grounds that the allegedly violated statute did not apply to the case.
Planned Parenthood Contributions
The newspaper's objectivity on the issue of abortion has also been called into question following revelations that the Chronicle makes several annual contributions to abortion provider Planned Parenthood. According to an investigation by the Houston Review, the Chronicle and one of its executives, Richard J. V. Johnson, have donated several thousand dollars to the abortion provider and sponsored its events. The paper's support for Planned Parenthood has also been cited by KSEV radio and the Republican Party as a reason for their boycotts.
Iraq War
In early 2004 the Chronicle was accused of bias regarding its coverage of the death of Leroy Sandoval, a soldier from Houston who was killed in Iraq. Chronicle reporter Lucas Wall visited the family of Sandoval for an interview about the loss of their loved one.
After the article appeared Sandoval's family members complained that a sentence alleging "President Bush's failure to find weapons of mass destruction" in Iraq misrepresented their views on the war and President George W. Bush (the Sandoval family was supportive of the war). The next day Sandoval's stepfather and sister called into Houston talk radio station KSEV and explained that Wall had pressured them for a quotation that criticized Bush and then included the line alleging Bush's "failure" against the wishes of the family.
A bitter on-air showdown ensued between Dan Patrick, the radio show host, and an assistant managing editor at the Chronicle, who defended his reporter's story. The incident prompted Patrick to join the call for a boycott of the paper. The story was also picked up by the local Houston television stations and, a week later, the O'Reilly Factor.The issue cooled down when Chronicle publisher Jack Sweeney contacted the Sandoval family to apologize.
External links
- Weblogs critical of the Chronicle:
- chronicallybiased.com
- Lone Star Times "Lone Star Times"
- Texas Media Watch Political Opinion Column Disguised as News