Dennis Evanosky has some great coverage of the S.E.R.V.E. meeting and claims therein. Rather than falling into the trap of thinking that journalism entails telling two sides of a story and leaving it at that, something we see a lot of in local news coverage, Evanosky digs a little deeper into one of the key claims of the Anti-LGBT recallers:
Members of SERVE Alameda say that 73 percent of the speakers at the school board meetings expressed the will of the community by coming out against the Chapter 9 curriculum. School board president Mike McMahon says that AUSD’s figures paint a different picture.
According to McMahon, 813 people submitted comments about the lessons to the district with 405 opposed, 378 in favor and 30 expressing concerns about the process. This translates to 49.8 percent opposed, 46.5 percent in favor and 3.7 percent expressing concern.
S.E.R.V.E. is playing a dangerous game with the facts. Their claim that 73% of the speakers were against the curriculum is based mostly on the first meeting, where folks who didn’t want tolerance-for-all taught to their children showed up early, snagged all the speaker slips and then handed them out to their allies as they arrived. It’s called stacking the deck and it speaks to the issues of character and the disingenuous manner in which the recall effort is being run. Just wait until you read the Recall Petition, it’s a load horse-pucky so steaming that I am surprised anyone would be willing to put their name to it.
Anyway, Kudos to Dennis E. Have a great weekend and don’t sign the ballot petition.
Sign the Statement of Support AGAINST the recall now over 1300 signers.
Here’s your opinion of the Alameda Sun’s journalism when they covered the horse shit of the SunCal signature gathering “without falling into the trap falling of thinking that journalism entails telling two sides of a story”. Perspective does change depending on your personal interest, doesn’t it John?
http://johnknoxwhite.com/2009/04/20/congratulations-alameda-sun-youre-now-the-print-version-of-the-alameda-daily-news/
John, this site is very obscure. Is there any way you can make it more known? MOST people in Alameda agree with you, and I’m sure would like to voice their opinions. I only found this because of the article in the Alameda Journal.
The journalistic trap is not “telling two sides of a story”; it’s “telling two sides of a story and leaving it at that,” without doing any journalistic legwork to see whose claims stand up to scrutiny and whose do not.
This is not the same critique leveled against the earlier piece about the signature gatherers: the problem there was editorializing in the context of a news article, to an extent so extreme that the article was scarcely distinguishable from the editorial that ran alongside it. Making these two distinct points hardly constitutes flip-flopping based on personal interest.
Anyone who was involved in the curriculum process knows that the numbers cited in the petitions are untrue. I assume it is illegal to provide false and misleading statement on a petition drive?? Of course a man of God and his followers wouldn’t lie to advance their own agenda would they??
I do not have any children, but I sure hope Alamdans will come out in force to speak out against this SERVE petition. If they would preach respecting others in their clubs, sorry,I meant churches, we would not have this discussion to being with. Always ask yourself “What would Jesus do?” I just can’t see him getting a petition going to stop teachings of respect toward each other.
We support your cause, and the board members.
It’s really sad when people who supposedly believe they should love one another come up with this stuff. Amazing that anyone would try to call teaching tolerance “indoctrination.” If it is, I think we could use a little more indoctrination starting with Rev. Dion Evans.
Hey AD … chillax (perhaps watch a movie or two at the theater)