News Cut: August 14, 2008 Archive

The color of gangs

Posted at 7:51 AM on August 14, 2008 by Bob Collins (3 Comments)

Laura Yuen's excellent story today on a St. Paul plan to keep closer tabs on the city's gang members should lead to more discussion on the issue. So let's start it.

Under the program, 60 of the 'baddest" gang members have been identified:

"In essence, what we're going to do is bring everyone to the table and say, 'We've identified you, and we're going to give you two paths to go down," Sgt. Trish Englund said. "We would prefer you to take this path where we have some resources in place for you to use, and people who genuinely want to help you and change your lifestyle. Or you're going to go down this path, where we're going to target you, and it's going to be one where you'll end up in jail, and possibly in jail for a very long time."

And all 60 are black. Is that a problem?

"We see it as a selective prosecution of individuals," St. Paul NAACP, Nathaniel Khaliq said. "You already have them on the list, and you're just waiting for them to trip, and then you move on them."

Khaliq said the police frequently target African-American men while overlooking other communities. For instance, a group of boys accused of a recent baseball-bat attack at Lake Phalen were Asian, not black. And Khaliq said the new program could distract the police from going after older, more established gangs rather than young people from the neighborhood.

Are the 60 African Americans the "baddest" gang members? As Khaliq pointed out in Yuen's story, the high-profile attack in the Phalen area recently was allegedly carried out by an Asian gang.

But a 2007 City Pages look at gangs in St. Paul detailed how a single incident led to more than year of gang activity among "predominantly black" gangs. But it also noted the involvement of gang members of Asian and Hispanic backgrounds.

And though somewhat aged now, an FBI bulletin in February 2003 provided a chilling picture of the violence -- primarily rape -- perpetrated by Hmong gangs in the area.

Is this selective enforcement against a particular race? Or an accurate representation of the gangs of St. Paul?

What's your view?

Comment on this post

No news at the conventions?

Posted at 11:20 AM on August 14, 2008 by Bob Collins (7 Comments)
Filed under: Media, The political conventions

Like the ceremonial first pitch at a baseball game, the lament that there's no news at a political convention officially kicks off the convention coverage season.

Jack Shafer, writing in Slate, has tossed the first pitch.

A still better way to improve convention coverage would be to withdraw all reporters and force the curious to rely on a C-SPAN feed: Unless a brokered convention threatens to break out, these political gatherings tend to produce very little real news. Yet the networks, the newspapers, the magazines, and the Web sites continue to insist on sending battalions of reporters to sift for itsy specks of information. According to Forbes, 15,000 pressies are expected to attend each of the conventions. Slate, I'm embarrassed to admit, is sending a team of eight to Denver and six to St. Paul. Attention! Don Graham! We're spending your cash like it's Zimbabwean bank notes!

Shafer is correct, at least to the extent that far too many mainstream journalists -- and even more in the blogosphere -- believe that convention coverage involves sitting in a darkened hall somewhere and waiting for someone to deliver a tinkle of news. But why would they? It's a rehearsed infommercial, and this isn't 1968.

So what's a reporter to do? Leave. Look for a better location to learn the real stories behind the script from which the Dems and Republicans want the media to read. Eventually, they reveal their true selves and deliver a far better story.

I've used this story before, but Shafer hasn't heard it, obviously. It's Boston 2004, the Democrats have trotted out the image campaign to make John Kerry a war hero. The former Fleet Center was bedecked in pictures of Kerry in Vietnam, all intended to provide some salve to the wounds inflicted by the Swift Boat Veterans.

The message: Democrats are patriotic, too. It was a carefully crafted message swallowed hook, line, and sinker by the major media. But on one morning, after a late-night convention session, an event was scheduled on Bunker Hill -- a salute to veterans. Most reporters didn't go, figuring there was no news to be had. That, and it was a mile away from Fleet Center.

They were wrong.

Thousands of Democratic delegates stayed away from the event. Had reporters spent more time looking for these angles instead of lamenting the lack of news, perhaps more than one news outlet would've told you the story of the convention that was reluctant to "salute the vets."

Fast-forward to New York City weeks later. The Republicans draped themselves in 9-11. Widows speak to a hushed convention. "We will not forget," becomes the rallying cry.

A day later, Minnesota delegates to that convention refuse to take the time to talk with another group of widows and survivors -- the ones whose loved ones' remains are buried in a Staten Island garbage dump; the ones who can't get sympathy from either the Republican mayor or the Republican governor of New York. As they're touring the site, I tell the delegates about the group of families. They return to their buses instead.

Here's the slideshow I put together at the time (Sorry it's in RealAudio format, it was 2004.)

In San Diego in 1996, a "Faith and Freedom" rally became a metaphor for the party as a whole. The far-right evangelicals were allowed in; the moderates stayed home.

In Boston, we started a dialog on whether Catholic Democrats have an obligation to their Church and faith that supersedes that to their constituents? That didn't appear on any agenda.

And in New York, Laura McCallum was one of the first people to analyze the possibility of a national role for Gov. Tim Pawlenty. That was four years ago, and people going into that convention forget that it was Sen. Norm Coleman, not Gov. Tim Pawlenty, who was considered a rising star of the party. Pawlenty got the love tap from the head of the Club for Growth, the ultra-conservative kingmakers.

By looking for news, MPR did an outstanding job finding the stories, and we're poised to provide even more over the next few weeks.

We're obviously not the only ones looking -- and finding -- these stories. And, sure, it's unclear whether we'll find their equals in Denver or St. Paul. But if we don't, it will only be because we didn't look hard enough.

It's our job to ignore the infommercial. But Shafer's suggestion -- staying home -- isn't the way to do it.

Update 12:13 Media lecturer Jeff Jarvis gets his licks in, too. But remember, that's a journalism "expert" advocating journalists stay home and just steal other people's work. If you haven't looked for the news, how do you know it's not there?

Comment on this post

Sorry, Canton

Posted at 9:28 AM on August 14, 2008 by Bob Collins (1 Comments)

Stephen Colbert has apologized to the good folks of Canton, South Dakota. He had called the town "North Dakota's ashtray."

According to the Argus Leader newspaper, many people in Canton didn't know who Stephen Colbert is, which, perhaps, is all one needs to know about Canton, South Dakota.

Comment on this post

Follow-up: The Gloucester 'pregnancy pact'

Posted at 1:30 PM on August 14, 2008 by Bob Collins (1 Comments)
Filed under: Media, Schools

Remember the story about the high school girls in Gloucester, Mass., who made a pact to get pregnant? It was a heck of a story until people started checking the facts and found no evidence that it was true.

What's happened since then? Plenty. The principal of the school, cited as the source for the pact claim, has resigned effective tomorrow. He says the mayor of Gloucester and other officials slandered him by refusing to invite him to a news conference back during the height of the controversy, and questioning the existence of the pact, a word Sullivan says he never used. As with any small city newspaper, the "comments" section of the newspaper article on the subject provides more insight than the article itself (Worth noting, by the way, that a post comparing Gloucester to the rest of the state and, oddly, Minnesota, could've only come from News Cut).

An editorial in the paper provides a glimpse into the politics of it all:

Sullivan has said he doesn't recall using the term "pact," but then again, he was never really given the chance to confirm, deny or explain. When the media storm broke, Sullivan -- like all other school personnel -- was ordered by (School Superintendent Christopher) Farmer not to comment. He was barred from participating in any of the multiple press conferences. Mayor Kirk spoke for him, saying Sullivan's memory was "foggy," and that he couldn't recall what he had told the Time reporter.
...

Not only was he ordered to remain silent while his reputation was tarnished, but since then he has not been consulted or even involved in the discussions that will eventually lead to policies on birth control and sex education for the school. These may well prove to be policies he might not support, but would be expected to enforce. That is not only insulting, but as Sullivan realized, it made it impossible for him to continue. No administrator can function effectively when he is being undermined and muzzled by his superiors.

Media critic Dan Kennedy writes today that the story here isn't the "pact," it's the poor reporting from a national magazine, that cost a man his job.

Still, it has struck me as exceedingly odd that here, in Oprah Nation, not one of these young women would step forward. Let's not forget, too, that one pregnant 17-year-old Gloucester High student appeared on national television and denied there was any such pact. Rather, she said some of the students became close after they got pregnant, a claim that comports with some inside knowledge I had picked up around the same time.

Time magazine shouldn't just be given a pass on this.

Comment on this post

Russia will be Obama's or McCain's problem, analysts say

Posted at 12:54 PM on August 14, 2008 by Bob Collins (0 Comments)
Filed under: Politics, War

The war between Russia and Georgia -- and more importantly, the effect on the relations between Russia and the United States -- didn't provide any more comforting moments today .

Defense Secretary Robert Gates warned that relations between the U.S. and Russia could be strained for years. But he did say there's no chance the U.S. is going to get involved militarily.

Still, it appears to be a situation that will be one of the first to end up in the lap of a new president.

John McCain, speaking in Michigan, called for a complete review of U.S. relations with its Cold War enemy, the International Herald Tribune reported.

McCain said there should be heightened security arrangements for Ukraine, the Baltic states and Poland. But he offered no specifics, and ruled out military action against Russia or a return to the cold war.

Barack Obama, on vacation in Hawaii, condemned the Russia invasion and called for a U.N. Security Council resolution.

Here are the statements of both candidates:

As for Minnesota politicians, I asked an official in Rep. Michele Bachman's office for an interview today. I got a statement from the congresswoman instead:

"Obviously, the Russia-Georgia conflict is very disturbing and I am monitoring it very closely. In fact, this afternoon, I expect to participate in a conference call with Republican leadership on this matter.

"I was pleased to see that the President is taking a firm stand with Moscow and that he's dispatched Condoleezza Rice to Tbilisi. This is a volatile region and I am hopeful that tough diplomacy and humanitarian aid are all that will be needed to keep the conflict from spreading."

So far, only Sen. Norm Coleman, Bachmann, and Rep. Jim Oberstar have provided reaction to the ongoing events.

Update 6:03 p.m. Rep. Betty McCollum has issued a statement:

"I strongly condemn Russia's coordinated assault and invasion of the sovereign, democratic Republic of Georgia. In an attempt to re-establish control over its neighbors through military force, Russia is sending a worrisome signal to the international community that its vision of the future looks like the troubled Soviet past.

"As a member of the House Appropriations Subcommittee on State Department and Foreign Operations, I support the Bush Administration's commitment to provide immediate humanitarian assistance to relieve the Georgian peoples' suffering. The United States and our European allies should now initiate high-level, persistent diplomatic talks with Georgia and Russia, focused on restoring and sustaining a cease-fire."

Comment on this post

The unemployment rate: It's not 1983

Posted at 3:36 PM on August 14, 2008 by Bob Collins (18 Comments)

First this disclaimer: The economy is bad. Really bad. And a lot of people are unemployed, according to the Department of Employment and Economic Development, which today released statistics showing the unemployment rate jumping a half-percentage point -- to 5.8%. On a seasonally-adjusted basis, that means 171,478 people are out of work, and there's no way to put lipstick on that pig.

It's the most people unemployed in Minnesota since June 1983, when 174,067 were unemployed.

But here's the thing: It's not 1983 out there. The total number of unemployed then was a far greater number of the labor market than it is today. There are about 800,000 more people in the labor force today than in 1983, when the unemployment rate (seasonally adjusted) was 8 percent.

749,581 more people are working today than were working in Minnesota in 1983.

Per capita income in Minnesota at last check -- 2007 -- was $41,034. In 1983 it was $12,698. Taking inflation into account, that would be $28,043.20 in 2008.

That's what the numbers say. But what do you say? If you're old enough to remember 1983, how different is your economic situation now than then?

Comment on this post

Housekeeping: What's your story? (redux)

Posted at 2:44 PM on August 14, 2008 by Bob Collins (0 Comments)
Filed under: Life

Last week, while soliciting your everyday stories of life, I told you about a family I met while on vacation. I told you a little bit about them and mentioned that I'd interviewed them for a piece I was writing for a personal blog and newsletter. The piece is now done and I wanted to invite you to read more about the family, if you're so inclined. It's written for a specific audience -- airplane builders -- but I think you might enjoy it, anyway; at least, I hope so.

Oh, and this is me reminding you to share your tales of living your life. You'd be surprise how interesting you are.

Comment on this post