Michael:
After being a subscriber to the Joplin Globe (News Herald) for 46 years I today cancelled my subscription and also cancelled my monthly display ad for Design Benefits.
The Joplin Globe has let the citizens of Joplin down with its selective reporting on news events that take place in Joplin.
One of the prime examples of this is the front page reporting of a 7 month old traffic violation by Dr. Rosenberg. Yet when the Master Developer fails to purchase the former Coca Cola building on May 16, 2014 which he had been committed to for over a year, The Globe chose to report it only once and that was buried in the mid section of the paper.
The Master Developer has yet to make the purchase (three weeks after promised) and the Joplin Globe news reporting has failed to report that.
Also during the dispute between Mark Rohr and myself, the Joplin Globe wrote many, many nasty things about me, based upon lies that Mark said about me. The statements were printed without any confirmation, Just lies that Mark reported to Carol.
If a person read the Loraine report with an open mind, you could only conclude that Mark should have been fired. But the Globe chose to attack the process instead of the facts contained in the report.
I do not even talk to your news reporters any more, because everything I say to them is either reported wrong, or twisted so that is is nothing like what I have said.
I am only one person, but I am going to encourage all my friends, and I still have many left in Joplin, to cancel their subscriptions until Carol is gone and/or the Globe starts reporting the news instead of taking sides in disputes and trying to make news.
Bill Scearce
***
Please consider supporting the alternative news source that has tackled the Joplin R-8 School District problems, the background of Wallace-Bajjali, first revealed the problems with the 1717 Rangeline property, and offers an independent voice for the Joplin area. Help the Turner Report/Inside Joplin blogs continue to grow and provide a hard-hitting alternative to the Joplin Globe.
13 comments:
Way ahead of you,Scearce. Cancelled within a month of Eddie Simpson coming to town. Carol Stark is a small town editor who is way out of her league. How else could you explain having Pound and Finley as featured writers?
Amen, Mr. Scearce! I can't remember the last time I picked up a Globe. Worthless waste of trees.
I don't feel like I have as clear an idea about the city council, because even if one side is right and the other is wrong, they all ended up looking bad the way it played out. I don't necessarily mind if Rohr is gone given the drama around him, but I would say the same about most of the others, that they mostly fed into drama one way or another.
One thing I absolutely agree with, however, is that Stark is pretty worthless as far as journalists go. There is no good explanation for the Rosenberg video aside from petty personal politics. Believe me, I'm no fan of people with money throwing their weight around, but this was incredibly selective.
I always remember this line attributed to Malcolm X about how he preferred Southern racists to Northern racists because at least in the South they were up front about it. There's a similar principle at work here; Stark writes about integrity and journalism and criticizes the internet blogs for various things, but this self-promotion is betrayed by her underlying pettiness as reflected in selective reporting. Stark herself is very much a culprit in the drama dividing this town despite her pretensions otherwise.
While not a fan of Councilman Scearce, I agree with him about the Globe.
There isn't news printed anymore. It's full of ads and propaganda. While the paper doesn't need to blast anyone, it should be printing information that presents the facts. Opinions are editorials and should be presented as such.
I thought that part of being a journalist was keeping the public informed and investigating rumors and such to see what the truth is. The Globe doesn't do that.
Interesting that it takes the articles becoming 'personal' before anyone believes that the Globe has an agenda.
I, too, am not a fan of Mr. Scearce but I agree with him here. I cancelled my subscription nearly a year and a half ago. It started with their coverage of the Bruce Speck debacle. But I also believe the publisher is as much or probably more responsible for it's deplorable news coverage as the editor. I remember Michael Beatty stepping in and stating they would not cover any negative news concerning Mr. Speck. There's been little to no coverage of the growing angst in the school system as well as their failure to cover the master developer and the tornado recovery progress. Then the Globe went on to double digit increases in subscription rates. If I'm told I need to pay more I want value for that increase. Sadly, the paper has only gotten worse. The last complaint I have against them is their throwing old papers in yards in an effort to get people to subscribe. From the number of these plastic covered pieces of trash scattered in the residential areas I doubt this practice has significantly increased their subscription numbers. Come on Globe get your act together.
Randy whipped the Joplin Globe's ass on a number of stories when he was the Carthage Press editor and had a reporting staff working for him. Now he's 20 or 25 years older and he is still doing it all by himself. Carol Stark was never much of a reporter and she is even worse as an editor.
Scearce is right about the reporting on Wallace Bajali. If you depended on the Globe for your information about this outfit you would be woefully misinformed. The Turner Report has been on David Wallace since the beginning.
I am not saying the Joplin Globe is not a good newspaper- No, wait, that is exactly what I am saying.
Stop picking on the Globe. Yesterday was the 70th anniversary of D-Day and the Globe did a great job of covering it, not the anniversary, just D-Day. That was about the last time it was worth reading.
What I find humorous is that the Globe was actually being touted for a Pulitzer Prize for its coverage of the tornado. A lot of the people who work for the Globe suffered, but I did not see anyone raise their game and turn in any kind of special work. Turner's 5:41 and Spirit of Hope have provided the best journalism on the tornado and he has provided the best journalism in Joplin ever since the tornado. As far as breaking coverage of the tornado itself, I remember that Zimmer Radio, not the Globe, was the main news source of this community.
With Carol Stark, they got a yes woman, which is what they wanted.
I also agree with a previous comment about the tornado coverage. They happened to be here when a major event occurred and they benefited from the attention and empathy of the world. This is also true for Rohr, Huff, et al. None of these folks suddenly became great, they were just in a position to benefit from the attention - the real work was done by people on the ground.
If Stark were consistently great, why isn't the Globe being considered for Pulitzers in years where stories don't fall into her lap? Why is it that St. Louis news sources can uncover problems with charity funding in Joplin but the Joplin Globe cannot? Why does Stark suddenly start filling out information request forms only when it involves a friend of hers?
If ever there were a case of someone holding court, it's Stark. I know, she's a good person and goes to your church. She really cares about stuff. Heard that one before.
I just wonder if the Globe can be charged with littering. People don't want that trash they are throwing in their yards. I feel bad for old people who have to out and pick that crap up. If they want it, they will subscribe. STOP LITTERING
The problem with Carol Stark is that as the editor of the only print news source for the Joplin area, she is thrust into a role as an influential community leader. She has the choice of how she fills that role and no doubt has some guidance and direction from the Globe Publisher Michael Beatty.
With that being said we have to wonder about the glaring lack of integrity and honesty coming from top two at the Globe. Bill Scearce writing a letter to complain about an obvious misuse of power might fall on deaf ears if Beatty is like minded and part of the problem.
The next question is why? Does bad journalism and dishonesty sell more papers? Probably not. Are local power brokers influencing the direction of the Globe? Probably. That would explain the deafening silence when it comes to the non-performance of Wallace Bajjali. The schemes are too numerous to count to make fortunes off of the backs of Joplin taxpayers. Movie theaters, apartments, senior housing, moving the post office and many other adventures that will make money fall out of the sky.
To insure that the money falls into the right pockets it will be necessary to silence opposition and keep the right people in Joplin in power. That includes removing council members by influencing voters and trying to keep city managers in power. I would not be surprised if the Globe has not already selected the next city manager. The actual selection will or already has taken place behind closed doors and then the process will guided to make the final selection appear to be the result of an exhaustive nationwide search.
With the Globe and the Joplin Progress Committee handpicking council members and the new city manager, the big payouts are still there for the right people.
Selling papers is not the #1 priority when fortunes are in the balance. It will take a true investigative journalist to bring light to the dark motives of the globe.
Post a Comment