Greensboro City Councilwoman Mary Rakestraw has recommended a plan to redistrict the current City Council district boundaries.
The plan would affect [impacts] 11 precincts, converting 10 full and one partial district into new boundaries.
U.S. Supreme Court decisions suggest that if the variance between district populations – when comparing the lowest populated district with the highest – is 10 percent or less, redistricting may not be necessary according to guidelines in the 14th Amendment.
Greensboro’s total variance rate is 9.2 percent, with the greatest variance existing between Districts 4 and 5. [Councilmember] Rakestraw’s proposal creates a population balance of 7.0 percent.
When the News & Record posts to its website material under the byline "staff reports," it suggest that some original reporting--some verification and fact checking--has occurred. When it obviously hasn't, they are just serving as a pipeline for propaganda and it is a lie to represent that material as original reporting. It is not reporting, it is vomit from a propaganda machine.The recommendation must be approved by [requires the approval of] City Council and the U.S. Department of Justice.
If the News & Record is going to continue this practice, and it has become common on their website, they should stop labeling these materials as news and stop crediting them to News & Record staff. They should just come clean and identify the material as a press release with the source fully identified: the name and contact details as are in the press release. Anything less is an intentional and gross misrepresentation. It is professional malpractice and it must end.
Thanks for the nod, Roch. I do the same thing as the N&R oftentimes with city press releases -- with one distinction: I always provide at least one attribution per article along the lines of, "according to a city press release." Some changes in wording makes the transition artful, but as long as proper attribution is made, I don't see a need for a radical overhaul.
ReplyDeleteBut I'm really much more interested in the implications of the redistricting changes proposed.
Good luck with that. Another terrible example is taking CFGC's numbers for granted in the article about Friday's Tea Party.
ReplyDelete