Pages

Monday, March 20, 2006

Tribune Writes Context Story, Los Osos Still Goes Missing!

In it’s March 19 “Second National Sunshine Week, Celebrating America’s Public Records Laws,” the Tribune headlined a quasi follow-up story on the previous one they’d run on the Los Osos CSD’s failure to follow state laws concerning getting public records requests out in the time required. The first story was, as usual, totally missing any context -- no notation that the CSD was, uh, beleaguered by some angry citizens attempting to break all their kneecaps, beset with citizen-sponsored lawsuits, and CSD sponsored lawsuits, and facing regime change, general mangers and office personnel put on leave until certain, uh, back-dated documents could be investigated, preparing agendas and paperwork for about a jillion public meetings, and so forth, that might explain (not excuse, but explain) this failure to get public records out in a timely manner.

Nor was there, in the original story, any attempt to compare the LOCSD’s failures with any other city, until a couple of days later, when this excellent story appeared. Headline, “CITIES HERE BALKING ON DOCUMENTS: Six of the county’s seven cities don’t honor requests for records that the law says they must.”

GOSH, you mean Los Osos isn’t alone? That six other cities, none of whom are going through the kind of turmoil and crushing paperwork problems Los Osos is, ALSO fail to comply with the state law? Well, Quel interesting. There was even a sidebar on a “list of the oldest [federal] pending requests” that have still not been filled, so clearly, this is something that’s very common.

And so I read through this whole new story to see if they’d refer back to the original Los Osos story, IN ORDER TO SET THAT STORY INTO CONTEXT and, naturally, that old horse went missing. Not a peep. Not a reference to Los Osos. Zip.

And so we’re left with the cart before the horse, then the cart shows up and the horse is gone missing. And that, of course is what “spin” is all about – separate cart and horse, lose horse. What “context” is all about is – connect cart, horse, traces, wheels, roadway and driver.

Good “watchdog” papers do the latter. The Tribune, alas, too often does the former.

Not known, now that Knight-Ridder has sold i’s holdings, whether the Trib’s new owners, the McClatchy News folks will bring a different editorial/journalistic ethos to the central coast. One can only hope.

15 comments:

Shark Inlet said...

Ann,

Lemmie ask you a question because I wonder where you stand.

Do you find Lisa's answer, essentially something like "it isn't acceptable, but we're too busy and understaffed to boot" reasonable?

How about working overtime? How about hiring someone part time to help out in the office if you're so overworked? Such a person could help fill these requests for informamtion or perhaps lighten the load elsewhere to make it easier to comply with the law.

How about simply not putting all your key staffers on administrative leave?


I wonder whether Dan is going to be one of the applicants for the GM position. If so, I wonder whether this board likes or dislikes the job he has been doing so far. To me it doesn't appear that he's been running the office in a way that the board would approve of.

On the other hand, I've found it hard to predict what this board will do based on what they've said. After all, the men promised that they could get us an out of town plant for $100/month or less but it doesn't seem very likely.

Anonymous said...

Go pound sand inlet, you are so predictable and annoying. Go crawl back into Pandora's Box.

Shark Inlet said...

I guess that if you don't support the current LOCSD board you don't have the right to speak in the mind of the minority of Los Osos voters.

Sad, they. Pathetic too.

Anonymous said...

By the way folks, I want you all to know that I doubled up on the "smart pills", and the sneezing has gone away. But now I am even more confused. I cannot see both sides of a question, and even worse can't ride my bike without falling off. At least I do not sneeze "bullshit". But perhaps now I am writing "rabbit shit" when I disagree and have not created the facts. I need to create the facts first through my writing.

Anonymous said...

Sharkinlet,

Thanks for pointing out the nonsense that those that try to justify the CSD actions purvey.

It will not be too long until the CSD's actions will result in collapse and dissolutionment. Hang in there.

An admirer

Churadogs said...

"Shark Inlet said...
Ann,

Lemmie ask you a question because I wonder where you stand.

Do you find Lisa's answer, essentially something like "it isn't acceptable, but we're too busy and understaffed to boot" reasonable?"

Reasonable? Yes. Acceptable? No. Hopefully, with Karen Vega back, we'll get some "splainin' done.

"How about working overtime? How about hiring someone part time to help out in the office if you're so overworked? Such a person could help fill these requests for informamtion or perhaps lighten the load elsewhere to make it easier to comply with the law."

Inlet, are you volunteering?

"How about simply not putting all your key staffers on administrative leave?"

So far as I know, some key staffers were put on leave until the DA could investigate whether they broke the law by falsifying public documents by back-dating a contract. Discovering back-dated contrtacts would send a red flag up to me because you'd have to wonder what ELSE had been, uh, fiddled with. So, I would find it reasonable and prudent to restricty acces of public records by people who have, uh, back-dated stuff, until you could determine what the heck was going on.

"...whether Dan is going to be one of the applicants for the GM position."

If memory serves, he's a temporary and is now looking for a permanent GM.


"If so, I wonder whether this board likes or dislikes the job he has been doing so far. To me it doesn't appear that he's been running the office in a way that the board would approve of."

You'd need to check with the office to see when his evaluation is/will be done. Also, check to see a copy of his contract to see if the board can fire him at will (i.e. 30 day notice) or whether he has some longer contract. If I remember, WiulDan is Blesky's employer and they can send him wither they will and plug somebody else. I'm sure if the Board wasn't happy with his performance, his bosses at WilDan would have gotten a call by now.

Anonymous said...

Darn, I just woke up from a nap and realized I was "sleep writing" on my last comment again. Maybe I only make sense when I "sleep write".

Anonymous said...

just so every body knows, the anon on the "smart pills" is Shark Inlet. Shark is upset that someone spoofed one of his earlier comments in one of Ann's earlier posts. How sad for you Shark, is this what you been reduced to? "I know you are but, what am I". What's next? "Same to you but more of it?" I'm sure there is a vacancy for you in the adolescent unit at Atascadero State. Why don't you let us all in on who you really are so we can intervene and make that call for you?

Shark Inlet said...

Ann,

It might be a good idea to see if you can get Greg to figure out how to keep such spoofing from happening. This is on your watch on his board and I would hope that if the two of you value discussion you would deal with it somehow.

Anonymous said...

"911 Emergency.......

....."Yes, we have a psychotic schizophrenic that has been posting to our blog by the name of Shark Inlet...we were wondering if you could send somebody out, I've heard there are vacancies in the cuckoo hut at Atascadero State."

Oh, I'm so sorry, but the people in the cuckoo hut are in recovery and we can't expose them to the likes of Shark Inlet. They might regress....besides Shark might try and stuff and clog all our toilets so no one can go poo poo anymore kind of like the evil "bullshit" Shark is spewing in Los Osos with the Dissolution movement and the CDOs that Shark begged the RWQCB to inforce on all the property owners in Los Osos...but, I wouldn't worry too much about it. When the people of Los Osos start to realize how ridiculous the CDOs and the dissolution movement is .....that it's just another futile attempt by Shark to DIVIDE the community, I think that most of the good people of Los Osos will finally realize what a nut job Shark is and you'll get behind the new CSD and work towards a final solution finally. Then, Shark will finally fade into the dark and distant shadows from whence it came......

Anonymous said...

Shark, don't bother.

It's not about responding or debating, it's important for some people to try to denigrate you (because it feeds their ego).

It's kind of like 'Lord of the Flies'. The ones that yell the loudest take know that yelling the loudest works.

It's called hating one into submission. If they can't debate you, they'll try to hate you until you go away.

Churadogs said...

Well, I see you kids seem to having a grand time. To the "real" Shark Inlet, if I shut off the comment section of the blog, I doubt that will make anyone happy. I can certainly check with Greg to see if this blogsite has specific blockers, but somehow I doubt it. I think it's pretty basic: On or Off. And since people can post anonymously (so far Mike Green and Ron Crawford are the only folks who've self identified) that opens the way for typical "anonymous" silliness, like you're seeing now. Clearly, the "faux" inlet has made his point, so I can only hope he'll move on to other things. Meantime, his "voice" is certainly recognizable so perhaps folks interested in using this as a valid discussion forum can sort out the phony inlet from the real one: ignore the former, and continue to engage the latter? If any of the others who post comments here have any other ideas, please post them.

Shark Inlet said...

Ann,

The quick way of finding out who is who is to right-click on the handle of the poster and then open the file in a new window. The "real" inlet dates back to August 2005 but the "fake" inlet dates back to March 2006.

As to what Greg can do ... I don't know that he can do anything, but I would presume he wouldn't like such spoofing and he can probably look into whether such activity would violate the terms of use. If so, the "fake" account could be shut off.

Anonymous said...

The Shark spoof is fabulous! Can you draw cartoons too? Personally I find the real Shark to be intelligent and somewhat engaging...certainly informative. It's just fun to see him flipped on his head to get an alternative perspective.

Churadogs said...

Shark inlet said above: "As to what Greg can do ... I don't know that he can do anything, but I would presume he wouldn't like such spoofing and he can probably look into whether such activity would violate the terms of use. If so, the "fake" account could be shut off."

So couldn't "fake poster" just log in under a different "fake name?" and start his game all over again?

One interesting thing about "anonymous" anybodies, is except for me, Mike Green and Ron Crawford, NOBODY knows who anybody is. You all could be spoofing. Register under different handles every few months and "invent" a different writing style or point of view, and type away. Who's to know?

That's one of the powers and dangers of the internet -- it's very hard to know who's who. In my case, anyone who's been reading my columns can track both my style and content over the years, they're free to identify me by my silly socks at public meetings, my mug goes out over the TV when I stand up and identify myself during public comment, folks can call me up and chat, stop me in the middle of the supermarket & etc. I'm a known quanity.

Not so for most of the commentors on this blogsite. Nobody knows who they are. Quite a game, and hence the door is always open for mischief