Month: July 2015

by William Skink

Here are some good reads from around the MT blogosphere.

Let’s start with Pete Talbot’s piece about the environmental cataclysm future generations will face, titled We’ll be Vilified if There’s Anybody Left. I’m glad Pete wrote this and not one of those extremists who do get constantly vilified by Democrats for pointing out terrible policies and deceitful rhetoric from team Dem.

Speaking of Democrats, there are some interesting posts to check out. At A Chicken Is Not A Pillage Rob asks the question Why Do Montana Democrats Lose?

At Cowgirl the question posed by the title of the guest post is this: Hillary Clinton; a Step Back for Progressives? Maybe it’s just me, but I have a hard time taking anything this anonymous writer has to say after reading this:

Mrs. Clinton has worked hard for some progressive causes during her life, that much is true. From her early days in Arkansas where she worked hard on reforming a broken education system to her famous efforts at healthcare reform in the early 90’s that every progressive should applaud. As well as her incredible four-year marathon as Secretary of State in the Obama administration where she traveled the globe endlessly, strengthening relationships and doing the legwork for many of President Obama’s foreign policy accomplishments.

This just highlights how absolutely clueless many Americans are when it comes to foreign policy. Hillary Clinton advocated for throwing Libya into a hell of violence and chaos it won’t recover from anytime soon, while traveling around shilling for corporations. The only thing incredible is the depiction that her tenure as SoS featured anything for progressives to be happy about.

For Bernie fans, Greg Strandberg, at Big Sky Words, recounts his attendance at a Bernie Sanders rally at the library in Missoula. Bernie supporters have a lot of work ahead to take this rather sad showing of grassroots disorganization into primary season. In a state like Montana, one wonders if it’s even worth trying.

At Flathead Memo, James Conner continues writing critically about Montana’s warped version of Medicaid expansion with a post titled MT’s awfulu Medicaid expansion may never be fixed. Conner ends his post with this piece of advice for progressives:

Montana’s Democrats are proud of what they’re doing to Montana’s poor. But I’m not proud of those Democrats. And I do not trust Democrats on health care. No progressive should.

Well said.

by William Skink

What the hell is going on in Missoula? There has been a disturbing amount of violence this month, with 3 reported rapes alleged to have occurred in just the past week.

Not all the violence makes headlines, and not all the violence even gets reported. There are more headlines coming.

Part of what’s happening is the combination of two factors: addiction and homelessness. When those two factors combine, the resulting vulnerability can be viciously exploited by predators. Is that some of what’s happening?

I don’t know. I’m in the weeds with this so maybe my perception is skewed. Sometimes I miss my youthful ignorance.

by William Skink

It started with a text. Verizon wanted my wife and I to know we were reaching data limits. That’s odd, we thought, we’ve never had this issue before. I’ve also recently gone cold turkey on my Twitter and WordPress App, so if anything I’m using that insidious device we call a “smart phone” even less. My wife thought I should call to inquire, I thought nope, let’s see what this data restriction looks like. So far neither of us have noticed any disruption.

Did I forget to mention that the fix for this dire data situation warranting a text alert was buying more data?

I only mention this because a Cowgirl post (not a Lee Enterprise article) brought my attention to an upcoming vote by the Montana PSC to address shitty phone service from CenturyLink. That vote happened, but I didn’t read the result from the Missoulian, I had to go to the Billings Gazette for some reason to read this:

HELENA — Montana’s Public Service Commission decided Tuesday to sue CenturyLink for failing to promptly restore out-of-service landlines.

The five-member panel voted unanimously to file a lawsuit in a Montana district court sometime before Sept. 1, citing slow response times and service lapses for geographically isolated customers.

“I am very disappointed at the place we’re at right now, and I do think we need to send a very strong message,” Commissioner Roger Koopman said before the voice vote.

The complaint will ask the court to levy fines against CenturyLink QC for violating the commission’s rule that 90 percent of trouble reports be cleared within 24 hours. Commissioner Travis Kavulla said the company has been fixing no more than 60 percent of downed phone lines in that time period.

“They’re candidly, grossly underperforming,” Kavulla said after the meeting.

Wow, thank you PSC regulators for protecting the public’s interest by using the court to ensure the private sector meets the standards it has agreed to. When it comes to a service that may be used by the customer to call 911 in case of an emergency, it’s good to know the PSC can put politics aside and do the right the thing for Montanans.

As for my data limit, go ahead, Verizon, do your worst. Less data could mean less awareness of the shit storm, and that’s not a bad thing. For example, I’m glad it took me a few days to hear about some disgruntled park employee in Wyoming who decided to execute a man in a detox center because he’s tired of cleaning up after homeless people in the park.

by William Skink

I added two blogs to the blogroll, Big Sky Words and A Chicken is Not a Pillage. I hadn’t included Rob’s blog mostly because it wasn’t updated all that frequently, but it seems Rob is back from partial hiatus, so I know I’ll be checking in more frequently, especially since he’s run afoul of the most bizarrely inept moderating I’ve ever seen at Cowgirl. “MT Temperance” is offering a great example for anyone who wants to see the opposite of how comments should be moderated. Truly fascinating.

There’s no formal comment policy here other than a carry-over from 4&20; contributors (JC and I) are free to moderate their comment threads as they see fit. Some things that will get my attention: calls to commit acts of violence, gratuitous personal attacks, and anything that I feel compromises my personal safety. Craig, I do appreciate your perspective and want you to comment here, but please respect the line I feel you crossed at 4&20. I’ll leave it at that.

I was hesitant to add Big Sky Words because in a lot of ways I find Greg Strandberg to be incredibly obnoxious. To say he came in like a blowhard is an understatement. I rarely find a Missoulian article he hasn’t commented on, his Twitter blasts are tantamount to spam, he criticizes (without trying to understand) anything that doesn’t directly benefit him, but he appealed to my ego and my guilt by claiming I was a tier above him in the Montana blogosphere hierarchy while pointing out the tantrum I threw when getting 4&20 removed from other blogrolls, so what the hell. We’re all kind of sad screamers into impotent microphones anyways, right?

by William Skink

It’s such a nice idea, reporters working on behalf of the public. Not corporate shareholders, or advertisers, but us, the public. At least that’s what former Missoulian editor, Steve Woodruff, would like you to think as he demands support and respect for the Missoulian in its fight with the Sheriff’s department:

Because the Missoulian has shown remarkable restraint, local readers may not be aware of the pressure the Missoula County Sheriff’s Department has exerted in an attempt to control the newspaper’s coverage of the sheriff and his department. But the Department’s attempts to control who covers the sheriff and how they do it have achieved national prominence thanks to influential journalism blogger Jim Romenesko.

I was a longtime Missoulian editor and reporter, so it should not surprise anyone when I express praise for the Missoulian for refusing to yield to pressure from the sheriff – or any other politician seeking to dictate news coverage. But the paper deserves support and respect from the broader community in this matter, too.

Let’s set aside whether I, you, the sheriff or anyone likes this or that they read in the newspaper. That’s beside the point here. What’s important is that the paper and its staff work for us – the public. If it serves us well, we’ll read and subscribe. If it doesn’t sufficiently serve us, we’ll look elsewhere for news.

A newspaper wouldn’t be worth the paper it’s printed on if it simply served up what those in power wanted, just the way they wanted.

I wish politicians would spend more time doing their jobs and less time worrying about how they come across in the media. But that’s not going to happen.

All the more reason to appreciate journalists and media outlets with the backbone to keep doing their level best for the public, even when those in power don’t like it.

Steve Woodruff,

Missoula

This is obviously extremely biased, but luckily Steve brings attention to Jim Romenesko’s national media blog, where the point of view of the Sheriff’s Department isn’t just “set aside” but given some space to explain the Sheriff department’s grievances:

Missoula County (Montana) Sheriff’s Department public information officer Brenda Bassett claims Missoulian reporter Kate Haake has misquoted her colleagues, and “often fails to give us adequate times to respond to her inquiries and/or will try to contact multiple people within our office in an attempt to get more information than what she can legally be given. In the past, she was been quite successful at it.”

So, it appears she’s an aggressive reporter.

The context still missing is this: the Sheriff’s Department has been in open turmoil since before the recent elections. There have been criminal charges, multiple lawsuits, and the Missoulian has covered all this. The reason this context matters is because clearly members of the Sheriff’s department have acted poorly. Has part of that bad conduct been to use the media in an unethical way to gain advantage, politically? Is that a contributing factor in this reporter getting information she shouldn’t have legally been given?

I’ve had a few conversations, and it’s not just the Sheriff’s Department that has had concerns over this reporter’s reporting. It might be worth considering that the Sheriff’s Department—who also work on behalf of the public because we actually pay them—have legitimate concerns about the media’s role in worsening the rift the new Sheriff is obviously still dealing with.