DISQUS

Err sorry...I meant Naomi!

The fact that the initiative specifies "illegal aliens" numerous times in its text tells you all you need to know. Excellent reporting Natalie; maybe the Denver dailies will catch up with you on this!

I haven't read a more biased and factually misleading comment on oil shale this year. Where does one even begin to address these oil and gas industry talking points?

1. The anonymous commenter claims "Shell is recovering thousands of barrels of oil today using this technology." What he/she doesn't say is that the linked Fortune magazine story makes it clear that Shell recovered 1,700 barrels IN FIELD TESTS, not true field production. Now, why wouldn't this commenter make that clear to the reader? From the Fortune article:

"Best of all, Shell was able to replicate the lab results in several field tests; the most recent one, in 2005, yielded 1,700 barrels of light oil."

2. The commenter says it's "not true" that Shell's in situ process will "require large amounts of fresh water." Again, read the actual story, which says only that "some" of the required water will come from saline water; what the hell do you think the water that is not the "some" covered by deep-aquifer saline is going to be, fairy water? From the Fortune article:

"Water is another worry. ICP uses a lot of water, mainly to refine the oil and purify the natural gas. (Shell plans on building a refinery onsite, which is news in itself: It would be the first new refinery built in the U.S. in 30 years.) Shell appears to be on solid legal footing with its water plans, as it owns senior rights for local river water.

And SOME of the water it intends to utilize will be salinated water pumped from deep aquifers that are not part of the conventional water supply. Nevertheless, the potential for political backlash remains high, given that this is a part of the country where water is scarce and fights over water rights get nasty. "It will certainly be an issue," says former Rifle mayor David Ling. "There's an old expression around here: We talk over whiskey and fight over water." " (EMPHASIS added)

3. The commenter also omits the important part of the equation, that it will be years and years and years for oil shale to result in any significant oil production, and he/she offers no solution for what we do in the meantime to address current energy needs and costs. Instead, this person claims oil shale will "give us time" to develop alternative energy. So, we have to WAIT a decade or more for shale oil to start flowing before we address the energy issues we have NOW? From the Fortune article:

"It could be decades before Shell hits the really big numbers, if it happens at all. The logistics are daunting. It has taken the tar sands industry of Canada almost 30 years to reach its current production of about a million barrels a day (although it could be double that by 2010)."

The larger question nobody is asking: Why did we willingly turn over our rights as citizens and voters to the profit-motivated (not that there's anything wrong with that) energy industry in past years and let it determine how we should protect ourselves against the environmental dangers that accompany the necessary and important process of providing ourselves with energy? And when will the public start realizing that energy industry voices are concerned only with energy production and development, given that many of them will move on to other regions once Colorado has been pumped dry?

Please, save the oil and gas industry talking points for another forum where people aren't as interested in checking to see if you're providing a reasoned argument or just misinformation.

Mr. Rivera,

Thanks for taking the time to chat! I'm the editorial director of Colorado Media Matters, and we've documented a number of instances of misinformation in the mainstream Colorado media related either to falsehoods about Sen. Obama or distortions of Sen. McCain's record that act to promote his candidacy. How is the Colorado campaign able to address this ongoing flow of misinformation with the media, which have purveyed it both in news and commentary platforms? Do you consider the Colorado media's ability to cover the election accurately to be a significant issue? How do you deal with members of the media (either individuals or media outlets) that have conveyed such misinformation? Thanks!

Bill Menezes
Editorial Director
Colorado Media Matters

So, Schaffer thinks the natural gas in the Roan is enough to heat all the homes in Colorado for 20 years, does he? Has anyone told this oil industry veteran that virtually all of that gas is going to be shipped out of state? In other words, it's a specious example.

Yeah, taking lots of questions and violating the First Amendment rights of Americans standing quietly with signs equating the Republican presidential candidate with the sitting Republican president. Apparently the Obama campaign doesn't have a problem with letting people such as the guy in this picture exercise their rights of free speech.

Oh, and please explain... ...how a lack of growth for nuclear power -- which has had 20 years worth of GOP administrations since Three Mile Island to get back on its feet -- has driven up gasoline prices.

Misinformation from Truthteller 2.0 Umm, "facts" tend to carry some substantiation, of which you've provided none for your assertion that gas prices are high because exploration and unbridled drilling have been "blocked."

In contrast, here's some substantiation that, as usual, you're providing factually inaccurate statements to support your position:

http://www.businessw...

Attention all trolls

You're failing to mention that under federal law all Coloradans already have the right to choose whether or not to join a union. Closed shops have been illegal for years, at most an employee must pay agency fees -- but they don't have to join the union.

 

Why are you trying to mislead readers about that important fact?

Face the State's documented history of misinformation, that's what Face the State and its operator, conservative activist and Independence Institute operative Brad Jones, have a well-documented history of using falsehoods, distortions of fact and other types of misinformation as their method of dispensing "news."  That track record and Jones' own public track record as a serial misinformer (http://colorado.medi...) speak for themselves.

And that justifies the purported deception by the Connerly people, how? Oh, and quoting Face the State as a source of anything other than right-wing falsehoods and other misinformation -- the primary product of that GOP-funded website -- probably isn't going to win you a lot of support in the community of ideas.

Not a plot And Ryan didn't appear to claim that it was one. He's making the same case that anyone else with common sense would make: The media are doing a poor job informing the public about issues of the greatest importance to the public. Nothing new, but a trend that takes on greater significance every time coverage of an asinine public act takes precedence over the conduct and execution of actual public policy.

Most recently... ...what's the actual network "news" story that you've seen that ranked highest on the unintentional comedy scale?

Listen to major Denver talk radio programs and then ask why hate crimes are up against Latinos

To be more specific, review the track record KHOW's Peter Boyles -- who broadcast the leprosy falsehood nearly a year before Lou Dobbs did -- has for fostering and engaging in bigoted commentary regarding immigration reform:

http://colorado.mediamatters.org/issues_topics/...

This frequent dehumanization of immigrants -- especially Hispanic immigrants -- on a major Front Range broadcast outlet coincides with the increase in hate crimes against Latinos noted in the article above.

Coincidence?

Bill Menezes

Editorial Director, Colorado Media Matters

Ah yes, Sen. Infhofe... Your citing of him tells us all we need to know, given his current position as a noted voice of misinformation on global warming:

http://mediamatters....

http://mediamatters....

Given that the mainstream media already picks up Colorado Confidential's reporting...

...it wouldn't be surprising to see it follow this story too, probably with a nod to Colorado Confidential, as it has given in the past on occasion. It also wouldn't be surprising to see the mainstream media ignore the story as well, given that none of the three major newspapers that reported on Bruce's donation of salary and per diem to "charity" told the full story of who the charity actually is.

On another matter, if this is such a "relatively minor political blogsite" then why do you spend so much time commenting here?

Then why wouldn't they just say that? "If you help put this on the ballot and it passes, we hope it will end affirmative action programs in Colorado."

There, how hard would that be?

General elections endorsements in the wake of these primary choices Hi Dan, Bill Menezes at Colorado Media Matters.

Given that the Post has made its primary election presidential endorsements, if Sens. McCain and Clinton win their respective parties' nominations, has the Post already determined who it would endorse in the general election?

If so, why not make that choice clear at this time as well? What could change between now and November to alter that choice?

Actually, quite a big story

Ashby is willing to base his decision on second-hand (or possibly third- or fourth-hand) information passed to him, about which he has not done any fact-checking? Is this is how he also conducts himself as a journalist, in covering the legislature? If so, there are much bigger questions that should be raised about his conduct beyond this whole CCPA snit.

The "due process" analogy may have been a bit of a stretch, but the term "reckless disregard for the truth" seems on target in such a case.

 

Just how friendly of a relationship does the press have with the Colorado legislature?

Glad you asked. Here are some examples of how one statehouse beat reporter at a Denver daily has managed to carry the state GOP's water over the past year:

http://colorado.mediamatters.org/issues_topics/..., he's not the only one engaged in this type of "journalism" (Charles Ashby of the Pueblo Chieftain, one of the Capitol club "deciders", also is guilty) just one of the more frequent perpetrators...

Bill Menezes

Editorial Director

Colorado Media Matters 

http://colorado.mediamatters.org 

It's not about feelings, actually

It's about a small group of reporters with no accountability and a huge conflict of interest having decision-making authority (albeit limited) over who gets on the floor and who doesn't. That's the problem.

If, as Mr. Ewegen says, 95 percent of his job can be done from off of the floor, then one solution might be to bar floor access for all journalists, instead of having the Capitol club decide who stays or goes. I covered the Missouri state legislature for years with the Associated Press and the rules then (and now, probably) did not allow media on the House or Senate floors during legislative proceedings. And, just as Mr. Ewegen's extensive experience indicates, reporters who couldn't get on the floor had no trouble cultivating sources, getting interviews and other information, and otherwise covering the beat.

 

The REAL question

The real question is how a self-appointed, unaccountable group of reporters with a serious conflict of interest qualified itself to determine the criteria for admission of potential competitors.

The fact that Charles Ashby of the Pueblo Chieftain is involved should raise serious questions; as Colorado Media Matters has documented, the Chieftain is a stridently partisan publication that frequently uses factual misinformation to support its editorial points of view. We've documented a number of instances in which Ashby himself also has produced stories that dispense misinformation supporting or promoting a conservative political point of view. Who has vetted Ashby and the Chieftain, and their qualifications for reporting from the House and Senate floors?

Clearly the current process is seriously flawed. Fortunately, established journalists such as Mr. Moore and Mr. Otte are willing to step up and provide thoughtful explanations as to why it is flawed. Now it's up to the rest of the Colorado media community to come up with a reasonable solution that -- at a time when legislative coverage demands more voices, not fewer -- puts a priority on serving Colorado readers, listeners and viewers ahead of the self-interests of a small group of reporters.

Bill Menezes

Editorial Director

Colorado Media Matters

Asking questions is our right and our duty Sorry, but some of you seem to be so conditioned by a compliant Bush-era media that you get a little uncomfortable when a journalist starts asking questions or making relevant contextual facts known that don't square with your immediate, sound-bite vision.

Ms. Assam's past as related to her performance as an armed enforcement person (in this case, a security guard) is relevant background. Is it the whole story, and does it somehow diminish her apparent bravery in the halls of New Life Church? Of course not, and this story is not written in a way that implies so. Rather, it takes a pretty one-dimensional portrait painted by the mainstream media and gives it just a little more depth. If you're interested in Ms. Assam's story, you should be interested in all of it, not just the parts that make you feel immediately warm and fuzzy. Did it ever occur to you that perhaps she had a troubled past that may have led her to a spiritual awakening, which put her on a road that led to New Life Church? Stories like this one make one more curious about a woman who, like most of us, is probably a pretty complex, multifaceted being. And without the facts of her past, you can't possibly have a full idea of her present.

Gotta be 18 to vote still... But the little blastocytes will provide a dandy child tax credit nine months earlier than before...

Workers' rights part II Go back further than that, to his newspapers in the Bay Area and Dallas and you'll see that this type of behavior is the rule, not the exception for Singleton.