This week, The Joplin Globe ran perhaps the most vapid, idiotic and pussified editorial in its long history of pandering and being more lap dog than watchdog.
The editorial notes the current appropriations proposals pending in Jefferson City, then it notes that since the Bored of the Governors refuses to use reserves (reserves that two to three years ago, it claimed were being built to survive FY13) the carnage has to happen somewhere:
“The fallout will come elsewhere, including no across-the-board salary increases next year, and possibly job cuts.”
That makes six years of no salary increase for even the cost of living. And job cuts. The Globe has to ask how many job cuts and could they be avoided and how, right?
Michael Beatty has his nose so far up RTV’s ass he uses Speck’s navel as a periscope.
Here is what The Globe says:
“…it’s the lesser of two evils.”
Nice cliche, guys. And it isn’t the lesser of two evils. But we concede that is a debatable point. Our problem with The Globe is that it doesn’t want to have the debate. It takes whatever the Bored and the Speck administration feeds it at face value. Remember The Chart story that quoted an email from Beatty to Speck about how his paper could help shape the U’s image?
Well, here is the email once again courtesy of The Turner Report:
You will hear that we are withdrawing our requests for your schedule, Rod’s schedule, and your expenses. On that note, I think it might be best that next week you and I and Carol get together at the university to meet about how it would work better with our communications.
I have five examples of positive (Note: Beatty is the one who put the word “positive” in bold.) stories that we wanted to do on MSSU this past week or so and we could not get a response back. We wanted to do an arboretum story for Arbor Day, a story on the mansion’s renovation, a story on the Science Fair, of course the prairie issue and lastly how you saved money for the university with the hiring of the two new VP’s.
As I thought more about the issue of the spokesperson, I will share with you what I experienced in Baltimore. I was used to the spokesperson to be more of the facilitator for the organization on how the message should be controlled. Examples would be we call Rod about a story, he knows how you want the story played out so he picks the spokesperson. This gives him/you appropriate individual time to develop the message. The process is really about controlling the message when working with the press and keeping transparency to the taxpayers.
I think we can find a middle ground so that all will be satisfied with the process.
The Globe‘s editorial board tells us that MSSU is “playing to its base” in doing this. Maybe that is the case, but if they choose to use that political analogy, we would say that anyone’s base is the most extreme example of their point of view.
They also give us another passage of note:
“Southern also is playing to its strength: Offering a great education at a low cost. We’re proud of the fact that Southern is, and will remain, the best deal in the state, and we applaud the board for keeping its focus on that as the highest priority.”
True, traditionally, Southern has provided a quality education at a value. But the next sentence smacks of pure shit. Why are you proud? You are the one outlet that should be objective. And how can you be certain that it “will remain the best deal in the state?” How come you aren’t asking IF it will?
Perhaps The Globe publisher is too busy schmoozing with Speck and others at golf tournaments and giving high fives to Kevin Griem at basketball games.