Hyperreal Film Club
'Chronicle' Double Standards?
RECEIVED Wed., May 10, 2006
Dear Editor:
In 1993, when Statesman environmental reporter Bill Collier became a PR man working for Freeport McMoran, the Chronicle covered it as a news story and as confirmation of unseemly bias in the Statesman's environmental reporting.
But there was no similar condemnation by the Chronicle nor a story examining journalistic ethics when Chronicle reporter Mike Clark-Madison recently parlayed his progressive journalism credentials to a position as a PR man for TateAustin's clients, who include AMD, the Austin Chamber of Commerce, and the local toll road authority. Instead, last week the Chronicle published as a piece of journalism a PR piece by Clark-Madison, who in the first sentence identifies himself as “a progressive writer and journalist” and “active citizen and neighborhood leader” [“Austin@Large,” News, May 5]. Mr. Clark-Madison does not identify himself as a PR man whose clients are the very corporate insiders that are targeted by Propositions 1 and 2. And the Chronicle has neither covered TateAustin's work on behalf of those opposing propositions 1 and 2 nor explained how passage of propositions 1 and 2 would adversely affect TateAustin's clients by affecting city support for toll roads, providing timely public disclosure of tax-giveaway deals, and preventing those who would pollute the aquifer like AMD from getting taxpayer subsidies. The Chronicle did little to help the reader evaluate Clark-Madison's piece, only noting in small print at the end of it that Mr. Clark-Madison is now “in partnership with TateAustin” and that his “column” was written for an antiproposition PAC.
Mr. Clark-Madison is just doing his PR job. What are you doing, Chronicle?
In 1993, when Statesman environmental reporter Bill Collier became a PR man working for Freeport McMoran, the Chronicle covered it as a news story and as confirmation of unseemly bias in the Statesman's environmental reporting.
But there was no similar condemnation by the Chronicle nor a story examining journalistic ethics when Chronicle reporter Mike Clark-Madison recently parlayed his progressive journalism credentials to a position as a PR man for TateAustin's clients, who include AMD, the Austin Chamber of Commerce, and the local toll road authority. Instead, last week the Chronicle published as a piece of journalism a PR piece by Clark-Madison, who in the first sentence identifies himself as “a progressive writer and journalist” and “active citizen and neighborhood leader” [“Austin@Large,” News, May 5]. Mr. Clark-Madison does not identify himself as a PR man whose clients are the very corporate insiders that are targeted by Propositions 1 and 2. And the Chronicle has neither covered TateAustin's work on behalf of those opposing propositions 1 and 2 nor explained how passage of propositions 1 and 2 would adversely affect TateAustin's clients by affecting city support for toll roads, providing timely public disclosure of tax-giveaway deals, and preventing those who would pollute the aquifer like AMD from getting taxpayer subsidies. The Chronicle did little to help the reader evaluate Clark-Madison's piece, only noting in small print at the end of it that Mr. Clark-Madison is now “in partnership with TateAustin” and that his “column” was written for an antiproposition PAC.
Mr. Clark-Madison is just doing his PR job. What are you doing, Chronicle?
Doug Young