May 19, 2010 08:45 PM UTC

ColoradoPols: Less "Fair and Balanced" than Faux News

•  
• by: StrykerK2

This morning’s diary attacking Romanoff on immigration made me start thinking about Colorado Pols coverage of the senate race.  I know the usual response is that Pols simply reposts relevant news stories and isn’t a news source, etc, but it’s a pretty bad argument.  Pols proudly touts that more people read their site than the Denver Post’s political section (a claim I’d be curious to see some numbers on).

Even if we take those claims at their word, the true power is, of course, on the cutting room floor.  Think of it this way: If there were 100 news stories that are favorable to Romanoff, and 3 that aren’t, and Pols posts those three, it appears to readers of their blog that all the stories are bad for Romanoff.  Simple right?

Since Pols also enjoys posting up stories that make candidates/campaigns look silly (which I’ll admit I find entertaining), I wanted to share a short list of stories that they apparently missed.

1) Campaigns responding to hostile press.  Now Pols ran multiple pieces about the Romanoff campaign responding to questions about their banner.  Pols also frontpaged diaries attacking the Romanoff campaign arguing details on Bennet’s tie to predatory lenders (Westwood college).  What didn’t they run?  Well let’s see:

     a. Bennet picking a fight with Mario Solis.  About a week ago, Mario said a few critical things about Bennet.  The Bennet campaign response?  Filling Mario’s inbox and voicemail with bitching and threatening responses…from the campaign.  That’s right, the Bennet campaign thought it was a good idea to have their new Rahm mini-me pick a fight with one of the two biggest progressive talk show hosts in the state.  Pols coverage?  Silence.  (On a related note, props to Mario for standing up for himself and calling them out).

     b. Worst spin ever.  Every campaign spins; it’s what they do.  Those of us who watch campaigns come to accept it.  When spin is completely outrageous, however, it warrants some criticism.  My favorite ignored spin from the Bennet campaign?  Bennet’s loss on caucus night being a crippling blow to the Romanoff campaign.  I’m not getting into a “how important is the caucus/assembly” argument here (I’m well aware of what it does and doesn’t mean), but let’s be serious.  A loss being a crippling blow to the opponent?  That’s about as extreme of spin as you can get.  Pols response?  Silence.  (Maybe when Bennet loses the primary he’ll issue a statement that it was a better than expected showing because primary voters are Romanoff’s base (you know…Democrats)).

2) Staff changes.  Every campaign ends up changing some staff.  Sometimes it’s legit, like Romanoff’s first temporary press person starting a family.  Sometimes it’s because someone isn’t working out.  When it becomes excessive, it’s something noteworthy.  Reading Pols, however, it would seem as if Romanoff has a new staff every week while Bennet doesn’t.

      a. Bennet is now on his third chief of staff.  For only being in Washington for a few weeks…err…months…err years (whatever the Bennet talking point of the day is), Bennet sure does go through his top-level management a lot.  The kicker?  His most recent one worked for a lobbying firm.  Doesn’t that make some of Bennet’s touted ethics reforms seem a tad hypocritical?  Pols response…well you can guess.  Oh and it’s interesting that their new spokesman is a Rahm appointee and they had to get rid of their caucus director and…well you get the idea.

       b. Compare this to coverage of Romanoff.  Romanoff brings on one of the most experienced campaign managers in the nation…Pols attacks them for changing staff.

Finally, my personal favorite.  Remember when Michael Bennet said bloggers aren’t real people?  I loved that one.  I would assume a blog might find it interesting, but apparently not this one.

I’m pretty sure that Romanoff could save a nun from being hit by a car and Pols would blast him for having too much time on his hands that he’s on a street.

So what’s behind all this?  Is there a grand conspiracy between the Bennet campaign and Pols?  I doubt it.  Honestly I doubt that either is really smart enough to craft such an idea.  But is there some vested interest in “Pols” promoting Bennet?  Well that’s a different question.  Yesterday Pols commented that no one who uses the handle is currently involved with any campaign.

Many different people have written for Colorado Pols, and many different people continue to write for Colorado Pols. Nobody at Colorado Pols has ever been a paid staff member of a current campaign.

You also said that apparently some of you are incompetent and just want to cover up mistakes that you make:

We have a number of authors who post eponymously as Colorado Pols. In this case, one of our writers made an assertion that another author knew was not correct and the comment was deleted by the second author. In retrospect that was not the right thing to do, another comment correcting this misstatement should have been added. We agree that in future cases of this kind, we should resolve an inconsistency between ourselves in a more transparent manner.

But here is the bigger question…what’s in it for you “Pols”?  So there are multiple people who post under the “Colorado Pols” handle.  Who are you mysterious men (or women) behind the curtain?  Are you just a group of failed political groupies who get fired from working PR for labor, bomb out completely when you run for County Commissioner, and otherwise can’t get a real job in politics?  Are you using this site to ingratiate yourselves with the Bennet campaign so maybe…just maybe…you can get back in the good graces of an elected official and actually get off the back benches once in awhile?

In the meantime, if you want to keeping having more readers than the Denver Post political section, maybe you should at least make a token effort to not totally look like you’re sucking up to a particular side.

PS – I also really loved your hard-hitting piece attacking Jane Norton for adopting a dog.  I may have no love for her policies, but your “story” was about as ridiculous as it gets.

 Loading ...