Narrow Search

  • Show Only

  • Category

  • Narrow by Date

    • All
    • Today
    • Last 7 Days
    • Last 30 Days
    • Select a Date Range

Comment Archives: stories: Blogs: Seven Days

Re: “SF Chronicle Editor Bans Newsroom Staff From Attending Saturday's Women's March

Ms. Cooper sure has a lot of power that she is misusing as a woman in a leadership position. This is not the time for taking away people's rights Ms. Cooper, it's never a good time. We have all forgiven you for having a paper that is written at 8th grade level, we cannot ignore your willingness to infringe on a women's right to assemble. What's next, will you not allow them to go to clinics or take birth control, or vote? You don't have my support or readership.

Posted by Diana Cristales on 01/20/2017 at 11:37 AM

Re: “SF Chronicle Editor Bans Newsroom Staff From Attending Saturday's Women's March

I am employed by a national news organization and the restrictions on participating in political events are clear, and, in my opinion, entirely appropriate.

If you're a major news organization, and a news reporter is participating in the news, and taking a partisan side in a battle, how are people supposed to believe that his or her reporting is striving to be fair, rather than striving to persuade?

For example, if a Fox News reporter is photographed holding a Pro Life sign at a rally, would you dismiss his reporting on abortion as propaganda? Fuck yes you would. And rightly so. Because he's not a reporter anymore. He's now a activist. And you assume he's starting out with a narrative that he will make selected facts fit.

And if a SF Chronicle reporter were to be photographed holding a sign with a picture of Trump that says, in huge letters, "What. A Dick," how much easier would it be for the new administration, and its followers, to dismiss everything the Chronicle publishes as biased?

News organizations often make a distinction between reporters and commentators or oped writers. The latter have opinions, and use those opinions in their comments, and are identified as people with opinions. Nothing wrong with that. If you want to consume opinion, there's opinion to be consumed. Buyer beware.

But reporters are expected to strive for fairness and accuracy, to the best of their ability. To report without fear or favor. And the appearance of fairness is a necessary component in asking readers to trust that you are trying to do just that.

Posted by Ken Olofia on 01/20/2017 at 11:21 AM

Re: “SF Chronicle Editor Bans Newsroom Staff From Attending Saturday's Women's March

Blatant denial to rights of freedom of assembly, association, speech.
Patrick Monk.RN. SF. Ca.

Posted by Patrick Monk RN on 01/20/2017 at 9:56 AM

Re: “SF Chronicle Editor Bans Newsroom Staff From Attending Saturday's Women's March

I and my journalist and writer friends are Marching, in part, to demonstrate opposition to the muzzling of the press by the incoming Trump Administration. The thought of fellow journalists being barred from attending a hugely historic demonstration against an administration who wants to silence the media is appalling! And just a bit suspicious in its own right. if I worked at the chronicle, I would call in sick,(maybe wear a mask) and attend, or feel bad about it the rest of my life. I am shocked and saddened by this dictatorial move on the part of this editor.
hold on to your radios everyone's, the way journalism compromise tells me it may be all we have left. Radio stations like Pacifica Radio from NJ and KPFA radio out of Berkley (both online), and online and Free Speech TV shows like Democracy Now are not corporately sponsored in any way and are the only places we can get unbiased reporting. Thank God they exist

Posted by Karyn Cortani on 01/20/2017 at 6:35 AM

Re: “SF Chronicle Editor Bans Newsroom Staff From Attending Saturday's Women's March

Insight is one thing. OPINION is another completely. If it is an opinion/ editorial piece, sure, both label it AS such and include some personal opinions. But if it is presented as "straight" reporting (just the facts: who, where, when, how), leave the bias out or at least offer full disclosure of it. This new trend of media attempting to influence minds from divergent fields is WHY folks can't/won't trust Mainstream Media anymore (e.g.- reporters feeding Hillary debate questions in advance but not to her opponents). The Chronicle isn't presented as an "Alternative" newspaper, so extremists should stop acting put out that the paper's publisher doesn't want her reporters compromising journalistic ethics. There are more than enough news sources in this day & age so that we don't have to gripe that people are somehow not able to hear folks' opinions because straight news is upholding journalistic ethics (as it should). When one major news source takes on the role of Big Brother by telling us what to think instead of giving us a chance to formulate our own opinions based upon unvarnished facts, then you have BIG Gov't at it's worst right around the corner. Do even the Leftists want THAT(??)

Posted by john_q on 01/20/2017 at 4:37 AM

Re: “Coal Terminal Developer Suing City of Oakland, Seeking to Overturn Ban on Fossil Fuel Exports

Oakland already has more than its share of environmental issues, there's no reason to add coal dust to the mix. Phil Tagami is doing what all business people do nowadays; if they can't get their way legally, they bully cities and towns with pricey, bullshit lawsuits figuring they'll break them financially. He would do well to remember the city he's trying to bully. Oaklanders do not take bullying lying down and they don't shy away from a fight.

Posted by Peter McQuaid on 01/20/2017 at 2:12 AM

Re: “SF Chronicle Editor Bans Newsroom Staff From Attending Saturday's Women's March

Disgusting. If you don't cover the news, then what is your actual job? If you don't cover the truth, witness our voices then you are in fact suppressing the news and you deserve neither our respect nor our support. We have enough fake news. We don't need to add news that shuts out female voices.

Posted by Martha Kreeger on 01/20/2017 at 12:00 AM

Re: “Judge Slams Oakland Council's Decision Not to Pay Police Monitor, Orders $100,000 Payment Within Month

Desley Brooks is right about the lack of transparency regarding the Oakland Police Department. Of course the Council, not to mention the Mayor and the City Administrator, need to be deeply involved in oversight of OPD. This is in addition to the new Police Commission.

It has long amazed me that the elected folks who spend their days in city hall have seemed to be so completely disconnected from our police department. Our police department's name is the "Oakland Police Department." It is a part of the government of the city of Oakland. OPD is a city department. We pay the salaries. We are supposed to be protected and kept safe.

I just cannot understand how and why city hall treats OPD as if it came from outer space.

Posted by Hobart Johnson on 01/19/2017 at 7:35 PM

Re: “SF Chronicle Editor Bans Newsroom Staff From Attending Saturday's Women's March

First Amendment.......

Posted by Ralph Kanz on 01/19/2017 at 6:09 PM

Re: “SF Chronicle Editor Bans Newsroom Staff From Attending Saturday's Women's March

Seriously? How can an employer dictate what employees do on their own time?

I'm subscribing to the NY Times now.

Posted by Dianna Garrett on 01/19/2017 at 4:09 PM

Re: “Oakland Raiders Officially File To Move To Las Vegas

At this point, who cares anymore? The City of Oakland officials lost all leverage on broke ass Mark Davis by approving more ridiculous one year lease extensions last year. They should have squeezed Davis and required him to make a real commitment to Oakland (a plan and a realistic financing strategy) or get out now. By allowing him to canvass the world for a big money deal, they only played into his hands. Davis has no money and has never been sincere about staying in Oakland.He, like the owner of the Chargers, has no connection or allegiance to the people who have supported this franchise for a 50 years. In the case of the Chargers, ownership never even brought home a Super Bowl trophy in that half century. What happened to Spanos keeping his part of the bargain by fielding a winning team?The NFL owners today are money hungry whores available to be bought by the highest bidder willing to construct a new billion dollar palace for them. It is ridiculous for any public money anywhere to ever again be spent on venues for private sports teams and owners with insatiable egos. Look at Atlanta, they will play in a new billion dollar football stadium next season when they did not even need a new place to play. Similarly, the Braves will open in a new park this year not because of need, but because the suburban white Atlanta fans no longer want to come into the city to attend baseball games. Look at the Warriors. They have the best home court in the NBA at the Oracle with sellouts for over 20 years. The sellouts and total fan support started way before the winning ways of the last 3 years. Never the less, the shine of big money in SF sends them off into the abyss. No loyalty, no sentiment, no thanks to Oakland, just greed for more. Ask Jed York and the 49ers how that attitude is working for them in Santa Clara. There will be a time when the Warriors are not winning nearly every game. They and the Raiders will miss the true and loyal Oakland fans, when empty seats in SF and Las Vegas outnumber those filled with butts. In the mean time, Mark Davis deserves to be in partnership with a casino boss like Sheldon Adelson or even better, a group of wall street low life from Goldman Sachs. What he doesn't deserve is to be connected with a sincere group of folks with a sense of loyalty and integrity like Ronnie Lott, Marcus Allen and partners, who realize that the Raiders only real home can NEVER be anyplace but Oakland. Whether from a decrease in participation by kids and lawsuits by former players because of CTE, market saturation driven by greed or by ignoring long time loyal fans, NFL owners like Mark Davis will eventually manage to kill the golden goose.

Posted by Gary Patton on 01/19/2017 at 3:17 PM

Re: “SF Chronicle Editor Bans Newsroom Staff From Attending Saturday's Women's March

William Randolph Hearst is still well and alive in San Francisco.

Posted by Alejandro Moreno S. on 01/19/2017 at 1:44 PM

Re: “Report: When It Comes to Mortgage Loan Servicing, Banks Are Still Failing to Comply With the Law

God bless everyone that cares to listen and take the right part in getting his or her loan and not fall victim. why am i saying this, i am saying all this because there are many testimonies on the internet which are either true or false but i tell you today, after all i have passed through in the hands of scams i will not fail to announce this God fearing lender who helped me out of my devastating condition when i lost my Job and couldn't pay my children's fees, after been denied loan due to bad credit by loan sharks and other credit unions i visited, my bills where behind and we were about to be trowed out of our house but as God will have it i logged on my Facebook to seek for help from friends and family members all to no avail. while still on Facebook i saw a testimony by one Mary Scott who once had similar problems and got her life transformed by this same lender (John Kennedy Investment Limited). Immediately i email them at: info.johnkennedyinvestment@gmail.com and behold i received my long desired loan within 48hrs of processing and i am grateful to God almighty for bringing such a lender across my way.

Email them today on,(info.johnkennedyinvestment@gmail.com).

Posted by Victoria Hills on 01/19/2017 at 1:20 PM

Re: “SF Chronicle Editor Bans Newsroom Staff From Attending Saturday's Women's March

I can't be alone in finding it suspicious that this policy is suddenly being implemented on the eve of the inauguration of a controversial, divisive Republican president, but had no such policy against demonstrations during the last eight years amidst the Tea Party protests against a Democratic president.

Posted by Kevin Goebel on 01/19/2017 at 12:29 PM

Re: “SF Chronicle Editor Bans Newsroom Staff From Attending Saturday's Women's March

So Ms. Cooper wants to ban her staff from their constitutional rights to free speech and assembly because they work for a metropolitan newspaper? I'd like to suggest that under the current administration these rights may disappear so we better use them while we still may.

Posted by Cathleen Miller on 01/19/2017 at 11:08 AM

Re: “SF Chronicle Editor Bans Newsroom Staff From Attending Saturday's Women's March

Years ago, former Chron editor Phil Bronstein wouldn't let lesbian reporter get married during the "Winter of Love" because she covered City Hall.

Posted by Cynthia Laird on 01/19/2017 at 10:42 AM

Re: “Oakland City Council Questions Need for Court-Appointed Police Monitor, Delays Renewing Contracts

To the East Bay Express: thank you for your coverage of this issue. As to our new police chief, I welcome her with open arms. But the press conference announcing her new hire seemed to focus exclusively on reform of the OPD and its culture. The Oakland Police Department is also supposed to provide Public Safety to the city of Oakland. Lost in that press conference was any discussion about how the new chief plans to do that. Where is the comprehensive Public Safety program we were promised by our mayor?

Posted by Joseph Tuman on 01/18/2017 at 8:13 PM

Re: “Building Engulfed by Deadly Oakland Fire Had Pending Habitability Complaints

I do not agree that individual code enforcement, Building or Fire Dept personnel should be held personally accountable for this obvious failure on the part of the City of Oakland.The people responsible are the leaders of the organization. They are responsible for the culture of work and the competency and precision with which that work is done or not done. It is obvious when people in every responsible department fail to do their jobs, it is the culture in the organization that is at fault. The city staff does not understand their individual job expectations or how they are connected to other departments.The people who are middle managers are inexperienced and unqualified for their jobs and for the most part, the senior managers are no different. The goal each day for everyone is just to clear your desk of today's problems as quickly as possible, without consideration of the long term impacts to citizens or potential legal exposure for the organization as a whole. It's not just illegal warehouse occupancy's. In the last year alone, we have seen the Mayor illegally trying to sell city property, while ignoring the law requiring affordable housing considerations and failure by staff to make simple decisions on fences or bus stops. If you can't make a decision on a fence or bus stop, how can you decide to close down a dangerous warehouse that displaces illegal tenants at risk? There is no leadership at the top.The Mayor has continued to hire and promote unqualified people to top level management positions. As Dr Phil would say, "how is that working for you"?

Posted by Gary Patton on 01/18/2017 at 7:01 PM

Re: “Oakland City Council Questions Need for Court-Appointed Police Monitor, Delays Renewing Contracts

Monitor Warshaw has a financial incentive never to find OPD in compliance. The judge could set a six-month limit on the contract for any one monitor - but he doesn't, because he hates OPD. Schaaf and the councilmembers do not seek this remedy. It seems they do not care that judge Thelton Henderson is determined to deprive residents of police service. *** This blatant stack of the deck against ending the NSA is not covered by the Express, a publication that claimed late last year OPD had only two officer vacancies when in fact there were 33 vacant slots then, still unfilled today.

Posted by Charlie Pine on 01/18/2017 at 1:04 PM

Re: “Oakland City Council Questions Need for Court-Appointed Police Monitor, Delays Renewing Contracts

"How these new leaders and authorities will impact OPD's ability to complete its court reform program remains uncertain."

Absolutely.

The bottom line question is what is the vision for a new, reformed OPD?
And, of course, what are the specific goals which will fulfill that vision?
Not to mention what are the steps we are taking towards meeting those goals, what is our timeline, how do we measure our progress?

It's not unreasonable for the Council to make only a short-term commitment
to continuing the oversight contract. The problem is that we as a city do not
have a vision, a plan, specific goals and we have no means for measuring our progress.

So we continue to be reactive, to be in a crisis mode. The Council suddenly discovers after many years that the court-mandated reform consultant has been drinking heavily at the public trough and that he has a conflict of interest in that finding ongoing fault in OPD reform brings him more income.

The Mayor suddenly discovers that her police chiefs cannot be trusted and then decides that finding the perfect new chief will be the answer. We've done the new police chief thing several times in recent years and it has never been the answer. We always forget to ask "what is the question?"

So we circle around again, without any sign of leadership or competent management in city hall. New challenges constantly arise: a sex scandal; unjustifiable shootings; a new Police Commission; piling on more police administrators.

Around and around we go. Our kids continue to be traumatized. Our vehicles stolen. Our houses burglarized. Far too many of us shot or shot to death.

Around and around.

Posted by Hobart Johnson on 01/18/2017 at 11:44 AM

Most Popular Stories


© 2017 East Bay Express    All Rights Reserved
Powered by Foundation