If we're supposed to "buy local," shouldn't this job opening be in the Herald-Standard classifieds?
Newspaper Executive Editor Uniontown PA
Posted: Tuesday, May 7, 2013 8:37 am
http://www.waaytv.com/contact/employment/newspaper-executive-editor-uniontown-pa/article_3766dc6a-b71b-11e2-98a1-001a4bcf6878.html
Fast-paced, family-owned multi-platform publishing company (SUN circ 22,500) in Southwestern PA seeks forward-thinking Executive Editor, committed to providing smart, indispensable, accessible and timely content across a variety of platforms.
This hands-on position is responsible for the day-to-day direction of reporters, web producers and independent content providers, within management’s established vision and financial parameters.
Effective communication with all levels of decision-makers and industry peers is an ongoing and vital function of the position.
The successful candidate must be committed to sustaining and improving existing print products while leading the way in digital innovations and overseeing the creation of innovative online tools and features.
A journalism degree or equivalent work experience is required. A high level of comfort with social media is an asset.
A proven record of successful leadership in deadline-driven journalism and solid news judgment skills are essential. Concern for our organization’s circulation, audience and advertising as they merge with delivery of news and information are a must.
Candidates meeting these criteria are encouraged to submit resumes to Karen Tweardy at8 East Church Street, Uniontown PA 15401 or ktweardy@heraldstandard.com.
Thursday, May 30, 2013
Monday, May 13, 2013
Missing the boat
Today’s
front-page story, “Election expert says overzealous supporters can harm
campaign” (Herald-Standard, May 13), not only misses the boat, it’s in a totally
wrong harbor.
Where
is the news in telling the public that in the heat of a political campaign,
volunteers may violate a law or a policy on behalf of their favored candidate?
If the
Herald-Standard considers that to be a big news flash, there’s a serious lack
of real-world insight in that building.
This
one-source story, quoting a Harrisburg attorney, goes to great pains to explain
the obvious. It also implies strongly that two volunteers for the campaign of
judicial candidate Douglas Sepic – one of whom used a Laurel Highland School district
fax machine to send out campaign-related material, and the other an Albert
Gallatin Area School district teacher who sent home some type of vote-for-Sepic
letter with her students – fit in the “overzealous” category.
This
Harrisburg attorney, further identified as an “election expert,” is quoted as
saying that local campaigns, whether for a borough council seat or a judicial
seat, are “complex.”
While
running a campaign may be complex, it is pretty simple to figure out what the
real stories should be here.
The
real story is not, and should not be, about judicial candidate Douglas Sepic. Although
there may be some degree of guilt by association or insinuation, we’ll give you
that he cannot be held responsible for everything that his supporters (and
maybe his non-supporters) may do on his behalf.
Taken
to extreme ridiculousness, if a guy robbed a liquor store while wearing a “Vote
for Sepic” button on his lapel and drove away in a car with a “Vote for Sepic”
bumper sticker, would or should that have any real bearing on Sepic, personally
or professionally?
No, the
real thrust of Herald-Standard follow up should be probing the two incidents
that have come to light, neither of which directly involves Douglas Sepic.
First
up: The reported use of a LH fax machine by Melvyn Sepic, Douglas Sepic’s
father who just so happens to be a member of the LH school board. We still don’t
know how many faxes were sent, if this was an isolated incident, or if it is
common practice for LH board members (not just M. Sepic) to use public
resources for personal or political business.
We don’t
know what, if any, measures are being taken to punish M. Sepic. And we sure don’t
know if this rises to the level of something serious, such as an ethics, school
board or crimes code violation. Wouldn’t it make sense to call some experts in
those fields, to gain their perspectives? (Or call the other eight LH school
board members?)
Next
up: The use of AG students as political pack mules. All we know is that a
teacher was reportedly suspended for this activity. But we still don’t know
this teacher’s name, or whether she’s back to work, or whether she has appealed
the suspension, or whether such activity violates the school code. Again, how
hard would it be to find some experts in this area to get some perspectives?
(Or call the nine AG school board members?)
We can’t
really fault AG for not releasing the name, because we’re not even certain they’ve
been asked to do that. You’d think that a news reporter would make asking for
the name the first order of business; this is, after all, a public employee
being paid for by tax dollars. If the district has a legitimate and legal
reason for not releasing the name, we would love to hear it.
A
prior Herald-Standard story made mention that D. Sepic does have relatives
working in the AG district. It makes a world of difference if the teacher who
distributed a letter on his behalf is or is not a relative of his. If it is, it
might lead the public to believe that the teacher was trying to help him win.
If it isn’t, the public might conclude that someone was trying to tarnish his
name and undermine his campaign.
Instead
of stories that involve hard questions in the quest to further examine and
illuminate unsavory practices, readers were treated to a piece of
fluff as soft as a roll of Charmin. Weeks after they were first reported on, readers
still have no idea whether either of these school-related activities even
qualifies as a potential crime or ethics violation.
One
thing is for sure: You can’t characterize the Herald-Standard as being
overzealous in pursuing these two stories.
Wednesday, May 8, 2013
Why we like Larry
We must admit that we don’t know much about seven of the
eight candidates running for the Democratic nomination for Fayette County treasurer
in the upcoming primary election.
But we do know a lot about one of them. And that’s why we
are wholeheartedly endorsing former State Representative (and self-employed
labor arbitrator) Larry Roberts for this position.
(We want to make sure we cover all of our bases, so
depending on when you met or knew Larry, our endorsement also covers anyone
named Larry Rabbit, Larry Zajac or Larry LaMonica).
In the election preview story “Treasurer candidates discuss post responsibilities,” (Herald-Standard,
May 7), Roberts said his
qualifications put him at the front of the line.
“My
level of responsibility over the years has meaning, and I have served in several
levels of responsibility,” Roberts said.
Amen to that. We think you’d be hard-pressed to find a
candidate with more experience than Larry Roberts. He’s done it all – and one
of the things we like about him is that should he be elected, the people who
put him in office won’t be in for any big surprises.
You don’t have to worry about being shocked by a Larry
Roberts ethics case. He’s already been hit with a $600 ethics penalty for allowing legislative staff to
arrange campaign events in 2001 and again in 2004.
Worried about Larry’s name popping up in connection with allegations
of hanky-panky? That’s already happened, in a 2004 Election Board hearing where
20-year-old carpet installer Michael Ciampanelli testified that Roberts agreed
to pay him $200 to enter the race for state representative.
Holding off on voting for Larry because you think he
might let you down by voting to increase his pay as treasurer? Roberts can’t
let you down, because he already voted to increase his legislative pay, in the
infamous midnight pay raise of 2005, from
$69,647 to $81,050 each year. (Calculations showed that vote additionally hiked
his state pension by $721 per year.)
http://triblive.com/x/dailycourier/news/s_359223.html#axzz2SephmF1O
http://triblive.com/x/dailycourier/news/s_359223.html#axzz2SephmF1O
We
know that some of you probably have concerns about how Larry as treasurer would
interpret the fourth-class county code. Put your mind at ease -- after voting
for that 2005 legislative pay raise, Roberts accepted the unvouchered expenses
used to skirt a constitutional prohibition on midterm raises.
Think
there might be dissension in the treasurer’s office if Roberts wins? Do not
fear; Roberts already has had a staffer testify against him during an election
board hearing.
Nepotism
is a big issue these days in Fayette Co. The great thing about Larry is you don’t
have to sit around wondering if he’ll help out a family member. Roberts' son
Mark has already been county controller, and Mark Roberts even tried to keep
challenger (and current controller) Sean Lalley from running against him in
2007.
If
philosophy of governance is important to you, Roberts already has made his
position clear, making the press go to court to try to obtain information on his
expenses paid for by the public.
Of
course, there are many other reasons to vote for Larry Roberts, some of which
we detailed in our own critique of Roberts' performance, back in 2011.
When
you go to the polls on May 21, please vote for Larry Roberts for Fayette County
treasurer. Remember, in 14 years as a state representative, he brought cable TV
to Ohiopyle Borough.
With
all his experience, just think what he can do for you now.
Wednesday, May 1, 2013
Help for Jesse
Here in the patch, we are laughing out loud at judicial candidate Douglas Sepic's rationalization of his father's reported use of a Laurel Highlands School District fax machine to send out political campaign material.
"Laurel Highlands school board member faxed campaign notices," (Herald-Standard, May 1) contains this paragraph regarding the actions reportedly taken by LH school board member Melvyn Sepic:
Douglas Sepic said that despite the allegation of wrongdoing, his father did not use his position to access the school fax to send campaign material.
http://www.heraldstandard.com/election/laurel-highlands-school-board-member-faxed-campaign-notices/article_5ce9eb31-7dbe-5653-9d94-8a3aa3a446be.html
Huh? Are we to believe, then, that any member of the public can trot on over to Hutchinson Elementary School, gain access to the building, enter the office and be granted permission to use the fax machine for personal reasons?
Has Melvyn Sepic ever heard of Kinkos or Staples? You can send faxes from there, but it means you'll also have to reach into your pocket to pay for the service.
Kudos, by the way, to LH superintendent Jesse Wallace for launching an investigation (but really, once the story broke, how could he avoid doing that?). But we're not buying for one minute Wallace's own statements that it is impossible to track down how many faxes Melvyn Sepic sent out on his son's behalf.
"The first thing I sought was the activity report, but because it was more than 24 hours (after April 23), I was unable to retrieve the report," said Wallace, adding that the manufacturer was also contacted to determine if access could be made. "It is due to the age and ability of the machine that we were unable to get it."
Even if the fax machine is too old to provide a count, wasn't there someone in the office who could testify to Melvyn Sepic's use of the equipment? After all, Douglas Sepic himself has stated of his father's activity, "It was done during the hustle and bustle of a busy day."
Surely, Wallace can find someone who was in the office who can say, "He was in here for (however long it was), using the machine." And if Wallace wanted to, we are pretty certain he could find out how many calls were placed from the Hutchinson office on the day and time frame in question.
Here's our easy, four-step approach for Wallace to follow:
1. Pick up the phone.
2. Call Verizon (or whatever phone company provides LH with service).
3. Say, "I am the superintendent of the Laurel Highlands School District, and I want a list of all outgoing calls made from the Hutchinson Elementary School fax number on April 23, 1013."
4. Thank the phone company representative for his or her time.
Still left unanswered as part of Wallace's "investigation" is the question of whether this was the first and only time Melvyn Sepic or any other board member used the fax machine for personal or campaign reasons. The public deserves an answer to that one.
According to Herald-Standard's Patty Yauger, who deserves some credit for following up on this story, Wallace said that the staff has been instructed that political material can not be distributed via the school district equipment by employees, students or anyone associated with the district.
We would like to see the answer to this question: WHEN was staff given this instruction? If it was before M. Sepic's reported use of the fax machine, then someone ignored the policy and should be held accountable. If it was given after M. Sepic's reported use of the fax machine, then it is quite possible, perhaps even probable, that this isn't the first time something like this has happened in the school district.
We also got a big chuckle out of D. Sepic's stated belief that this story didn't rise to the level of front-page news. That's a sure-fire sign that the Herald-Standard made the right call in putting it there.
D. Sepic said, and we quote from the story, "I’ve spent my career prosecuting serious, violent criminals, drug dealers, murderers and trying to do what is right for Fayette County. (This minimal matter) detracts from the real issues in this campaign that are plaguing Fayette County."
We wonder if D. Sepic, the experienced career prosecutor, has ever put anybody away for theft of services or conflict of interest.
"Laurel Highlands school board member faxed campaign notices," (Herald-Standard, May 1) contains this paragraph regarding the actions reportedly taken by LH school board member Melvyn Sepic:
Douglas Sepic said that despite the allegation of wrongdoing, his father did not use his position to access the school fax to send campaign material.
http://www.heraldstandard.com/election/laurel-highlands-school-board-member-faxed-campaign-notices/article_5ce9eb31-7dbe-5653-9d94-8a3aa3a446be.html
Huh? Are we to believe, then, that any member of the public can trot on over to Hutchinson Elementary School, gain access to the building, enter the office and be granted permission to use the fax machine for personal reasons?
Has Melvyn Sepic ever heard of Kinkos or Staples? You can send faxes from there, but it means you'll also have to reach into your pocket to pay for the service.
Kudos, by the way, to LH superintendent Jesse Wallace for launching an investigation (but really, once the story broke, how could he avoid doing that?). But we're not buying for one minute Wallace's own statements that it is impossible to track down how many faxes Melvyn Sepic sent out on his son's behalf.
"The first thing I sought was the activity report, but because it was more than 24 hours (after April 23), I was unable to retrieve the report," said Wallace, adding that the manufacturer was also contacted to determine if access could be made. "It is due to the age and ability of the machine that we were unable to get it."
Even if the fax machine is too old to provide a count, wasn't there someone in the office who could testify to Melvyn Sepic's use of the equipment? After all, Douglas Sepic himself has stated of his father's activity, "It was done during the hustle and bustle of a busy day."
Surely, Wallace can find someone who was in the office who can say, "He was in here for (however long it was), using the machine." And if Wallace wanted to, we are pretty certain he could find out how many calls were placed from the Hutchinson office on the day and time frame in question.
Here's our easy, four-step approach for Wallace to follow:
1. Pick up the phone.
2. Call Verizon (or whatever phone company provides LH with service).
3. Say, "I am the superintendent of the Laurel Highlands School District, and I want a list of all outgoing calls made from the Hutchinson Elementary School fax number on April 23, 1013."
4. Thank the phone company representative for his or her time.
Still left unanswered as part of Wallace's "investigation" is the question of whether this was the first and only time Melvyn Sepic or any other board member used the fax machine for personal or campaign reasons. The public deserves an answer to that one.
According to Herald-Standard's Patty Yauger, who deserves some credit for following up on this story, Wallace said that the staff has been instructed that political material can not be distributed via the school district equipment by employees, students or anyone associated with the district.
We would like to see the answer to this question: WHEN was staff given this instruction? If it was before M. Sepic's reported use of the fax machine, then someone ignored the policy and should be held accountable. If it was given after M. Sepic's reported use of the fax machine, then it is quite possible, perhaps even probable, that this isn't the first time something like this has happened in the school district.
We also got a big chuckle out of D. Sepic's stated belief that this story didn't rise to the level of front-page news. That's a sure-fire sign that the Herald-Standard made the right call in putting it there.
D. Sepic said, and we quote from the story, "I’ve spent my career prosecuting serious, violent criminals, drug dealers, murderers and trying to do what is right for Fayette County. (This minimal matter) detracts from the real issues in this campaign that are plaguing Fayette County."
We wonder if D. Sepic, the experienced career prosecutor, has ever put anybody away for theft of services or conflict of interest.
Tuesday, April 30, 2013
Who will act?
Today's Herald-Standard story, "Political fax sent from school questioned," (April 30) details Fayette County Republican Committee Chairman Russ Rhodes' ire over a political fundraiser invitation allegedly sent from a fax machine at Hutchinson Elementary School in the Laurel Highlands School District.
The April 23 fax, according to Rhodes, was
distributed on behalf of Douglas Sepic, one of five candidates for county judge
in the upcoming primary election.
"What we have is a political person using
taxpayer-funded resources for their own purposes," said Rhodes.
Sepic, who is an assistant district attorney in
Fayette County, disavowed any personal involvement in the matter. "It is
improper to send a (political campaign) fax from a government or school district
fax and I did not authorize it," said Sepic.
We'll take both men at their word.
But that doesn't change the fact that Rhodes is
100 percent correct in pointing out that a fax machine being paid for with
taxpayer dollars should not be used for political campaign purposes.
The practice could end up landing someone in
jail. It has in neighboring Allegheny County, where district attorney Stephen
Zappala prosecuted former state Senator Jane Orie for such office practices and
won a conviction.
Rhodes says his next step is considering filing a
complaint with the State Ethics Commission.
We wonder what would happen if Rhodes also
dropped a dime to call Fayette County district attorney Jack Heneks and the
Pennsylvania state police. They, after all, sprang into action (and are
presumably still investigating) the nearly year-long "Saga of the
Packet" presumably left at a restaurant by Fayette County Housing
Authority board member Bev Beal during a lunch with Sonya Over and county
commissioner Angela Zimmerlink.
Heneks and the PSP also rushed headfirst into the
effort to track down the identities of anonymous posters on an Internet
community bulletin board, once they started repeating potentially libelous
rumors about a sitting county judge.
This case seems far more solid than either of
those two. It's not like anyone can walk in off the street at any time and use
the fax machine at Hutchinson Elementary School to send out an invitation to a
political "meet and greet" for a judicial candidate. (Or can they?)
And what of the Laurel Highlands School District?
Someone should call superintendent Jesse Wallace and the nine school board
members, asking them what policy the school district has regarding the sending
of such faxes, and how they plan to get to the bottom of who sent this one.
(Are there security cameras that might have captured the culprit?)
Heck, the school district should be conducting
its own investigation. Someone on staff just might have seen or heard
something. How many of these faxes were sent? Who sent this one? Has anything
like this ever happened before?
For all we know, it is standard operating
procedure for someone -- maybe even anyone -- with ties to the Laurel Highlands
School District to use public property (and thus taxpayer funds) to conduct
political campaigning.
We hope someone does the right thing and at least
calls for an investigation, maybe even by attorney general Kathleen Kane. Who
knows what an investigator with no ties to local politics might uncover?
Tuesday, April 23, 2013
Selective presentation
According to Fayette County Commissioner Angela M. Zimmerlink's most recent blog posting, the following paragraph was deleted from her commentary by the Herald-Standard prior to its publication Sunday.
To say the article is inaccurate and misleading is an understatement. My experience shows information is not always accurately relayed and then reported resulting in misinformation to the public about a county issue. Knowing this, I initiated contact with the Herald Standard to provide accurate information before the article was printed, but it did no good; hence the reason for this letter.
The question for the newspaper's high command is: Why? What is so offensive about this paragraph, other than the fact that it is critical of the job done by the paper?
The newspaper ended up running a correction on the very same issue to which Zimmerlink was refering, so there obviously was a problem with the story. And Zimmerlink certainly has a strong basis for forming the opinion put forth in the deleted paragraph.
You can -- and should -- read the full text of Zimmerlink's blog post here: http://blog.votezimmerlink.com/
It's not like Zimmerlink wants favorable treatment, or is asking for a favor, or wants the paper to stop letting people criticize her. All she wants is for what is printed to be accurate -- especially as concerns what she says and provides to a reporter. That's a pretty reasonable request -- and one to which all sources are entitled.
When inaccurate information is printed, particularly in a front-page story, the damage isn't erased by an apology and a page 2 correction. That's why errors are anathema to good journalists.
Whatever happened to getting the story right?
We're glad that Zimmerlink has pointed out what she calls the "censorship" of her letter. It lets the public know that free speech seems to end when it reaches criticism of the job being done by the paper.
To say the article is inaccurate and misleading is an understatement. My experience shows information is not always accurately relayed and then reported resulting in misinformation to the public about a county issue. Knowing this, I initiated contact with the Herald Standard to provide accurate information before the article was printed, but it did no good; hence the reason for this letter.
The question for the newspaper's high command is: Why? What is so offensive about this paragraph, other than the fact that it is critical of the job done by the paper?
The newspaper ended up running a correction on the very same issue to which Zimmerlink was refering, so there obviously was a problem with the story. And Zimmerlink certainly has a strong basis for forming the opinion put forth in the deleted paragraph.
You can -- and should -- read the full text of Zimmerlink's blog post here: http://blog.votezimmerlink.com/
It's not like Zimmerlink wants favorable treatment, or is asking for a favor, or wants the paper to stop letting people criticize her. All she wants is for what is printed to be accurate -- especially as concerns what she says and provides to a reporter. That's a pretty reasonable request -- and one to which all sources are entitled.
When inaccurate information is printed, particularly in a front-page story, the damage isn't erased by an apology and a page 2 correction. That's why errors are anathema to good journalists.
Whatever happened to getting the story right?
We're glad that Zimmerlink has pointed out what she calls the "censorship" of her letter. It lets the public know that free speech seems to end when it reaches criticism of the job being done by the paper.
Monday, April 22, 2013
Oops! They did it again!
It wasn't on the front page, but the Friday, April 19 edition of the Herald-Standard contained the following important and noteworthy correction:
Commissioner Angela M. Zimmerlink did receive a packet of information related to the Fayette County Airport Authority and turned over copies of the documents to members of the authority as asked for in a right-to-know request. Incorrect information was reported in a story published Wednesday. The Herald-Standard apologizes for the error.
Given the newspaper's patttern of shabby treatment of Zimmerlink, you would think these type of errors wouldn't be happening. Remember the reporter who was permitted to do a hatchet job on her in print on the eve of the 2011 commissioner election, then was caught working the polls for the other Republican in the race? Remember the pre-election meeting story on the politically motivated (and unsubstantiated) allegation that Zimmerlink was posting items to a website on county time (authored by a reporter later hired as the county's chief clerk)?
We do: http://fayettepatchhunky.blogspot.com/2011/12/why-should-zimmerlink-talk.html
In a less obvious and more easily defensible display, the paper spared no shortage of ink on the red herring we call "Packetgate," which tried to tie Zimmerlink to a packet of information regarding the Fayette County Housing Authority left at a local restaurant on May 30, 2012. Much ado was made about the matter being investigated by the district attorney, the state pollice and a private investigator hired by the housing authority with tax dollars. Eleven months later, as we predicted, nothing of substance has been presented.
So how in the world does the paper STILL end up having to print a major correction admitting that "incorrect information was reported" in a major story dealing with Zimmerlink? Aren't reporters and newspapers supposed to get it right the first time?
Even if the reporter goofs up, what of the editors whose job it is to catch such things before they are published and cause embarrassment?
A final word on right-to-know requests: Instead of being fixated on airport authority chairman Fred Davis' RTK request seeking information that Zimmerlink obtained from the airport authority -- and in the case of the Herald-Standard, getting a key fact wrong -- the media should be launching its own RTK requests to find out more about the Federal Aviation Administration findings that form the basis of Zimmerlink's concerns over airport operations.
In her column of April 21, "Concerns about airport are valid," Zimmerlink notes that according to the FAA, federal funds may be in jeopardy "because of the airport's continued unauthorized uses of airport property, the failure to collect fair market rent and other deficiencies" first brought to the authority's attention in 2011.
We need to hear more -- from airport board members and employees, past and present, and the FAA -- about these unauthorized uses of airport property and the failure to collect fair market rent.
We need to hear less about Zimmerlink trying to get the accurate answers that the independent media should be providing.
Commissioner Angela M. Zimmerlink did receive a packet of information related to the Fayette County Airport Authority and turned over copies of the documents to members of the authority as asked for in a right-to-know request. Incorrect information was reported in a story published Wednesday. The Herald-Standard apologizes for the error.
Given the newspaper's patttern of shabby treatment of Zimmerlink, you would think these type of errors wouldn't be happening. Remember the reporter who was permitted to do a hatchet job on her in print on the eve of the 2011 commissioner election, then was caught working the polls for the other Republican in the race? Remember the pre-election meeting story on the politically motivated (and unsubstantiated) allegation that Zimmerlink was posting items to a website on county time (authored by a reporter later hired as the county's chief clerk)?
We do: http://fayettepatchhunky.blogspot.com/2011/12/why-should-zimmerlink-talk.html
In a less obvious and more easily defensible display, the paper spared no shortage of ink on the red herring we call "Packetgate," which tried to tie Zimmerlink to a packet of information regarding the Fayette County Housing Authority left at a local restaurant on May 30, 2012. Much ado was made about the matter being investigated by the district attorney, the state pollice and a private investigator hired by the housing authority with tax dollars. Eleven months later, as we predicted, nothing of substance has been presented.
So how in the world does the paper STILL end up having to print a major correction admitting that "incorrect information was reported" in a major story dealing with Zimmerlink? Aren't reporters and newspapers supposed to get it right the first time?
Even if the reporter goofs up, what of the editors whose job it is to catch such things before they are published and cause embarrassment?
A final word on right-to-know requests: Instead of being fixated on airport authority chairman Fred Davis' RTK request seeking information that Zimmerlink obtained from the airport authority -- and in the case of the Herald-Standard, getting a key fact wrong -- the media should be launching its own RTK requests to find out more about the Federal Aviation Administration findings that form the basis of Zimmerlink's concerns over airport operations.
In her column of April 21, "Concerns about airport are valid," Zimmerlink notes that according to the FAA, federal funds may be in jeopardy "because of the airport's continued unauthorized uses of airport property, the failure to collect fair market rent and other deficiencies" first brought to the authority's attention in 2011.
We need to hear more -- from airport board members and employees, past and present, and the FAA -- about these unauthorized uses of airport property and the failure to collect fair market rent.
We need to hear less about Zimmerlink trying to get the accurate answers that the independent media should be providing.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)