| |
| |
| Growth is the West's biggest
issue, but most of the region's daily papers sacrifice coverage
for profits |
By Frank Allen
for Headwaters News |
| For three
decades, wagon trains were the primary means for newcomers
to reach the West. About 350,000 people made the journey during
that period. Today, the population of the Western region of
the United States grows that much in three months.
Booming growth has been part of the American West's temperament
ever since the region's first newspaper, The Oregon Spectator,
started publishing in 1846. A jaded journalist might conclude
that growth and change, with their blend of benefits and harms,
are simply the West's traditions, but not news.
The jaded journalist would be wrong. Since
1980, the population of the 13 Western states has risen by
more than 20 million, or 47 percent. That's about twice the
growth rate of the United States as a whole.
The West now has five of the country's 10 fastest-growing
metropolitan areas and eight of the 12 fastest-growing states.
Nevada, Arizona and Colorado lead the list, followed closely
by Utah, Idaho, Washington, Oregon and New Mexico. Also ranked
among the 20 fastest-growing states are Montana, Alaska and
California.
By the numbers:
20 - 30: typical annual profit margin of
Western daily papers, in percent.
83: percentage of Western
dailies at which editors cited a shortage of reporters.
75: percentage of papers
at which editors cited severe time constraints for reporters.
54: percentage of Western
papers without a reporter assigned to environment, growth
or natural resources more than one-third time.
67: percentage of dailies
that report 40 times more event-related news than in-depth
stories about conditions or trends.
75: percentage of Western
dailies that provide no training for environment or other
specialized beats.
Most: proportion of newspapers
where lack of professional development is a bigger complaint
among reporters than salary levels.
20: percentage of Western
dailies that do a good job reporting on growth, development
and environment.
9: number of the region's
285 daily newspapers that consistently do an excellent job.
Western Canada and northern Mexico
share this phenomenon. Two of the three fastest growing provinces
in Canada are British Columbia and Alberta. Since 1990, the
population of British Columbia has grown by 24 percent, on
par with that of India. Several of the fastest growing municipalities
in Mexico — including Cíudad Juárez, Mexicali
and Tijuana — lie along the country's 2,000-mile border
with the U.S.
By 2020, demographers estimate, the rapid industrialization
and urbanization now under way on both sides of that border
could double the area's total population to about 24 million.
Throughout the North American West, growth and development
hold hands. They are big news, and they have lasting consequences
for the West's natural environment.
Daily newspapers in the West have an obligation to cover this
big news competently — to explain the large-scale changes
in population, economy and environment that are transforming
the character of the region and its communities.
Yet the vast majority of the West's 285 daily newspapers overlook
the essence of the big story. They neglect the whole.
Instead, most Western dailies cover just the parts, narrowly
and sporadically, in response to specific events, as if these
were isolated and unrelated. What's missing so often is the
needed sense of context, significance and relevance.
Why is so much of the coverage narrow and superficial? Why
is the neglect so widespread? The answers abide within many
of the news organizations themselves, where the drive for
higher profit margins has become relentless. The explanation
is inadequate investment in the newsrooms — investment
in reporters, editors and other resources necessary to produce
competent coverage.
These hard-edged conclusions are results of a two-year study
of all the West's dailies conducted by the Institutes for
Journalism & Natural Resources. IJNR is an independent
nonprofit group based in Missoula, Mont. As IJNR's president,
I organized and oversaw this project, which was supported
by a substantial grant from the Hewlett Foundation.
IJNR's team of experienced journalists examined the habits
and standards of Western daily newspapers in their reporting
on growth, development and the environment. Our methods were
straightforward.
We traveled for many months all over the West, from El Paso
to Anchorage and from Billings to San Diego, learning about
current conditions, trends and issues. We interviewed more
than 1,000 people. We visited more than 150 newsrooms.
And we actually read the newspapers — week after week
and month after month, for two years. Just a few weeks ago,
we published the findings as a 135-page report called "Matching
the Scenery: Journalism's Duty to the North American West."
What we found was mostly disheartening. Journalism isn't doing
its part for the West nearly as well as it could and should.
The duty of newspapers to serve the West's communities goes
beyond merely creating a passive record of growth-driven changes
as they occur. Western dailies should also describe and explain
the significance of these changes, examine their causes and
evaluate their consequences.
Most Western dailies have the financial means, if not the
will, to do this job. A large majority of these newspapers
consistently generate healthy earnings. Many of them keep
20 percent to 30 percent or even more of every dollar of revenue
as profit. At these papers, a greater share of the profit
could be invested in developing capacities to gather the news.
Yet by keeping so much of the profit for the owners, we found,
most Western dailies also keep their newsrooms weary and starved
of resources. Colleen Conant, publisher and editor of The
Daily Camera in Boulder, Colorado, summed it up this way:
"Publishing isn't fun. We're a slave to the bottom line."
To boost profits, many Western newspapers curb costs, especially
newsroom costs. Such practices usually have a direct, negative
effect on the quality of news coverage.
Throughout the West, we found many more examples of mediocre
and superficial coverage than good coverage. Consistent excellence
was quite rare.
Most widespread was the evidence of inadequate newsroom staffing,
insufficient time for reporting, scarce opportunity for training
and arbitrarily limited space for complicated news stories.
Many people also told us about skimpy budgets for travel to
gather news, about prolonged vacancies on important beats
and about high levels of staff frustration.
Consider the Great Basin, a 200,000-square-mile territory
between the Rockies and the Sierras. It includes most of Nevada,
half of Utah and large parts of southeastern Oregon and southern
Idaho.
It has only 12 daily newspapers. The Great Basin's four smallest
dailies have a combined circulation of less than 20,000. Their
staffs are tiny.
In Nevada, just two newspaper companies control 89 percent
of total daily circulation. Utah's 135,000-circulation Salt
Lake Tribune is one of the Great Basin's three largest dailies,
but it covers natural-resource issues mostly piecemeal, by
reacting to events.
"We really don't have room for trends," explains
Judy Fahys, who covers the environment beat. "We have
room for stuff that happens."
In citing these conditions, we don't contend that most Western
dailies used to be better than they are now. What we do claim
is that the current performance of most Western dailies still
needs to improve a lot.
The great need is to raise newsroom expectations and levels
of effort to match the present magnitude of what is happening
to the West. Most Western dailies simply aren't keeping up
with the pace, scale, intensity and ramifications of profound
change.
We asked managing editors and other senior supervisors to
identify the major obstacles to better coverage of growth,
development and the environment.
At 83 percent of Western dailies, these editors cited a significant
shortage of news reporters. At 75 percent of the dailies,
they cited severe and chronic time constraints for reporters.
At 54 percent of these papers, no reporter is assigned to
cover environment, natural resources or growth more than one-third
of the time.
Our research also revealed several other indicators of deficiency:
- More than two-thirds of the dailies
in the West report about 40 times more often about routine
environment-related events, such as scheduled meetings or
press conferences, than about broader environmental conditions
and trends or about their causes and consequences.
In general, these routine-event stories take one work day
or less to gather, write, edit and publish. In length, they
rarely exceed 700 words.
- Senior news executives at more than
three-fourths of Western dailies acknowledge that their
organizations provide no training whatsoever in how to cover
the environment, science, public health, government, business
or economics.
- At most Western dailies, the lack of
opportunity for training and professional development is
a much more prevalent source of news-staff discontent than
either salary levels or chances for promotion.
- Reporters who have left the environment
beat at Western dailies since the mid-1990s most often cite
job dissatisfaction or disillusionment as the primary reason
for their departure.
In particular, they express frustration about having been
allowed too little time and space to do justice to complicated,
issue-based stories. Many reporters currently assigned to
cover the environment for Western dailies express the same
frustration.
After two years of analyzing newspaper
content, we concluded that only about 20 percent of the North
American West's 285 dailies consistently did a good job of
covering the complex and related subjects of growth, development
and the environment. Within this group, only a small minority
— nine newspapers — consistently did an excellent
job. They offered their readers a rich, reliable diet of explanatory
and insightful coverage.
Dynamic places have dynamic problems. The West has plenty.
Resolving these problems will require dynamic, healthy conversations
in Western communities.
Yet thousands of the news stories we reviewed were cast in
the framework of battle and acrimony. They shed much heat,
but not much light.
The issues facing the West continue to grow more complex.
That reality makes covering these issues comprehensively and
persistently all the more challenging.
Even so, these factors don't excuse the mediocre performance
of the majority. In far too many Western communities, journalism
seems to be losing its way, suffering an erosion of will,
capacity and competence.
Frank Allen is president of the
Institutes for Journalism & Natural Resources, an independent
nonprofit group based in Missoula, Mont.
The report "Matching the Scenery" can be read online
at www.IJNR.org.
| Newspaper |
Circulation |
Owner |
| Anchorage Daily News |
70,000 |
The McClatchy Co. |
| Arizona Daily Sun |
12,000 |
Pulitzer Publishing Co. |
| The Durango Herald |
9,000 |
Ballantine Family |
| The Idaho Statesman |
65,000 |
Gannett Company |
| Los Angeles Times |
944,000 |
Tribune Company |
| The Oregonian |
351,000 |
Newhouse Newspapers |
| The (Riverside, CA) Press-Enterprise |
169,000 |
Belo Corporation |
| The Sacramento Bee |
286,000 |
The McClatchy Co. |
| Seattle Post-Intelligencer |
169,000 |
Hearst Newspapers |
|
|
| |
| |
| |
| It's
all about growth |
By Greg Lakes, editor
Headwaters News
Nov. 12, 2003 |
One of the more challenging aspects of
assembling Headwaters News each morning is to put each story
into a particular category.
Usually, any single story would fit under any of several labels:
environment or economy, community or politics, beyond the region
with a pointed angle in the Rocky Mountain West.
It's a testament to the way the region's issues are interrelated
and to the need to see the connections.
And scratch almost any story in the
region deeply enough, and entwined somewhere within are the
ramifications of growth.
The region's unparalleled growth during the past decade has
brought more people demanding more services and trying to claim
their portion of limited resources, and doing both in closer
proximity.
In Colorado, national forests are losing their vistas, their
open space and, in some cases, even their claim of being out
of town, as sprawl gobbles adjacent private land.
Condos, strip malls and parking lots encroach
on wetlands, eliminate winter range, cut off migration corridors
and isolate wildlife populations.
Forest Service Chief Dale Bosworth called sprawl one of the
four biggest issues in national forest management.
Managers of Wyoming's public lands are grappling with the recreation
demands of more people, and of more older people, who clamor
for more
amenities and more motorized access.
In Montana, most of the population boom has been urban in nature,
a fundamental shift in a traditional rural and agricultural
state that has favored service
jobs over resource industries and forced housing
prices beyond the reach of many residents.
Along Utah's Wasatch Front, most of the growth has been outside
cities' limits, mostly at the fringes of development, turning
outlying mountain
towns into bedroom communities, and straddling city school
districts with flat or declining
enrollments while smaller districts boom.
In Arizona, the landscape
of the greater Phoenix Valley will be unrecognizable in
a few decades as the little burgs of Surprise and Buckeye grow
to more than 600,000 people each. Phoenix
traffic is already rated fifth-worst in the nation.
Arguably the biggest effect on the region has been on its politics,
as a flood of well-heeled and conservative newcomers moved from
California and gave Republicans a majority grip on all but a
few states, an ongoing trend discussed in our Western
Perspective in October.
And probably the biggest effect yet to be felt is growth's impact
on water, and vice versa. Santa Fe and Durango have toyed with
moratoriums
on growth to stave off water problems, and New Mexico is
drafting a statewide water management plant that's supposed
to address growth, demand and supply.
But the current state of the art is more a state
of denial, as evidenced in Las Vegas, where some experts
predict growth and water supplies will collide head-on in 10
years, max, while others say it's only a drought and limiting
growth is no way to manage it.
The biggest impacts both current and future are from immigration
and all its repercussions.
Latinos are the fastest-growing ethnic segment of the West in
every state, and will become the majority in Phoenix, with repercussions
on jobs,
schools,
politics,
communities,
social services and even shopping
habits from Arizona and New Mexico to Idaho and Montana.
But across the region, each of these stories was reported in
a separate newspaper with varying degrees of recognition that
the same problems were going on elsewhere.
Or, as Frank Allen writes in the adjacent column, "What's
missing so often is the needed sense of context, significance
and relevance."
With such easy access to online news and media across the region,
Headwaters News included, it's never been easier for reporters
-- even stressed reporters in understaffed newsrooms -- to put
a regional view into their local stories.
A regional identity is the best tool the Rocky Mountain West
can forge to get a clear idea of where it is and where it wants
to go.
And that's one of the most rewarding aspects of assembling Headwaters
each morning. |
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
Send
this page to a friend
Send
your comments
Polling the choir
Mr. Allen's comments and criticisms on bias are all well and
good, but I am struck by his use of a survey of journalists
to determine if ecoscribes are "too green."
That's the same as asking general media if they are "too
liberal."
Let's not forget the Freedom Forum survey a few years back checking
out DC reporters' voting in the '92 election. The reader riffraff
voted 43 Bush 45 Clinton, the rest Perot. The media elite voted
9 Bush, 88 Clinton, 1 Perot.
Furthermore, I did a quick and dirty regression on the sample
and such a result was a couple standard deviations past being
statistically significant. Never mind the fact that the slag
floats to the top of any alloy.
Finally, reporters need to realize that the "environment"
isn't only the pretty stuff. Jobs, infrastructure, the socioeconomic
fallout from "environmental" initiatives (or pollution),
education, indoctrination, value systems...it's all part of
one great big "environment" that everyone has to deal
with -- not just Greens and green reporters. Dave Skinner
The
Hydra Project
Whitefish, MT
Author's blog:
Formula for change
The West is struggling
with profound changes spurred by growth and development. These
changes put relentless pressure on the West’s natural
environment. A lot more public attention and public discussion
ought to be devoted to this phenomenon, but a large majority
of the West’s daily newspapers are neglecting it.
How should newsrooms go about the work of getting better? Here
are four general recommendations for newsroom improvement:
1. Assign and encourage more reporters to cover
growth, development and the environment.
2. Become more selective about this coverage.
Sheer volume of stories doesn’t necessarily equate with
good coverage.
3. Give more space and more prominent placement
in the newspaper to stories that are important, ambitious
and complicated.
4. Provide more training opportunities for reporters
and editors.
All the West’s dailies have the freedom
to choose how they allocate people, time, space and other
newsroom resources. By choosing to allocate some resources
differently, many dailies could increase the quality of their
coverage of growth, development and the environment. As a
result, the communities of these newspapers would be better
served.
On the environment beat, producing fewer stories
can still result in coverage that is comprehensive and informative
— especially if those stories offer lively perspectives
on what has been happening and why it matters. Such coverage
appeals to readers.
Northwestern University’s Readership Institute
published a report in April 2001 that examined ways to reverse
a national, 30-year trend of declining readership of daily
newspapers.
This study of 100 U.S. dailies representing all size categories
was a joint venture of the Newspaper Association of America
and the American Society of Newspaper Editors. The Readership
Institute’s researchers analyzed the news content of
these papers as well as the reactions of consumers to the
content.
The study found that readers of daily newspapers
want coverage that is intensely focused on people —
especially on people who live in their own communities.
But readers also gave significantly higher priority to news
about the environment than to news about police, crime and
the judicial system or to coverage of sports. More specifically,
the study found a direct correlation between “longer
and more complex stories” about the environment that
used a “feature approach” and higher levels of
reader satisfaction.
If dailies in the West choose to heed these findings, then
they will need to shuffle some reporting assignments and even
add some reporters.
To increase reader satisfaction with coverage of the environment,
they will need to undertake longer and more complex stories
more often. In many instances, they also will need to become
more proficient in the feature approach to telling environment
stories. These adjustments, in turn, will require a greater
investment in newsroom training and professional development.
Wallace Stegner is widely remembered for describing
the West as hope’s native home. Late in life, however,
he amended that label. “There are varieties and degrees
of hope,” Mr. Stegner wrote in 1992 , “and the
wrong kinds, in excessive amounts, go with human failure and
environmental damage as boom goes with bust.”
Before the overall quality of journalism
in the West can match the magnitude of what is happening to
the West, most of the region’s daily newspapers will
have to pursue higher standards of coverage. For the sake
of the West’s citizens and communities, newspapers have
a duty to do better. -Frank Allen
Author's response:
Analysis isn't bias
I
appreciate the continuing flow of readers' responses to my Western
Perspective column about daily newspapers and their shortcomings.
One in particular, submitted this week by Dave Skinner in Whitefish,
Mont., raises important points about reporter laziness, gullibility
and bias on the environment beat.
It's a worthy topic. Here are some additional thoughts that
I'd like to offer:
At one time or another, most environment reporters have been
suspected or accused of bias. The attacks have come not only
from a polluting industry or a conservative watchdog group,
but sometimes from miffed environmentalists, disappointed neighborhood
activists, suspicious readers or even their own editors and
publishers.
Why is this? Education and health reporters don't have to defend
their blatant prejudice in favor of good education or good health.
As part of its two-year study of dailies in the West, IJNR talked
with hundreds of reporters. Among them was Ken Weiss, now a
coastal-issues reporter for the Los Angeles Times.
"I've been struggling with the question of bias,"
Mr. Weiss told IJNR. He spent four years covering higher education
-- including such issues as who gets into schools, racial equality
and how to make schools better.
On that beat, he doesn't remember having had his motivations
questioned. "I pride myself on being impeccably fair,"
Mr. Weiss says.
But now that he covers environment issues, he adds, "I'm
challenged at every turn by crazed homeowners, recreational
fishermen, whatever…They get angry at the messenger."
Like Mr. Weiss, many other Western reporters who cover issues
of growth, development and the environment are wary and vigilant
about bias.
In the Western region as a whole, the evidence suggests that
most environment reporters don't share the view that they and
their peers have a "green" or pro-environment bias.
For example, researchers at Brigham Young University surveyed
environment reporters at 108 daily newspapers and 87 television
stations in eight Western states in 2001. Among the respondents,
only 28 percent said they agreed or strongly agreed with the
statement that they and their peers were "too green"
in orientation.
The same minority proportion agreed or strongly agreed that
environment-beat reporters should "work with community
leaders to solve" environment-related problems.
Similarly, only 38 percent agreed or strongly agreed that environment-beat
reporters "sometimes should be advocates for the environment."
No matter how praiseworthy or prize-winning, any news coverage
of the environment that examines complex and contentious problems
is apt to raise eyebrows, elevate blood pressures or incite
complaints. IJNR's study found that some of the harshest complaining
comes from within the journalism community itself.
"What was once excellent environmental reporting has become,
in many instances, environmental advocacy," charges John
Costa, the editor of The Bulletin in Bend, Ore., who has editorialized
on various sides of environment issues. "There are extreme
environmental organizations that would not be satisfied until
all natural-resource industries are shut down. We, as journalists,
have to recognize that fact when we are covering them."
Mr. Costa's perception is widely shared. Russ Hemphill, city
editor of the Wenatchee World in central Washington, explains
that for readers who live on the eastern side of the Cascades,
"when you say environmental reporting, it's a pejorative.
It means reporting with a bias."
Richard Wagoner, city editor at the Spokesman-Review in Spokane,
observes that something about the environment makes reporters
passionate. As a result, he says, "They start talking like
environmentalists."
Jane Amari, publisher and editor of the Arizona Daily Star in
Tucson, says she has known environment reporters who became
so wrapped up in pro-preservation thinking that they lost the
ability to remain impartial.
Sometimes environment reporters get accused of being just plain
ignorant.
"They don't spend enough time with us to understand what
we're doing," complains Arthur Brown, chairman and former
chief executive of Idaho-based Hecla Mining Company, a producer
of silver, gold, lead and zinc that has inherited some large
Superfund liabilities.
At other times, environment reporters get accused of imposing
personal attitudes or values on their stories.
Jeffe Selle, a former reporter who now works for Spokane's Regional
Chamber of Commerce, attended a Poynter Institute seminar in
1999 in Seattle, where he listened to a panel of environment
reporters and editors, and came away convinced of their bias.
"The Tacoma editor says he belongs to environmental organizations,"
Mr. Selle recalls. "I thought, What the hell is this?"
Regardless of the source, substantive complaints about bias
in environment coverage deserve serious attention. Even if some
or most of the complaints are unfounded, they probably arise
because environmental-protection ideas often demand wrenching
change and extra costs, especially for business and labor interests.
The challenges that businesses face in achieving environmental
goals or satisfying government regulations are too often dismissed
or downplayed by reporters. Modifying irrigation schemes, logging
practices, fishing restrictions, suburban land uses and grazing
traditions may indeed be possible, but such changes are rarely
easy or inexpensive.
Reporters aren't likely to appreciate these realities unless
they spend time with the industries and resource users they
purport to cover. As many business reporters could use training
in environment and science journalism, so could many environment
reporters benefit from training in business and economics —
if only to understand better the implications and consequences
of remedies being proposed by environmental activists.
The IJNR study acknowledges the pervasiveness of the perception
that environment reporters bring bias into their work in a way
that other reporters don't. This complaint is derived partly
from what is at stake on the beat. The concept of "environment"
encompasses broad and intellectually exciting terrain.
At its best, reporting on this terrain challenges society's
most basic beliefs about science, capitalism, politics —
and even our own chosen behaviors as human beings. When the
reporting is done well, entrenched interests will howl. But
the same reaction occurs when the reporting is thin or sloppy.
All across the West, IJNR encountered reporters who told us
that their keen personal interest in the natural world was a
major factor that attracted them to the environment beat. But
many of these same reporters were quick to add that their deep
interest in nature doesn't make them "environmentalists"
in the pejorative sense.
The distinction between good journalism and emotional advocacy
is important. To avoid bias, a reporter must constantly challenge
his own most basic assumptions. The best stories find meanings
and draw conclusions from facts. These stories help readers
understand what is at stake, but they still allow readers to
decide for themselves what could or should be done. This kind
of reporting is not the same as bias.
Nor can journalists simply inoculate themselves against all
biases. Societies have inherent biases. So do journalists, and
that isn't necessarily bad.
Walter Dean, a 30-year news veteran, now works for the Committee
of Concerned Journalists and the Project for Excellence in Journalism.
Speaking in Boise in December 2002 during a conference devoted
to news coverage of Western issues, Mr. Dean suggested that
peace is generally presumed to be better than war. But as a
result, he asked, "should every peace treaty be ratified?
Are there no battles worth fighting? Is democracy the best form
of government for everyone in all places at all times in history?"
Order may be better than chaos, Mr. Dean added. "but at
what cost? Wasn't the Boston Tea Party or the American Revolution
somewhat chaotic? Is a loud and unruly demonstration less righteous
than an orderly one?"
Anything created in journalism is bound to have bias. Even the
decision to cover or not to cover an event or an issue is subjective.
The responsibility of journalism is to manage bias appropriately.
Good journalists adopt a strict discipline of verifying information
before putting it into stories. They also disclose how the information
was obtained, identify in each story what is not known and,
above all, keep an open mind while gathering the story. "Getting
the facts right isn't enough," Mr. Dean argues. "The
real challenge is to present the right facts."
Using this approach, I think journalists shouldn't be faulted
for believing that a clean environment is better than a dirty
environment, that beauty in nature should be appreciated or
that watersheds deserve protection from abuse.
Where people most often differ is in choosing solutions to environment
problems, especially in deciding what and how much should be
traded or forfeited to achieve widely acceptable solutions.
Reason and science may influence such decisions, but the decisions
are reached on the basis of values, beliefs and attitudes. And
that means they are made in accordance with biases.
These factors don't mean that journalists must be paralyzed,
fearing to report because today's apparent solution might not
be the best one for all time.
Rather, journalists have to put all sides to a continual test
of scrutiny and skepticism. They must try to measure promises
against actual results. They must stay alert to contradictions,
new findings and new approaches.
It's not that industrialists or developers, conservationists
or preservationists, resource consumers or property–rights
defenders are right or wrong. All such constituencies—and
their respective arguments and evidence—should be subjected
to careful review and critical thinking. The journalists who
do this reviewing and thinking must constantly guard against
their personal prejudices.
In 2001, reporter Tom Knudson at The Sacramento Bee sparked
both praise and complaint with a series of articles about how
many mainstream environmental organizations have, in size of
budgets and in fundraising tactics, become remarkably like the
large institutions they criticize.
Those stories had an impact because Mr. Knudson subjected big-league
environmentalism to the same scrutiny he had earlier given to
big business.
To ensure balance in an environment story, simply quoting the
opposing sides isn't sufficient. That shortcut only deprives
readers of a journalist's considered judgment and of a competent
basis for reaching their own conclusions.
One reporter in Hawaii told us he quotes "both" sides
and assumes that his readers will "believe" whichever
speaker comes across as the more intelligent and articulate.
In our view, this reporter abdicates his responsibility to find
meaning and significance independently and then to share with
readers what he has learned.
Readers want accuracy and fairness. But they also want clear,
independent analysis. And independent analysis is not the equivalent
of bias. -Frank Allen
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
