SocratesChildren's blog

Part 4. Wisconsin Center for Investigative Journalism Gets in Bed with the Cato Institute.

SocratesChildren — Sun, 08 Nov 2009 00:48:12 +0000

Ninety percent (90%) of the opinion in the Wisconsin Center for Investigative Journalism (WCIJ) report on high speed rail is status quo, anti-public investment, and emphatically Cato Institute doctrine.

This essay presents eleven (11) charges that WCIJ failed their ethical principles. And twelve (12) characteristics of sloppy writing that denigrate journalism as a profession.

This blog^! is the fourth in a series about a WCIJ Report High Speed Rail broadcast on Wisconsin Public Radio July 22, 2009:

Part 1. The WCIJ Fraud. WCIJ falsified the conclusion in a US Government Accountability Office report.

Part 2. The WCIJ Virus - the Fraud over the GAO text has spread far and wide in the media.

Part 3. WCIJ Fails to Correct. The WCIJ has failed its the ethical code to correct error.

Part 4

Documenting WCIJ's "Authorities" in its Report on High Speed Rail.

SUMMARY

See Wisconsin Center for Investigative Journalism Code of Ethics. I charge the WCIJ with eleven ethical offenses:

Fact revisions
Misappropriations of quotations
Misappropriations of government reports
Laundering the meaning of quoted sources (fabrication, fraud) - arguably worse than plagiarism
Reporting that an interviewee said something she did not say
Avoidance of reliable sources and available data
Parading an advocate naked - seven words to defend your position to a national audience
Abusing its "Partner" relationship with Wisconsin Public Radio
Weighting a report to favor of one viewpoint (90%)
Using a dishonest statement to lead their Report, and allowing the error to stand.
Hiding behind the skirts of WCIJ's prestigious Mother, the UW School of Journalism, and then violating Mother's code of journalistic ethics.

From the WCIJ website: "The Center's ethics standards include the Society of Professional Journalists Code of Ethics, adopted in 1996 and endorsed by thousands of journalists around the world."

I grade WCIJ writing: Amateurish. Sloppy. Tough editor missing in action:

Presenting numbers without context
Lack of definition in its hypothesis - what does "ready" mean?
Juxtaposing two sources so as to give the impression one source agrees with the other
Preference of opinion over available facts
Undistinguished research, the worst of blog-like writing
Failure to pursue background sources
Arm chair bias against government
Ignorant bias against public investment
Ignorance of nearly two decades of rail studies in Wisconsin
Lack of critical awareness of the Cato Institute agenda
An aversion to legacy data that is widely available on the subject
Framing government voices as if they are lone advocates, outliers.

The Parent in Me

My first research paper and report - seventh grade - I went to an encyclopedia and copied a couple of paragraphs on the common cold. Then I stood in front of the class and read it.

WCIJ is 6 months old, was born this year and is learning how to talk. Sure, it wants to talk like a journalist, but this child continues to need a parent to guide it. I argue that WCIJ needs us. We, the people, are the parent; it is the property of a venerable Wisconsin public institution. A good parent will prod, encourage, discipline, praise, scold and coach the child to grow up.

In WCIJ's Report on high speed rail the writers rest comfortably on the voices of others to make WCIJ sound like a grown-up. As a reader I wish they had gotten out of Madison, and out from behind a computer terminal. Perhaps talked to actual users of public transportation, Madison-Milwaukee commuters - motorists and Badger Bus riders. I wish they had spent some ink identifying the needs of commuters between Madison and Milwaukee.

Authority or Fact? Opinion or Evidence?

The WCIJ Report prefers "authorities" over fact. WCIJ did not use a factual basis to critique Governor Doyle's plan for inter-city rail planning, though facts are abundant. Yes, it tosses out some numbers. Without context, their numbers are useless.

American cities are swimming in facts, statistics, and budgetary projections about ridership, BTU and miles per gallon requirements for every vehicle from a golf cart to a jet plane, CO2 and other emissions from cows to planes. WCIJ avoids all this rich scientific evidence and favors a quaint faith in the doctrine of Cato.

DOCUMENTATION

Data Collected from WCIJ Report. In its 2500-word report, opinion takes (I counted) 624 words.

WCIJ's Opinions

WCIJ's opinion about rail sparkles through its Report. I identify "WCIJ opinion" by the authorities that it calls upon to support its conclusion. WCIJ brings forward nothing from a vast legacy of responsible commentary on Rail - to name a very few:

An honest reading of the US GAO Report on High Speed Rail,
Our Chicago neighbor Center for Neighborhood Technology with Scott Bernstein,
Conrad deFiebre and Mick Conlan of Minnesota 2020
The Texas Transportation Institute (with an extensive bibliography)
"Post Industrial Smart Growth" by Kate Rube
"Financing Transit Systems through Value Capture" by Jeffrey Smith and Thomas Gihring
University of Minnesota Center for Transportation Studies
"Caught in the Middle: America's Heartland in the Age of Globalism" by Richard C. Longworth
The Midwest Interstate Passenger Rail Commission

Lame by choice, WCIJ attempts to plow new ground with arm-chair brilliance:

Consider that "Nobody Knows..." sentence that remains on their web site - (See Part 3.) it is not fact; it is self-imposed ignorance. This lie went viral on the Net and stays on as WCIJ's demon feeding the political lying machine of our times. (See Part 2.)

WCIJ states:

But an investigation by the Wisconsin Center for Investigative Journalism and University of Wisconsin-Madison journalism students found the state might not be quite ready for rail. http://readyforrail.wordpress.com

This statement is opinion, not fact. What does 'ready' mean? WCIJ does not define 'ready.' Everyone (including rail advocates) knows rail implementations take years. Years. So what does "ready" mean? Don't spend money until you are ready? Wait for a golden year to buy the whole infrastructure and the trains? What exactly is the problem with annual investments in railroad improvements that are not going to be cheaper in the future?

Rail studies have continued in Wisconsin for nearly two decades; some of which were inspired by Governor Tommy Thompson.

Not ready? We went to the moon in less time.

Part 1 Fraud as source - WCIJ opinion based on a WCIJ fraud.

One WCIJ opinion is wecome: "The description 'high-speed' is a misnomer." Most rail fans know what high speed rail is. I prefer the expression Inter-City Rail, which is more accurate given that America is so late figuring this out.

Laundering the GAO

Most observers probably give the US Government Accountability Office at least nodding respect; it is after all a thoughtful government watchdog that barks at pork. But the WCIJ, unhappy with the GAO's investment in political complexities, would prefer a GAO scrubbed clean of government, baptized with the waters of free market fantasy, and delivered unto us a born-again cheerleader for the free market.

Twice in their Report WCIJ re-writes text from the GAO Report on High Speed Rail. Part 1 of this series comments on one fraud in the Report; and there is another:

The US GAO reports what makes European and Japanese rail cost competitive. Tolls, taxes, gasoline price supports - all a function of national policy.

[GAO:] "In the countries we visited, automobile travel also tends to be significantly more expensive than in the United States, resulting from tolls on inter-city roads and higher gas prices and taxes, which makes high speed rail a more cost-competitive option." GAO-09-317 p. 20 [bold added, explained below]

And now comes WCIJ, denying the GAO its own insight, it lays a free market slant to the GAO point. How? By removing words (bold above): The implication is that decisions in Europe and Japan were a result of market forces, not government policy.

[WCIJ version of GAO:] "The cost of driving is another issue. The GAO studied passenger rail systems in France, Japan and Spain and concluded automobile travel in those countries is "significantly more expensive than in the United States," making train travel a much more attractive option for consumers." http://readyforrail.wordpress.com [Bold added - this was not a 'conclusion' in the GAO report, but an observation of fact in a long section of responsible fact-gathering.]

WCIJ cuts meat from the GAO statement to make the GAO appear to say that the "market" in Europe and Japan caused the auto to be more expensive than the train. Suggesting to the reader: If market, not policy, governs successful rail decisions in other countries, should we not stay with market forces in America, and allow rail to grow when private investment is ready to pay for it?

May I ask? Why not report GAO as it stands? Why not respect the intent and content of the GAO report? Why not ask the topical question head-on? "Is the market a sufficient solution to our long-term transportation needs?"

The fact is that Europe and Japan moved to rail as national policy years ago.

So what we have here is WCIJ again using the carefully worded GAO report, and the prestige of the US GAO as an authority, now to prop up gutted comparisons of national policies. One fraud appears to be insufficient to satisfy WCIJ's designs on a discussion of rail; WCIJ burrows into and twists around more GAO language to suit its agenda.

Cato Institute (137 words)

WCIJ loves Cato. Who is the Cato Institute? Speaking for itself, here is the Cato summary of Cato principles. Slavish admiration for Founding Fathers is quite like enjoying the rear-view mirror while speeding down a modern highway:

The market-liberal [Cato] vision brings the wisdom of the American Founders to bear on the problems of today.... It is--or used to be--the conventional wisdom that a more complex society needs more government, but the truth is just the opposite. The simpler the society, the less damage government planning does. Planning is cumbersome in an agricultural society, costly in an industrial economy, and impossible in the information age. Today collectivism and planning are outmoded and backward, a drag on social progress. [emphasis added] http://www.cato.org/about.php

Cato believes our Founding Fathers were so smart that they have the wisdom we need for 21st century questions: public transportation, nuclear proliferation, stem cell research. The Fathers, who knew the four person carriage, horses and walking, can tell us from the grave out how to do public transportation in the jet age?

On another day, we shall explore Cato, a frequent guest on Wisconsin Public Radio. From their Report, here is WCIJ's choicest Cato Fellow quote:

"... the diesel-powered trains may consume more energy than more-energy efficient cars and planes likely to be developed in the future." [Randal O'Toole as quoted by WCIJ in http://readyforrail.wordpress.com]

O'Toole's statement implodes from its own weight. Fellow O'Toole compares current trains to future cars. Might as well compare horse and buggy to NASCAR. Engine efficiencies are and will be translated to all the engines of the world. Lithium batteries, solar and wind electricity transfers, and biomass will not be patented for cars only but will be equally available to all forms of transportation.

UPDATE: November 23, 2009, NPR: "Capitol Corridor Runs Cleaner-Burning Diesel Train" Morning Edition (2:18, audio.) When I Googled NPR's tags, I found a national press report that preceded WCIJ's "investigative" report by 5 days: "Eco train engine unveiled" by Suzanne Hurt, published on July 17, 2009.

Rick Geddes, another WCIJ selected authority on transportation is presented here as an advocate for highways, which he believes are more economical than rail. Mere assertions, however strong, are not proofs. Highway costs are diffuse: payments to foreign sources with whom we have conflicting interests, environment, sprawl, isolation in car-dependent neighborhoods, and the dispersal of jobs away from economically needy neighborhoods. His forthcoming book on the subject may deserve attention. But WCIJ's use of him as an "authority" on the subject might be premature.

He made a name for himself as a member of the Council on Economic Advisors for the Bush administration, in which he advocated for more deregulation, a policy which has since driven the world into deep recession.

In the WCIJ Report, Geddes serves as another "Cato-like" authority. He has published through the Cato Institute, and the Hoover and American Enterprise think tanks; philosophically his advocacy against public investment shows him comfortable with the generally Cato position of the WCIJ Report.

I will submit in another blog that Cato is about Cato, not the Founding Fathers, not even the free market, but just another NonProfit with an IRS exemption that is engaged in private enterprise, spinning off Fellows who collect stiff (private) fees from speaking engagements to free market audiences.

"Cato's 2007 revenues were over $24 million, and it has approximately 105 full-time employees, 75 adjunct scholars, and 23 fellows, plus interns." [Cato report on finances, http://www.cato.org/about.php]

Wealth and prestige have entrenched thinkers in the past. Cato is not immune.

Taxpayers for Common Sense, 54 words

TfCS cautions against projects that aren't fully planned. (trumpets please!) Who can be against Common Sense?

And I'm not, but WCIJ is not content with Common Sense, but enlists TfCS to bend its commentary against rail.

This TfCS statement would just as easily support a well-planned rail system in preference to a highway. WCIJ strategically omits words that might support rail as the better choice. The bolded words are omitted in the WCIJ Report. (I give the reference missing from the WCIJ Report.)

TfCS: "Some economists argue that it doesn't matter much how the stimulus money is spent, just that it is spent. We beg to differ. This is an enormous investment and debt we are undertaking. We need assurance the money is spent wisely and appropriately and we need maximum bang for the buck, otherwise too much treasure will be squandered on second tier, non-critical projects while other enormous infrastructure challenges facing the country remain - basically the equivalent of resurfacing the driveway when you need to replace your roof." http://ctpgcountryboys.blogspot.com/2009/03/taxpayers-for-common-sense-stimulus.html [bold added to show words omitted in WCIJ's quote]

WCIJ suggests in its report that the State is not planning but only spending - no evidence offered to support this. The single glitch in the Milwaukee-Madison rail plan is admittedly the connection between Truax field and downtown Madison; it is easy to make too much of a problem that could be resolved in months with a "buses waiting for you" service, once we know that the five-year rail project is going ahead.

Personally? I would prefer to see the Governor fund the local bus system in Milwaukee, but all public transportation is interrelated. There is really no segment that can operate independently of any other segment. The message we should have learned by now is plan locally, plan regionally, even plan nationally, and build as the funding becomes available. Above all, think regionally and get all the political players to the table, as the Governor appears to be doing with RTA proposals.

Center On Wisconsin Strategy (COWS), 50 words

WCIJ seemed to sense a gap in its criticism of the State plan for inter-city rail. And so it appears to me that they recruited and laundered the language of a voice they describe as "liberal-leaning."

Eric Sundquist of the Center On Wisconsin Strategy is made to appear as if he is arguing with Frank Busalacchi, Commissioner of the Wisconsin Department of Transportation.

Result: The appearance that both "liberals" and "conservatives" are opposed to the WisDOT plan for rail.

The MWRRI 2006 Study

WCIJ mentions (without documentation) a "2006 Study" which my brain trust drilled into the Net to find. The study was conducted by the Midwest Regional Rail Initiative (MWRRI) and promoted in an easy-to-read brochure. I refer to the Study here as MWRRI.

In the MWRRI there are 13 numbers projecting future jobs if the Midwest Rail Initiative is implemented.

Only one number appears in the WCIJ Report.

But another, undisclosed, number plays into the WCIJ deceit. How?

The MWRRI presents the two (of 13) job numbers in this way:

"New Permanent Jobs ... Wisconsin 9,570" [MWRRI, page 8. WCIJ reports only this one of 13 job numbers].

"57,450 permanent new jobs across the Midwest" [MWRRI, page 7. WCIJ excludes this and eleven other job-related numbers]

WCIJ reports only the 9,750 number, followed by a paraphrase of their interview with Sundquist - no quote given to this analyst, no number in his statement, but appearing to be commenting on the 9,750 number because WCIJ had just mentioned that number in the preceding paragraph.

By presenting only 9,750 jobs, WCIJ finesses Sundquist's words to appear to be critical of that lower number.

I submit that this is an irresponsible laundering of a source. A quick look at the easy-to-read 8 page study brochure would have driven a responsible journalist (or editor) to repair the following two WCIJ paragraphs, which I now quote in full:

Busalacchi believes the state's stimulus request will help realize the dream of an expanded nationwide rail network that will make travel faster, cheaper and easier. He also touts the economic benefits of an improved passenger rail system for Wisconsin. A 2006 study estimated that a fully operational Midwestern high-speed rail system would create or save 9,570 jobs in Wisconsin by adding another transit option and creating service sector jobs in the communities with stops. In addition, 3,000 [sic*] construction jobs would be created over a 10-year period.

Those estimates may overstate the actual number of jobs that would be created, according to Eric Sundquist, senior associate at the Center On Wisconsin Strategy, a liberal-leaning policy center. The problem, Sundquist said, is the estimates are based on an entire Midwest train system, not just the new Wisconsin segment. All nine Midwestern states are expected to apply for stimulus funding; Wisconsin plans to submit its proposal in late August. [WCIJ Report, emphases added]

We see here devious writing that makes Sundquist appear to be commenting on a job number that appears to be coming out of the mouth of Frank Busalacchi.

In a conversation with Eric Sundquist I learned of his disappointment at the way his remarks were used in the WCIJ Report. He said he was fairly insistent to the reporter that his expertise was not "rail" and that he recommended more appropriate resources to the WCIJ reporter - people better equipped to analyze job creation estimates from rail development; the reporter however did not seem interested, Eric told me.

WCIJ number flipping is not all:

WCIJ laundered the verb, too, claiming that the MWRRI 2006 Study projects the system will "create or save" 9,750 jobs in Wisconsin. I note that neither verb - "create" or "save" - is found in the brochure. MWRRI describes jobs as "New Permanent Jobs."

Temporary jobs, like construction are counted separately; and WCIJ cannot leave those numbers intact either.

*Construction Jobs

The MWRRI states: "15,200 average annual jobs during the 10-year construction period, of which 6,000 are construction jobs..." (page 11)

WCIJ claims 3,000 construction jobs would result from the Rail Initiative, not the 6,000 that their source, MWRRI, reports - yet it attributes this lower number to the MWRRI.

Sources for the MWRRI 2006 Study are left out of the WCIJ Report. Here they are, from The Midwest Economic Analysis consisting of three independent assessments:

The Federal Railroad Administration (FRA),
The TEMS Economic Rent analysis,
The Department of Commerce BEA RIMS II Model.

Is WCIJ afraid of a sources? Is WCIJ afraid to acquire technical background to understand their subject? And why put the language of a study into the mouth of Frank Busalacchi?

Dear WCIJ, you have to believe Wisconsinites are a bunch of dopes. We know how Frank Busalacchi talks. When I read WCIJ's attempt to put a statistical study in his mouth, I knew your reporting deserved a critical eye. An academic pose? That is to laugh. Busalacchi talking does not sound like a carefully worded statistical report. Folksy, vague, avuncular, rough hewn, but a professor? Not Frank.

(Frank Busalacchi as Secretary of Wisconsin Department of Transportation is often suspected for being in the pocket of Wisconsin road builders. His road-building, public-opinion ignoring WisDOT should someday find itself a target for a responsible journalist.)

Eileen Bruskewitz, voice from the countryside, 48 words

WCIJ selects an "urban" transportation policy maker who lives nowhere near public transportation. Her residence is nestled comfortably between a park and a lake - Governor Nelson State Park and the northern shoreline of Lake Mendota.

Quoted, she says: "The business community thinks ... that because it's a train, people will use it," said Eileen Bruskewitz ... "I just don't buy that. Do we really need to spend billions of dollars to build a train line when everything points to using rubber tires to get from point A to point B?" [WCIJ Report]

Bruskewitz, Dane County Supervisor, member of the Madison Area Transportation Planning Board is the only Towns' (low population density) appointee to that board. But, while her perspective brings a thought to the table, WCIJ begs the question, why Ms. Bruskewitz only? Are there not 14 members of the MATPB? Why not an urban rep? Someone who drives city roads daily.

And why only Madison? Milwaukee, Green Bay, Eau Claire, Racine and Kenosha are brimming with officials discussing and, some, using public transportation.

Rick Harnish, high speed rail advocate, 7 words

"Americans definitely without question want more trains," said Rick Harnish, executive director of the Midwest High Speed Rail Association.

Harnish is equipped to offer a statistical basis for rail, to explain how rail may arguably bring efficiency and a lower cost of living to American households, as well as a reduced State budget deficit. WCIJ extends no courtesy to his expertise or his organization.

Check out his work at MHSRA: http://www.midwesthsr.org/index.html

State Officials

Considerable space, of course, is given to state officials. And that is appropriate as it is the State plan that is being scrutinized. Their voices need to be aired as completely as possible. The more ink the more informed the citizen.

Opinion Ink Awarded by WCIJ

WCIJ opinion, 115 words
WCIJ-laundered-GAO opinion, 273 words
Cato opinion, 149 words
WCIJ-laundered-COWS expertise, 50 words
Motorist, Bruskewitz, 48 words

I observe that WCIJ, Cato, Geddes, and Bruskewitz all reflect free-market faithful, status-quo thinking, an aversion to government intervention into public transportation. GAO works with government planners; it is not averse to government planning and investment. But GAO, as misrepresented here by WCIJ, is WCIJ's opinion disguised as the "mouth" of GAO. COWS' analyst's opinion is so manipulated by the reporter that I attribute the 70 words to the WCIJ opinion makers.

WCIJ - total ink given to free-market opinion, 91% (585 words)

Other voices:

Common sense opinion, TfCS 8% (54 words)
High speed rail advocate, Harnish opinion 1.08% (7 words)

In the Internet age which has brought us uncertainty about news sources, it is disheartening to see the Wisconsin Center for Investigative Journalism, born with high ideals within the UW School of Journalism, baptized a "Partner" by Wisconsin Public Radio - prestige and blessings abounding on their mission to clean up journalism - now stepping into the mud of slovenly, careless, and unethical writing.

This series of blogs will continue. We will challenge investigative journalists for what they are: "The Cato-like Wisconsin Center for Investigative Journalism." The only way to save "Investigative Journalism" is this state will be to practice it.

^!A series of blogs in UppityWisconsin.org under the name SocratesChildren are a response to the WCIJ report by Lexie Clinton of the Wisconsin Center for Investigative Journalism, with Andy Hall and Jim Packard. Web: July 21 and Wisconsin Public Radio: July 22, 2009.

The author, Bill Sell, is a life-long Milwaukee resident. Founder and principal of a 33 year old downtown Milwaukee business serving editors and authors nationwide. Founding Member Bay View Neighborhood Association. Founder of Transit Matters. Steering Committee Coalition for Advancing Transit. Member Bicycle Federation of Wisconsin. Shepherd Express Community Activist of the Year, 2007. Member, Public Policy Forum. Associate Member, Investigative Reporters and Editors.

Part 3. WCIJ has Trouble with Delete Key. We Guide Their Hand.

SocratesChildren — Sun, 06 Sep 2009 17:39:24 +0000

... Wisconsin Center for Investigative Journalism Violates 3 Principles in its Code of Ethics....

A Series of Commentaries.

Introduction. Open Letter to WPR.

Part 1. The WCIJ Fraud.

Part 2. The WCIJ Virus.

Part 3. "Nobody Knows..."

WCIJ Screenshot

WCIJ Says Nobody Knows...

I point.

Notice the second sentence, beginning "Nobody knows..."?

This short sentence deserves attention but please don't quote it.

Even its author, the Wisconsin Center for Investigative Journalism, knows it is not true.
Secondly, knowing it is false, WCIJ nevertheless preserves the error for all to read on its webpage - second sentence, on top.
Thirdly, "Nobody Knows..." is a preposterous claim. How does a journalist establish evidence that nobody knows?

Best I can tell, WCIJ "corrects" that above-mentioned sentence as follows:

A July 21 report from the Wisconsin Center for Investigative Journalism incorrectly said that state officials haven’t estimated how many people would ride a proposed passenger rail line between Madison and Milwaukee. Actually, a 2008 report prepared for the state Department of Transportation estimated that 188,000 passengers a year would take the trip between the two cities by 2020. An additional 155,000 passengers would take the trip between Madison and Chicago. Total ridership on all or portions of the new route is estimated to be 900,000 passengers a year by 2020.

Thank you very much. But why not delete the error? Which error stands firmly on top of the WCIJ essay.

This "Nobody Knows..." sentence - from the top of WCIJ's blog on high speed rail - continues (now for 48 days) to feed media outlets hungry for information, infecting new sources.

It is nothing new for journalists to misrepresent government officials with intent to increase their audience for advertisers.

How can we improve journalism if the funded, high-minded, "standard setting" journalists don't follow their own standards?

Am I being picky?

You bet. From 27 outlets, growing now (Sept. 6) to 33. These media quote WCIJ as declaring "Nobody Knows..." about passenger estimates - even after the 'correction.' The number grows as writers quote other writers, long after WCIJ may behoove itself to make the correction.

Investigative Journalism?

Failing the taxpaying public who pay double for WCIJ, operating out of the UW campus.
Failing Wisconsin Public Radio which "partners" with WCIJ.
Helping the "sound-byte" media with the short, misleading sentence.
Our Media Watchdogs birthing yet another media virus, "swift boating" high speed rail.
Sloppy. Careless. So, I say:

Welcome to the New Journalism

Newspapers are laying off reporters and turning responsibility for text over to a higher power. And WCIJ steps into the gap with its pithy truths.

Well, I suggest some media outlets may be conned for a while by the 'prestige' of the Wisconsin Center for Investigative Journalism. I can understand they might lend credence to the Ivy Halls of Journalism, at the University of Wisconsin.

Let us take measure of WCIJ by their own principles of performance.

The WCIJ Code of Ethics

With "Nobody Knows..." WCIJ has cut an artery of its life-blood, its own credibility.

WCIJ appears to stand in violation of three principles of its own Code of Ethics.

Test the accuracy of information from all sources and exercise care to avoid inadvertent error. Deliberate distortion is never permissible....

Make certain that headlines, news teases and promotional material, photos, video, audio, graphics, sound bites and quotations do not misrepresent. They should not oversimplify or highlight incidents out of context....

And a violation of no. 3 under "Be Accountable"

Admit mistakes and correct them promptly....

900,000!

This number bodes well for Wisconsin - and our ability to understand the power of rail. I am happy that WCIJ has felt prompted to publish this number - even while hiding it under a link, and denying it prominently.

900,000 passengers per year riding Chicago-Milwaukee-Madison rails. This number is so huge, it surely may take the gas out of WCIJ's balloon. "Is the State Ready...?" Well, yes, Wisconsin is ready, maybe we're late, but we're ready.

Watch for our Course for Math for Journalists, coming soon. Journalists as a breed tend to be math-shy. Help is on the way.

Part 4. Coming soon. Part 4 and future blogs will each cover a topic related to high speed rail as covered by WCIJ: * content, * language, * common sense, * the Governor Doyle's transportation record, * the debate about reducing congestion, * and - throughout all blogs - suggestions of resources available to a journalist truly interested in reporting on transportation policy to the public, including as I promised, * math.

A series of commentaries on report by Lexie Clinton of the Wisconsin Center for Investigative Journalism, with Andy Hall and Jim Packard. Web: July 21 and Radio: July 22, 2009.

Part 2. WCIJ Error Spreads Media Virus. Scores of Media Infected by WCIJ.

SocratesChildren — Mon, 31 Aug 2009 16:52:22 +0000

... Wisconsin Center for Investigative Journalism has created a tenacious anti-rail virus, a "feathers-to-the-wind" media story that the U.S. Government Accountability Office is opposed to inter-city rail projects....

By Bill Sell

A Series of Commentaries.
Introduction. Open Letter to WPR.
Part 1. The Fraud.
(more to come)

Part 2. The Virus

Wikipedia:

A computer virus is a computer program that can copy itself and infect a computer without the permission or knowledge of the owner.

I advocate for public transportation and so I am familiar with the benefits and limits of rail, and the proper role of government.

The efficiencies of bus and rail are well-known. WPR underwriter CSX touts that its trains can move 426 tons of freight on one gallon of gas. Even the old Milwaukee buses qualify:

One full bus takes 30 cars off the road reducing congestion and making the air healthier to breathe. That's comparable to a line of cars six blocks long traveling at 25 mph.

And so it happened, that when I visited the WCIJ website, I found myself staring in disbelief at what WCIJ calls the 'conclusion' in the U.S. GAO Report on High Speed Rail: I know the work of the GAO; and it commands respect.

Screen Shot of WCIJ Website

How could this be?
Why would the U.S. GAO say that?
(I then found the report on the Net and read it.)
The GAO real "Conclusions" are on page 54 of the report (but not in the WCIJ Report).
Only 16 of the GAO's 40,000 words appear in WCIJ's report.
But who fabricated WCIJ's purported GAO 'conclusion?'

I have trouble believing WPR would intentionally be party to a fabrication.

My better angel kicked in and say "Silly Monkey" (my neighbor's favorite nickname for me) - long time Friend of WPR that I am.

Of course! I surmised kindly (at first) that someone else fabricated that GAO 'conclusion' and WCIJ just carried it forward. Public Radio would *never* lie to me!

So I did what any investigative journalist could do: I turned to Google. My goal was to find the author of the 41 words (see screenshot above).

And Google delivered.

So, step by step: Don't you dare take my word for it.

Investigative Journalism 101 - you, too, can play the game. You are as good as you are if you abide by the WCIJ Code of Ethics. Maybe a shill if you don't.

Do It Yourself Investigative Journalism

Of course, you can find the 16 words on page 44 of the US GAO Report.

For your convenience, copy the 16 words (here bolded) [ "little impact on the congestion, environmental, energy and other issues that face the U.S. transportation system." ] and include the quotation marks to limit the scope of the search engine.

If Using Advanced Google Search:

At THIS EXACT WORDING OR PHRASE, PASTE: little impact on the congestion, environmental, energy and other issues that face the U.S. transportation system
At RESULTS PER PAGE: 100
If the Google list is short, go to the very bottom and click on: REPEAT THE SEARCH WITH THE OMITTED RESULTS INCLUDED.

Google presented to me, on different days, slightly different counts - 65 to 72 - news outlets and blogs that picked up the WCIJ quote, word for word.

Each pointed to WCIJ as the source.

I decided to devote time to reading each of the three-score commentaries. Yes, I love investigating. And this trail is hot.

Reading the Commentaries

So I read media reports that Google linked me to.

I found no link dated prior to July 21, the WCIJ Report publication date.
I found that each medium referenced WCIJ as their source.
In their own words each news outlet attacked public investment in high speed rail.
It appears by all logic that WCIJ has created a mendacious anti-rail virus, a "feathers-to-the-wind" media story that the U.S. Government Accountability Office is opposed to rail projects.
On July 21, 2009, WCIJ successfully Swift-Boated the substance of the US GAO Report on High Speed Rail.

WPR Gets Mud on Its Face.

On July 22, 2009, the amiable Jim Packard on WPR's Larry Meiller show read the fraudulent paragraph to his audience:

WPR's Jim Packard:

"a recent U.S. Government Accountability Office report [...] concluded rail projects would have 'little impact on the congestion, environmental, energy and other issues that face the U. S. transportation system.'"
[Packard continues in his own words:] That's a rather harsh assessment for Wisconsin trying get some stimulus money to build this Milwaukee to Madison corridor.

Letters to the Editors

So, I am in the process of sending a Letter to the Editor of each newspaper or radio station in my Google list. I point out the fabrication. (I will report on The Letters in another blog in this series.)

Plausible conclusions:

WCIJ originated the fraud.
Each of the Googled media attributes the paragraph (above) to the US GAO, instead of WCIJ, the true author.
No news outlet appears to use that 16 word GAO phrase before July 21.
None wrote a report based on the GAO Report itself.
None gives evidence of having read the GAO Report.
None appears to question WCIJ's journalism.
Each of the media outlets pans high speed rail as a public investment.

Our new Wisconsin "Watchdog" needs to watch what it leaves behind as it moves through the media; digital mistakes are forever.

A series of commentaries on Report by Lexie Clinton of the Wisconsin Center for Investigative Journalism, with Andy Hall and Jim Packard. Web: July 21 and Radio: July 22, 2009.

Parts 1 and 2 are the first of my several commentaries on the July 22 High Speed Rail report by Wisconsin Center for Investigative Journalism reporting on Wisconsin Public Radio. I will soon publish more about this WCIJ report - about the content, language, common sense, the Governor's transportation strategy, the debate about reducing congestion, and suggestions of resources available to a journalist interested in transportation policy.

Part 3. Next, The "Correction"

The author is a life-long Milwaukee resident. 33 year owner of a downtown Milwaukee business serving editors and authors nationwide. Founding Member Bay View Neighborhood Association. Founder of Transit Matters. Steering Committee Coalition for Advancing Transit. Member Bicycle Federation of Wisconsin. Shepherd Express Community Activist of the Year, 2007. Member, Public Policy Forum. Associate Member, Investigative Reporters and Editors.

Part 1. UW Journalists Fabricate the US Government Accountability Office's Conclusion on High Speed Rail

SocratesChildren — Sun, 16 Aug 2009 20:28:29 +0000

Part 1. UW Journalists Fabricate the US Government Accountability Office's Conclusion on High Speed Rail

... WCIJ finds a 'useful' phrase buried in the GAO report and represents those 17 words as the whole of the GAO report....

By Bill Sell

Introduction to this Series of Reports

Part 1. The Fraud

From Wisconsin Center for Investigative Journalism Code of Ethics:

Test the accuracy of information from all sources and exercise care to avoid inadvertent error. Deliberate distortion is never permissible.

Did they? Draw your own conclusion:

GAO Report

The U.S. Government Accountability Office published a report last March on High Speed Rail. GAO-09-317 High Speed Passenger Rail: Future Development Will Depend on Addressing... March 19, 2009

This GAO document is fairly exhaustive and probably measures up to GAO's purpose, balancing need with political and financial feasibility. In this sizeable report (108 pages, 40,000 words) there is a panoply of guidelines.

Other than this mis-quote WCIJ says nothing else about this GAO Report.

In fact, the GAO itself concludes with this amazing statement in its Conclusions section, p. 54:

... Yet the potential benefits of high speed rail - both to riders and nonriders - are many....

How did WCIJ go from GAO's report to a 'conclusion' that might have been written by well-known opponent of public investment in transportation?

Copy-Edit-Paste=Journalism

Copy: WCIJ copies 17 word phrase (a series of nouns, no verbs) from GAO report.

Edit: WCIJ composes new sentence - new subject, new verb - borrowing GAO's 17-word phrase, and fabricates GAO 'conclusion.'

Paste: WCIJ's invented GAO summary becomes core of WCIJ claim.

"Investigative" Journalism: In this single sentence, WCIJ makes an erroneous claim about the GAO. WCIJ language such as "concluded" and "thrown into doubt" misrepresent the substance of the 108 page GAO report.

Here is the full GAO paragraph from which WCIJ selected 17 words:

Given the current fiscal crisis facing the nation and the pressing needs facing the federal government in many areas, it is critical that federal dollars are used efficiently and effectively and are focused where they can produce the greatest benefits. Failure to apply these principles could lead to an unfocused federal investment in high speed rail corridors or projects and, as a consequence, little impact on the congestion, environmental, energy, and other issues that face the U.S. transportation system. [Emphasis added to show the phrase that appears inside of WCIJ's reconstructed sentence.] GAO-09-317, p. 44.

Screen Shot from GAO PDF file

WCIJ changed this GAO text, and offered the following as the 'conclusion' of the GAO report:

Other benefits of such projects have been thrown into doubt by a recent U.S. Government Accountability Office report that concluded rail projects would have "little impact on the congestion, environmental, energy and other issues that face the U. S. transportation system." [emphasis added]

Screen Shot of WCIJ Website

Nowhere does the GAO report 'throw into doubt' benefits of rail - quite the contrary.
Nowhere does the GAO report 'conclude' that "rail projects would have 'little impact...'" as claimed by WCIJ.
Why would WCIJ throw its reputation on the line for a forgery?
Why would WCIJ start its life (June 2009) with high-minded journalistic principles, and then throw itself into the now fashionable media mud?

GAO Opposite of WCIJ Claim

In fact, the GAO itself concludes the exact opposite. GAO summarizes itself with this language (not quoted by WCIJ): "... Yet the potential benefits of high speed rail - both to riders and nonriders - are many...." p. 54. [emphasis added]

Why would an Investigative Journalist avoid this statement? What is the WCIJ agenda?

GAO Report Suggests Positive Benefits

GAO posts extensive commentary on the pluses expected from intercity rail, from both a variety of elected officials and various government departments.

Truth be told we advocates don't always like what the GAO says. But it performs a necessary and credible service to citizens and politicians.

Commentary on Report by Lexie Clinton of the Wisconsin Center for Investigative Journalism, with Andy Hall and Jim Packard. Web: July 21 and Radio: July 22, 2009.

Part 1 is the first of my several commentaries on the July 22 High Speed Rail report by Wisconsin Center for Investigative Journalism reporting on Wisconsin Public Radio. I will soon publish more about this WCIJ report - about the content, language, common sense, the Governor's transportation strategy, the debate about reducing congestion, and suggestions of resources available to a journalist interested in transportation policy.

Next, Part 2, the WCIJ Virus, spreading the fraud.

The author is a life-long Milwaukee resident. Founder and principal of a 33 year old downtown Milwaukee business serving editors and authors nationwide. Founding Member Bay View Neighborhood Association. Founder of Transit Matters. Steering Committee Coalition for Advancing Transit. Member Bicycle Federation of Wisconsin. Shepherd Express Community Activist of the Year, 2007. Member, Public Policy Forum. Associate Member, Investigative Reporters and Editors.

UW Journalists Fabricate the US Government Accountability Office's Conclusion on High Speed Rail

SocratesChildren — Sun, 16 Aug 2009 18:15:13 +0000

UW Journalists Violate Several Ethical Principles of Journalism, but WPR maintains partnership with WCIJ

Open Letter to Wisconsin Public Radio

...this July 22 radio program made me wonder about the ties that WPR has created to this group called the Wisconsin Center for Investigative Journalism....

By Bill Sell

Introduction and Open Letter

Dear Wisconsin Public Radio

Re: "Questions remain as state pushes ahead with rail line," by Lexie Clinton of the Wisconsin Center for Investigative Journalism, with Andy Hall and Jim Packard. Web: July 21 and Radio: July 22, 2009.

After listening to the July 22 Larry Meiller show, in which Jim Packard led a discussion about high speed rail, I went to the Wisconsin Center for Investigative Journalism's web page and read the full report. I also researched the sources.

My findings trouble me.

As a life-long Wisconsin Public Radio fan, from Jerry Bartell (Wisconsin School of the Air) to now, maintaining my several-years membership in the Ideas Network, I am disturbed by the shenanigans of WCIJ.

The Ideas' Network has a policy of airing all the viewpoints. Heart and soul, I support WPR as a breath of fresh air in a manipulative media world.

And, I love Wisconsin Public Radio because of its commitment to journalism, and I applaud that they are willing to entertain all the voices. But this July 22 radio program made me wonder about the ties that WPR has created to this group called the Wisconsin Center for Investigative Journalism.

Jim Packard called WCIJ a "partner" with the Wisconsin Public Radio. The Center describes itself as a service to the state operated by the University of Wisconsin School of Journalism. And when he introduced his guests as "investigative journalists" and a "partner" I assumed that the reporters would try to be above the fray, covering issues with integrity.

The Allegations

What I found in WCIJ's radio and web reports was

fraudulent reporting,
a revision of an official report,
a dismissal and a revision of the conclusions of that report,
shallow analysis of State transportation policy,
omissions of fact, and
an unbalanced jury of "authorities."

Why, I asked myself, would principals and students of the University of Wisconsin School of Journalism do this to the citizens of our State? And why is WPR involved with WCIJ at all?

Truth be told, I am a transit advocate and I report to my readers about transportation policies. As an advocate I feel the obligation to lay out evidence and reasons for my views. I expect no less of a journalist.

But the WCIJ report failed the people on several levels. And so I did the research necessary to correct the record.

A Series of Commentaries.

Part 1. Fraud. Fraudulent journalism report spreads media virus to dozens of newspapers, launched from Wisconsin Public Radio's Larry Meiller show.

Part 1 is the first of my several commentaries on the July 22 High Speed Rail report from WCIJ to WPR.

I will soon publish more about this WCIJ report - about the content, the Governor's transportation strategy, the debate about reducing congestion, the use of tendentious language in a journalism environment, and lack of common sense. I will share with WCJI some resources available to any journalist who is interested in studying transportation policy as it is being debated today.

BusStop. Water Panel Weak on Specifics

SocratesChildren — Fri, 22 May 2009 15:52:26 +0000

Water Panel Weak On Specifics

The Politics of Water. Thursday, May 21.

A panel ensconced by the Public Policy Forum in a Wauwatosa hotel, was strong on the language of cooperation, happy about the International Water Compact, and true believers in the new "work together" mood of our nation.

Michael Murphy, Alderman from Milwaukee, spoke of the issues on which Milwaukee would like cooperation: affordable housing, transit, and economic development of distressed areas. What he might have added is some conceptual material - how all of these things work together in a healthy city. Unfortunately he did not bring to the table The Now Issue: why it is that Transit, today as they spoke, could be the most effective signal of cooperation from Waukesha (County and City). Nor did he suggest, and reasonably he could have, why Milwaukee officials are looking to a private, international water corporation for serious money after being rebuffed on many fronts in Madison over school funding, dedicated transit funding that brings federal dollars, and health care costs.

Larry Nelson, Mayor of the City of Waukesha, touted the many things Waukesha has done to distinguish itself from the politics of his County. He omitted Waukesha's embarrassing history of running its water industry dry after World War II. "Waukesha Springs" used to mean the best water in the world. Now their underground aquifers are drying up. The city is under an order from the DNR to fix its radium problem by 2018. While Waukesha can buy water from Racine or Oak Creek, Nelson stated clearly it was in Waukesha's interest to develop collaborations with Milwaukee, simply because between these two cities there are already many issues on the table. I get a "good neighbor" feeling about this man. Milwaukee needs to listen.

Matt Moroney, Metropolitan Builders Association, was high on the word cooperation. He even "scolded" his own industry (what were they thinking?) for all that farmland converted to sprawl, as if to say that is So Past. He stated "We cannot solve all issues at once" but we should focus on Water first. He stated that there is "plenty of water," that the City of Waukesha is not anyone's example of sprawl. Moroney was patently happy to have a chance to use and recycle that pro-environment buzz-word "infill" to describe recent revitalization in Waukesha - in strong support of the City of Waukesha's application for water. His vested interest was palpable. I would have preferred to hear him announce a pro-bono, stimulus funded (perhaps) effort by Metropolitan Builders to sponsor Habitat for Humanity efforts to Waukesha County. SEWRPC tells me the jobs are in Waukesha but the unemployed are not.

"How difficult would it be to solve this problem?" a Godfrey & Kahn attorney from Brookfield asked me.

Jodi Habush Sinykin from the Midwest Environmental Advocates brought to the conversation a needed sense of applause for recent environmental progress. She nudged the audience to think about comprehensive planning rather than the "one at a time" approach of the Builders. Her most unfortunate statement was that there is "no urgency" right now, and that means we can make a comprehensive plan without pressure. Like Murphy, she was short on specifics around the transit crisis in Milwaukee County.

She might have mentioned the letter her organization co-signed last week, asking the Governor to devote more federal stimulus money to public transportation projects. Letter_to_Wisdot_on_transit_and_stimulus-5-12.pdf (Again, is there a fear to jar this $40 lunch audience?)

With respect, I thought the environmental position on regional cooperation might have been sharper if presented by Bruce Speight, WISPIRG Advocate. But I'm not sure his passion would suit the decorum of a Public Policy Forum.

To his credit, Murphy did mention the high concentration of poverty (30% of Milwaukee's population earns below the $18,000 poverty level). He splashed cold water on our collective faces by reminding us that there is competition among the parties in the region. As long as Milwaukee has the largest burden of poverty in the state it will always be at a disadvantage: Farmland is often cheaper than urban infill. (He might have added how State policy encourages sprawl, but a point like that would be too testy for the spirit of cooperation that embraced this gathering.)

Sinykin pointed out the difficulty in returning water to Lake Michigan up and over the Sub-Continental Divide - a requirement of the Compact. There will be, she said, a 40% increase in the load on the "return" river (Root River or Underwood Creek). Who will monitor that? Who will pay for erosion? Will the new flood plains be adequate? She stated that during heavy rains there will be allowed some diversion of Lake Michigan water in the other direction (Fox River) but, she asked, how often? How much?

Nelson answered the "no urgency" position of Sinykin by pointing out that nine years is a short time to get all Waukesha's ducks lined up. Waukesha's application for water must be accepted by seven governors and two provinces of Canada; and that won't happen before engineering and local politics deem the application acceptable.

Ken Yunker, Director of SEWRPC, in a long "question" to the panel, came down politely but firmly in favor of Murphy and Sinykin's "comprehensive" position. His oft-heard point is that the planning really has to be implemented as a whole. Cherry-picking parts of a comprehensive plan is exactly the wrong way to approach these problems, he said.

Yes, Ken mentioned Milwaukee's Transit and how it needs help in Madison, now. I wish he had pointed to the self-destructive politics of the majority. In my heart of hearts I believe transit is a truly Republican issue (about serving small business and getting workers to work).

In May 2008 the Public Policy Forum issued an excellent analysis of the Milwaukee Transit crisis http://www.publicpolicyforum.org/research.php?pageNum_Reports=1&totalRows_Reports=165 . Reading this should have been a pre-requisite for each panelist. And maybe their Housing study ("Give Me Shelter") earlier this month.

I sat with bankers, whose self interest is probably not a depressed, politically conflicted regional economy.

Maybe, just maybe one Waukesha guest went back to the office that afternoon and called his or her state rep to find out about the implementation of the will of Milwaukee's voters on November 4th: a Regional Transportation Authority for three Southeastern Wisconsin counties and ask, just by the by, why the heck is Waukesha not part of this, too?

BusStop. My Dear Republican

SocratesChildren — Wed, 29 Apr 2009 03:15:01 +0000

My Dear Republican

"While each member of the Senate caucuses with his Party, what each of us hopes to accomplish is distinct from his party affiliation. The American people do not care which Party solves the problems confronting our nation. And no Senator, no matter how loyal he is to his Party, should or would put party loyalty above his duty to the state and nation." ---Arlen Specter, on changing from Republican to Democrat, April 28.

April 27, I mail this letter to to the Republicans of the Joint Finance Committee.
April 28, Senator Specter resigns from the Republican Party.

=========================

Dear Republican Elected Official

I am a small-business owner of a nationally known service located in downtown Milwaukee. For over 30 years, I have observed your allegiance to the larger corporations and their needs, while generally you are condescending to us small business owners.

Your party puzzles me, locked into old issues that are evaporating as fast as stimulus funds from Washington.

My impression is that to a Republican a "small business" has revenues from 10 million and upward to the value of Marquette Electronics when it was sold to GE. (By the way, the former owner of that business is someone you should spend time with: he understands the connection between public transportation and local economies; his streetcar plan is a homerun for our city. )

But $10 million? Not my company. Quality dictates our size, not capital. We work; and our trips to Madison are few, maybe about health, education and safety, but never whiney pleas for tax breaks.

Yes, I pay attention to the Republican platform, but between your religious fanatics and the large corporations there is no place for me or my business. Your commitment to small government has given us the dictatorship of large corporations.

Today, I write you about the brain-dead politics of public transportation.

You say you support businesses. Since business needs workers and customers, how is public transportation simply off the table? Small business depends on people who come from a distance. To think everyone uses a car to shop and work is naive. Scott Walker's remarks about everyone having a car was probably the death of his political career.

Blind people work, too;
fifteen year olds have jobs;
no matter what Scott Walker believes, we seniors will not be driving ourselves to our own funerals;
workers cannot change homes as often as they may have to change jobs;
kids change schools at least once every four years and
households sometimes have several children in distant schools;
no plan to reduce Temporary Assistance to Needy Families can work without the bus.

I quote our brain trust: "The higher the percentage of families below the poverty level in a given block group, the higher the percentage of households with no vehicle available." (UWM Study)

Walking to work died before my Daddy was born.

If you believe we don't need transit, wait a couple of years to see what Milwaukee looks like then.

Today 40,000 jobs are inaccessible to public transportation in Milwaukee due to the Walker bus cuts.
If our buses do not get dedicated funding, the number of inaccessible jobs will rise to something over 100,000.

I live in Bay View. If the bus system fails, our local business district will go on life support. Restaurants and small shops depend on workers and customers from more than 3 miles away.

Did you know that Milwaukee County voters asked you to fix this? And that included a tax swap to reduce our property tax? Why did you fight this? I thought reducing property taxes was YOUR issue.

I note that one of your club is gleefully rubbing his hands that Senator Lehman will do a "Petak" on Regional Transit and there will be a recall in Racine. This is not an economic plan for our state. I take it, however, it is the Republican Plan to get control of the next budget.

It is, however, the same brain-dead politics that ties Dems in knots; they are poised to sacrifice Milwaukee's economy so Russ Decker can remain majority leader.

It is to cry.

My dear Republican, I plead with you: just vote for to allow us our Regional Transit Authority, the tax we want imposed on ourselves, and sweep the issue out of the hands of the Dems who seem ready to abandon it.

To your credit you will not have abandoned your base, you will not have abandoned Scott Walker. (Indeed you will have saved his behind. And even given Gov Doyle a race.)

You will not have abandoned the large corporations; the Milwaukee Chamber (MMAC) wants this regional transit authority.

And you will have made the Democratic base of this city sit up and take notice.

To me, running my little business, the RTA (access to Racine, Kenosha and Chicago; city-wide buses restored) is more important than the career of Mr. Decker. For me I doubt that Wisconsin's elected Democrats are smart enough to grasp the great truth: Our sun does not rise and set on their personal careers.

Nor do they understand that if Mr. Lehman does the right thing they can count on us to come down to Racine in hordes and fight for his seat in the Senate. We are not talking "Sunday in the ball park." This is our city, our future. And we know the difference between Sunday games and weekday jobs.

My question, however, is: where are you?

Sincerely,

William Sell
2827 S. Lenox, Milwaukee 53207
414-744-3970

BusStop. Comments on MCTS Plan 2009

SocratesChildren — Sat, 14 Feb 2009 21:23:43 +0000

Re: Milwaukee County Transit System Development Plan: 2009–2013 Transit Service Improvement Alternatives.

A Response by Bill Sell

Dear Transit Planners

I appreciate that you have a difficult job in a day of when politics is sometimes hostile to practical, wise investment in our infrastructure. Many believe Transit is a luxury because, they say, “I have a car. I don’t need it.” And elected officials pander to that tune rather than educate the citizen.

Your MCTS Plan 2009, however, too, is lacking. If anything it is not bold enough. You are open to serious criticism while your opening position on Plan 2009 does not reach far enough. While I understand the need to accommodate many interests, ... more at http://www.milwaukeerenaissance.com/BusesAreGreen/MCTSPlan2009

BusStop. A plea to County Transit drivers.

SocratesChildren — Sat, 07 Feb 2009 14:49:02 +0000

Word from Transit is their concern that the demise of Transit TV will leave Transit but 'no choice' except to find a substitute system. As a bus rider, I have a better idea.

Dear Drivers

One bus driver on Route 15 announces all the stops. It is a pleasure to hear his voice and it gives him a commanding presence that is reassuring about the service as a whole. Why we needed Transit TV was that Transit management gave up on its efforts to get drivers to announce bus stops.

They might have thought that TTV filled the bill, but it does not. It announced only major stops, skipping the dark corners one can barely discern from inside the bus. Dark corners are the corners the rider needs to get right.

Drivers, please spare us another version of TTV and call the stops, all of them.

Your riders have gone to bat for you against the cuts, against the fare increases that would reduce your hours. We need you on this one. Shout the stops. We'll thank you.

BusStop. Transit TV. May it rust in pieces.

SocratesChildren — Sat, 07 Feb 2009 03:05:11 +0000

I have been begging County Transit to abandon Transit TV for years. It is a noisy intrusion on a quiet ride. It offers scams to unwitting citizens. It was a blight on the Milwaukee scene - as if we were too cheap to provide our passengers with a quality ride - we had to infuse the bus with the worst of television and AM radio ("operators are standing by..."). It appears to have died at the hands of the Market. Thank heavens for the hand of the market. (never thought I could ever say those words.)

http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/news/39205597.html?c=y&commentSubmitted=y

No one at Transit wanted to step forward and say the truth: this noisy nuisance was deterring the efforts to get passengers who can choose to ride the bus. Let peace reign. Death to scavengers is good. Mercy killing is not always wrong.

best

Bill Sell