Uppity Wisconsin

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.