The Seattle Times Company

NWjobs | NWautos | NWhomes | NWsource | Free Classifieds |

Editorials / Opinion

Our network sites | Advanced

Ed cetera

Join the informed, opinionated journalists of The Times' editorial staff in lively discussions at our blog Ed Cetera.

About the contributors| RSS feeds Subscribe | Blog Home

August 1, 2008 4:00 PM

The Fairhurst bandwagon, minus one

Posted by Jim Vesely

Justice Mary Fairhurst, seeking a second term on the Washington Supreme Court, appears to have gathered so many newspaper endorsements you would think there is unanimity about her candidacy. There is not. But the accolades are curious about a race that should be more than a token confirmation of an incumbent.

The Seattle Times editorial board is taking the opposite approach and endorsing litigator Michael Bond. The editorial is being published in The Seattle Times Sunday editions. It's an uphill fight for Bond -- the Fairhurst campaign has much more money and name recognition. But The Times' Editorial Board could not join the bandwagon because of a long list of judicial decisions the Justice made should be carefully considered by voters.

So far, editorial pages at the (Vancouver) Columbian, the Tri-Cities Herald, the Yakima Herald-Republic, the Seattle P-I, the Spokesman-Review and the Olympian, plus others, have all endorsed Fairhurst.

Comments | Category: none |Permalink | Digg Digg | Newsvine Newsvine

August 1, 2008 1:10 AM

Journalists and policy

Posted by Kate Riley

Journalists staying out of politics and policy decisions is a sound practice that has served the profession well. What are journalists to do though when the craft they love is being destroyed by bad policy?

Columnist Ryan Blethen argues in his column today that the time is right for journalists to start making a stink about policies like media consolidation that directly affect the newsroom. There is a resolution in the U.S. House of Representatives that needs support from journalists. The resolution would kill the Federal Communications Commission's new rule that essentially wipes out the media cross-ownership ban.

This is not a political issue. This debate goes to the heart of our democracy. Do we want and need a diverse and vibrant press? Or will journalists settle for a couple media giants owning most of the nations newspapers and broadcast outlets?

Comments | Category: Media/Press |Permalink | Digg Digg | Newsvine Newsvine







Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
          1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
Browse the archives

August 2008