Tag Archives: Burlington Free Press

Copy editors? We don’t need no stinkin’ copy editors!

On Friday, Governor Shumlin released his 2013 income tax form. The Freeploid’s Nancy Remsen  wrote up the story… which included this little gem:

He lists five vehicles, a boat and farm equipment with total value of $128,300. One car, a 1964 Porsche, is valued at $55,000. The other vehicles are older and much less valuable. Since becoming governor, Shumlin gets little chance to drive as he is always chauffeured by his State Police guards.

Huh. Five vehicles. One is a 1964 Porsche. The others “are older.”

Let me guess…

— 1962 Chevy Nova

— 1958 Trabant P50

— 1952 Nash Metropolitan

— 1951 Fuldamobil

— 1948 GAZ-M20

Yeah, that sounds about right.

Funny; I would have guessed that our millionaire Governor would  own at least one car newer than 1964. But hey, the Freeploid reported it, I believe it, and that settles it.

The Burlington Free Press: Your Shameless Hometown Daily

Last week, I called attention to a bit of hypocrisy from Vermont’s Largest Newspaper: Veteran reporter Mike Donoghue Tweeting a complaint that WCAX had poached his story without attribution. Which was a clear example of Pot/Kettle Syndrome, since the Freeploid has a reputation among journalists as a serial story poacher. Like ESPN, the ‘Loid likes to pretend it’s the only news source in its market.

At the time, I pointed out just one recent example of the Freeploid failing to give credit to another outlet, to wit Paul “The Huntsman” Heintz at Seven Days.

Well, they’re at it again.

On September 3, Seven Days published an article about John Barone, superintendent of schools in Milton, receiving his advanced academic degrees from an institution known to be a diploma mill.

And hey, whad’ya know, on today’s Freeploid front page, there’s a story about John Barone, superintendent of schools in Milton, receiving his advanced academic degrees from an institution known to be a diploma mill.

And it gives no credit to Seven Days.

If you think that’s a coincidence, I’ve got a bridge you might be interested in buying.

And the Free Press had the brass-plated balls to COPYRIGHT the story.

I’m sure they have some ass-covering explanation for this, but I ain’t buying.

Burlington Free Press, serial story-poacher.

Skip Vallee is a bitter man

Oh, Rodolphe. Why can’t you just tend to your knitting? I actually like stopping at your gas stations, with their clean (!) restrooms tastefully decorated with fake flowers and chairs nobody ever sits in.

But please, let go of your Bernie Sanders fetish.

As you may recall, Our Junior Senator has made a big stink about high gas prices in Chittenden County, pointing the finger at the cartel that owns most of the area’s gas stations. Skippy, the frustrated politician wannabe, fired back — challenging Bernie to a debate. Bernie, rightfully, ignored him.

And wouldn’t you know it, after Bernie’s public splash, Burlington-area gas Skipprices came down. At least for a while. Now, as the Burlington Free Press reported, they’ve gone back up. Gotta pay for all those plastic flowers somehow.

Well, now Skip has turned his grudge into a political ad criticizing Bernie over the Burlington College mess. Bernie’s wife Jane is a former BC president, and it’s fair to say that her grandiose expansion plans played a part in the college’s current financial difficulties. The ad is on YouTube now, but Vallee plans to run it on local TV. The ad ad blasts Bernie and Jane for getting a “golden parachute” from Burlington College.

A “golden parachute” worth… wait for it…

… $200,000.

Really more of a zinc parachute, isn’t it?

Not that 200 G’s is anything to sneeze at, but it’s perfectly reasonable in comparison to severance packages given to top executives — even at nonprofits. And by corporate standards, well, it’s pocket change.

But that’s not my real point here. The main thing is, Vallee spending thousands of dollars to run an ad with no real purpose. Bernie’s not up for re-election until 2018, for God’s sake.

Skip’s spending Your Gas-Buying Dollars to toss a little gratuitous mud at Bernie Sanders, apparently because Bernie dared to point out that Vallee and his cronies were profiting from artificially high gas prices. And because Bernie’s campaign worked — forcing Skippy and Friends to, at least temporarily, bring their prices down.

Revenge is a dish best served out of a convenience-store microwave. Am I right, Skippy?

Milne Campaign: The Cloud of Doom grows thicker

As I said on Twitter, “Holy stinkin’ crap.”

Two months after Brent Burns signed on to manage Republican Scott Milne’s gubernatorial campaign, he is gone.

“I resigned Friday,” Burns confirmed Monday.

The Freeploid’s Nancy Remsen quotes Burns as saying he “wanted to take a step back” after “working in super high stress jobs” for six years straight.

I have to wonder if a negative financial balance had anything to do with the sudden onset of stress fatigue. The Milne campaign’s most recent finance report showed that it had spent more than it had received in donations. Only a loan from Milne himself had kept the lights on and the checks from bouncing.

Both Burns and Milne say they will have no further comment on the departure, which only adds to the irrespsonsible speculation about rats leaving burning ships and such. But Milne insists his campaign won’t miss a beat — probably true, if not in the way he puts it.

As to being able to operate without a designated campaign manager, Milne said in a telephone interview, “We are a flat organization. Everyone has ownership and responsibilities.”

Yeah, “flat” as in roadkill.

Vermont Pundit Emeritus Eric Davis puts it more eloquently than I:

“My sense of the Milne campaign is it is running on fumes right now and depending on free media,” Davis said.

It’s getting to the point where you don’t know whether to laugh or cry.

Bunched knickers at the Freeploid

The Burlington Free Press’ Mike Donoghue is shocked, shocked, that someone would dare steal his scoop.

Screen Shot 2014-09-11 at 2.18.28 PM

Donoghue is referring to his excellent story on the Louis Freeh accident, in which he broke the news that an eyewitness saw Freeh’s vehicle force three other drivers to swerve out of his way. Which raises the question, why isn’t Freeh facing any charges for reckless driving or endangerment or some such?

And how Mike’s knickers are in a twist because Channel 3 poached his story.

I feel his pain.

As does every non-Gannett journalist in Vermont, who would tell you that the Burlington Free Press is the number-one violator of this ethical principle. The Freeploid likes to pretend, in fact, that it is the only journalistic outlet in the state. It is very quick to grab credit for its own “gets,” and extremely — extremely — reluctant to grant the same credit to others.

Let’s just take one recent example. Terri Hallenbeck, reporting on Governor Shumlin’s campaign launch: 

According to the governor’s office, Shumlin has spent 141½ days in the past two years outside of Vermont, which includes 54 personal days off and 35 days on business for the Democratic Governors Association, of which Shumlin is chairman.

“According to the governor’s office,” my ass. That story came straight out of Paul “The Huntsman” Heintz’ column in Seven Days. Which was entitled “On the Road Again: Shumlin’s 141.5 Days Outside Vermont.”

So, rather than give proper credit to Heintz and Seven Days, Hallenbeck called the governor’s office for confirmation. Which gave her an excuse to avoid giving credit where credit is due. Well, to be fair to Hallenbeck, I suspect that her editors made her do it.

In any case, I say anyone at the Burlington Free Press who whines about story-poaching needs to look in the goddamn mirror.

The Freeploid’s headline writer is at it again

Same story, two headlines. VTDigger: 

STATE REGULATORS CUT RATE INCREASES FOR VERMONT HEALTH CONNECT

And Vermont’s Largest Newspaper, your Burlington Free Press: 

Vermont health insurance rates to increase 

Both stories concern this week’s action by the Green Mountain Care Board, authorizing increases in health insurance rates for the coming year. Digger chose to emphasize the actual news — that the Board had trimmed the size of requested rate increases — while the Freeploid went with a factual but fundamentally misleading header. 

The requested increases were old news. The Board’s decision to cut them was the real news.

The Burlington Free Press, once again dutifully (if subtly) carrying water for the VTGOP.

Freeploid headline writer places thumb discreetly, yet firmly, on the scale

Same story, different headlines. Associated Press workhorse Dave Gram filed a post-primary story on the outlook for the November elections. His unsurprising thesis: the incumbents have a hefty advantage. Hard to argue, that; but the story’s a useful space-filler for holiday weekend editions of Vermont newspapers. 

And so the Mitchell Family Organ (North) and the Freeploid both published Gram’s story on Sunday. The MFO(N)’s headline: 

Incumbents favored in Vermont midterm elections

And at the Freeploid? 

Milne promises a fight as incumbents are favored

The Burlington Free Press: Official Turd-Polisher to the VTGOP. 

I guess I missed the memo: We’re taking Dan Feliciano seriously now?

This doesn’t add up. Take one Libertarian candidate for Governor; have him launch a write-in campaign for the Republican nomination, complete with the public support of exactly one Republican of any renown — Darcie Johnston, a Republican who’s on the outs with her party — shake it all up; and you have a serious, credible campaign? 

Whaaa? 

Libertarian Dan Feliciano held a news conference today, standing behind a folding table in a public park, to criticize Governor Shumlin’s budget policies. Now, a Libertarian presser usually doesn’t draw flies; but this time, WPTZ’s Stewart Ledbetter and the Freeploid’s Terri Hallenbeck showed up. I’m not sure why; Feliciano ain’t winning the primary. And on the Libertarian slate, Feliciano ain’t pulling more than a small minority of votes in November.

Boy, with all this media attention, Darcie Johnston must be happy as a pig in its customary environs. 

And Ledbetter’s story brands Feliciano only as a Republican. It doesn’t mention that he’s the Libertarian candidate. Rather, it puts him front and center in the Republican parade: 

Republicans went on the offensive Thursday, a day after Gov. Peter Shumlin and a panel of state legislators agreed on $31 million in adjustments to the new state budget. 

At a Burlington news conference, Dan Feliciano, a write-in candidate for the Republican nomination for governor, characterized Shumlin’s history of budget management a “carnival of incompetence.” 

Ledbetter goes on to quote Feliciano, give space for comment from the Governor, and finally shoehorn House Minority Leader Don Turner into the final paragraph. 

So, “Republicans” is defined as a lot of Feliciano and a skosh of Turner. Only the latter is an actual Republican. 

In her story, Hallenbeck at least points out that Feliciano is, first and foremost, a Libertarian candidate. Still, she gives his presser plenty of space, tossing in a comment from Don Turner for a bit of variety. 

I guess the Freeploid and Channel 5 wanted to run stories about a Republican response to this week’s budget tweaks. But shining the spotlight on Feliciano? Good grief. I wonder how Scott Milne feels about this; he’s had to cut back on campaign activity because HIS MOTHER DIED THIS WEEK. They haven’t even held the funeral yet, and reporters are chasing after Dan Feliciano because, I guess, Scott Milne isn’t returning phone calls?

If this keeps up, maybe Feliciano will be able to get himself an actual lectern. 

Addendum. Lest anyone think I’m unfairly disparaging Mr. Feliciano, my point is this: Usually, a candidate has to show some level of real support before earning the media’s attention. You wouldn’t see TV cameras at an Emily Peyton presser, for example. It’s just strange that WPTZ and the Freeploid chose to give Feliciano this much attention. And anointed him a central figure in Republican politics. That’s the phenomenon I found worthy of comment. 

The Burlington Free Press ignores an obvious contradiction, gives Mark Whitworth a free pass

Oh boy, another Monday morning, we’ve had a bare-bones staff all weekend and we’ve gotta have a local story to fill that big front-page hole.

I know! Let’s profile a sage Vermonter type and run a big photo of him in a stereotypical Vermont setting!

And there you have it, on page A1 of today’s Freeploid: Mark Whitworth staring manfully at the camera, with a big pile of firewood behind him.

Whitworth, for those just joining us, is the recently installed head of Energize Vermont, the benign-sounding advocacy group promoting the anti-wind cause. Whitworth took over from that carpetbaggin’ astroturfer, Luke Snelling, who’s gone to San Francisco to seek his fortune by greenwashing corporations with environmental image problems. Which is what he used to do out of the Massachusetts office of his ad agency. Hence “carpetbaggin'” — he may be a scion of a Vermont family, but he wasn’t living here when he fronted for Energize Vermont.

Anyway, on to Whitworth who, as the headline informs us, wants Vermont to “SLOW DOWN, ASK QUESTIONS” when it comes to our energy future. Seems we’re in a “rush” to implement renewable energy. Yeah, stupid, isn’t it? Just because global warming is a goddamn crisis doesn’t mean we should “rush” to build our homegrown renewable infrastructure.

The story treats his views with respect, which is not out of bounds for a softball profile of a public figure. But this one line caught my eye, not to mention my ire:

“I’m not pro- or con-wind,” he said.

Cough. Snort. Chuckle. BWAHAHAHAHAHA.

All righty then, Freeploid, riddle me this. This article is on page A6*. On the next page, A7, directly across from this article, is an over-the-top rant of an opinion piece by Whitworth that accuses Vermont’s environmental community of being corporate stooges, and repeats the tired arguments of the anti-wind crowd.

*In order to see the layout, you’ll have to access a print copy of the Monday edition or have subscriber access to the Freeploid’s online e-newspaper. The digital version includes the same content, but it’s scattered around the website. 

He’s “not pro- or con-wind,” eh? And reporter Joel Banner Baird didn’t challenge him on his obviously false and self-serving claim? And the editors didn’t think the article and opinion piece made for an uncomfortable juxtaposition?

He starts his opinion piece by comparing Vermont’s renewable strategy to President Bush’s conduct of the Iraq War. He paints the build-out of renewables a for-profit hustle by what he calls the “Big Green Alliance of Green Mountain Power, policians, and ‘environmentalists.”

Because Mark Whitworth and his allies are pure as the driven snow, and all others have been Assimilated by the Evil Utility Borg. Got that, Paul Burns? Brian Shupe? Jake Brown? Sandy Levine? Chris Kilian? You’re all corrupt. Unless you change your tune and agree with Mark Whitworth.

He accuses GMP and its co-conspirators of seeking to “put 500-foot-tall turbines and massive solar fields wherever we want — on sensitive ridgelines, in wetlands and on prime agricultural soils,” and “string transmission lines all over the place.”

Yeah, no. Nobody’s proposing anything like that. As I’ve written before, and as anyone who checks the public record can see, there are only a handful of places in Vermont where wind is economically viable. And I don’t think any utility, no matter how profit-hungry, would try to site energy projects on sensitive lands. Seeking profit involves knowing when and where to build, and sensible utilities know they have to be careful and appropriate with their decisions. If they aren’t, they’ll waste a lot of time and money on projects that will never be built.

Also, if you want “transmission lines all over the place,” look no farther than Energize Vermont’s own green-energy plan, which relies heavily on Hydro Quebec power from the far north. That’ll require a big fat buildout of high-tension power lines right across the Northeast Kingdom that Whitworth professes to love so much.

Whitworth is a True Believer. He sees himself and his allies as the defenders of Vermont’s sacred honor, and anyone who disagrees is a turncoat and a corporate lackey. He is entitled to his opinion, and I respect his commitment. But he shouldn’t get a free pass from Vermont’s Largest Newspaper.

Art Woolf spews numbers, provides zero insight

In the past, I’ve given UVM economist Art Woolf two nicknames: Vermont’s Loudest Economist, for his inescapable media presence; and Vermont’s Laziest Economist, for his thoroughly conventional views. Well, now I’ve got a new one: The Human Almanac.

In addition to (Lord help us) educating the next generation of UVM students, Woolf also does a lot of corporate consulting, publishes a costly newsletter, and writes a weekly column in the Burlington Free Press. The latter is where I see his work, and it’s consistently unimpressive. The typical Woolf column includes an oversized chart or graph (to fill space), a shallow review of statistics, and/or a bit of thoroughly conventional wisdom, all served up in a few hundred words.

In his last two columns, he didn’t even bother injecting a bit o’ the old C.W. They were just bland overviews, free of any context or insight.

This week’s entry is “Vermont Fertility Rate 15% Lower Than U.S.” And, well, that title just about covers it. The column is full of shameless padding, like this:

The average Vermont woman will have 1.6 babies over her lifetime. …Of course, no one has six-tenths of a baby, but when we’re dealing with large numbers of women, and large numbers of babies, fractions and decimals do play a role.

Do tell, Art. I was picturing a landscape littered with partial baby corpses. Glad you set me straight.

He also stretches the content with a parade of irrelevant, or marginally relevant, statistics:

The fertility rate for the U.S. as a whole is 1.9 babies per woman over her lifetime, so Vermont’s fertility rate is about 15 percent below the U.S. average. By contrast, Utah, the state with the highest fertility rate, is 25 percent above the national average.

It’s like a high school student writing a five-page paper.

The “bulk” of the column is given over to a recitation of current and past numbers from the US and the world, followed by one paragraph listing possible reasons why Vermont might have a low fertility rate. That paragraph ends with:

We really don’t know the full reasons.

For this, we need an expert?

Woolf wraps things up with this thrilling conclusion: low fertility has consequences for the economy.

Last week’s entry in the Woolf oeuvre was even less meaty “Vermont Immigration patterns Differ From U.S.

Stop the presses!!!!!

Do you mean to tell me that Vermont has fewer immigrants from Latin America than, say, Florida or Texas? I am shocked, shocked.

But yes, that’s the knowledge bombshell Woolf drops on our heads: Vermont gets relatively few immigrants, and most of ’em are from Canada or Europe. No shit, Sherlock.

Woolf doesn’t even try to contextualize this nothingburger of a column. The big conclusion reads like this:

Sometimes it’s hard for Vermonters to understand why the concerns and passions about immigration run so deep. One reason is that our immigrant population, and our experience with immigrants, is very different than it is in the rest of the United States.

I really, really hope that Woolf’s own ($150 per year plus tax) newsletter has more to offer than his Freeploid blurts. For that matter, I hope he’s doing some more substantive academic work to justify his UVM sinecure. Because judging by his newspaper columns, Art Woolf is a man without substance.