sactoe comment-21326 2010-01-28T16:24:36Z 2010-01-28T16:24:36Z '"We expect that the Appellate Court will side with the people," Hiltachk said in a press release Monday afternoon.' I'm so tired of the Mayor and his supporters referring to SMP as what the people want. Who says this is what the people want? A list of questionably obtained ballot signatures does not reflect the will of the people. sactoe 2010-01-28T16:24:36Z sactoe comment-18219 2009-11-24T19:06:28Z 2009-11-24T19:06:28Z "She's good at taking trips on taxpayer dollars and not much else. " If you're so concerned with mishandling of funds you must be really disappointed about KJ's misuse and subsequent repayment of federal funds prior to becoming mayor. sactoe 2009-11-24T19:06:28Z sactoe comment-14787 2009-10-01T17:34:43Z 2009-10-01T17:34:43Z I have to say I hardly ever read Sac Press because I simply don't take it seriously. Many of the stories are duplicative of other local news sources and if I feel like I have to seriously screen what I'm reading or question the background of who's writing it than I'm not going to bother. In general I don't think the idea of Sac Press is a bad one but in order for it to become a useful news source to the community at large it needs some refining. In the above article there were a few comments I took issue with: "However, the interesting thing is that our community actually uncovered these affiliations in the conversation, not us. If we give one person the job to screen then we take power away from our community and give it to someone in our office. That person is fallible and will undoubtedly make mistakes." This sounds like a cop out. If there was some measure of credibility to the screening process involved with what gets posted I would be more inclined to take this site seriously. I also understand, however, that from a community perspective being able to publish a self promoting article is one of the appeals. Leaving the commentors to uncover the allegiances of the author is poor journalism. A: Not everybody wants to read the comments section because it usually appeals to the lowest common denominator B: What about the first time reader of an article? If they got to West's piece before it was vetted by readers they wouldn't have realized the true background of the piece. On a bigger picture level one has to question the inherent danger and serious community disservice involved with giving politicians an unverified platform like this to publish propaganda. This was the other passage from above I took issue with: "I am not sure if I feel comfortable asking people to disclose that they are the brother or sister or mother of anyone. We ask people to disclose their affiliation with organizations." Why not? Do you feel more comfortable with the alternative? About the time I decided to slow down on reading Sac Press was when I saw an article containing a byline by the very person the piece was about. Comfortable or uncomfortable that's just cheesy. Okay I lied, there was one more thing I took issue with: "There is some kind of myth about the press that media mega-corporations have concocted over some years: That journalists are like scientists carefully revealing truths without bias." If this is one of your arguments the alternative you present is not much better. Myth versus blatant self promotion? Also, in fairness I can think of several local journalists who possess a great deal of integrity who struggle with bias and do their darndest through investigation and fact checking to deliver honest reporting to the community they serve. Your two solutions for how to fix this I think are good ones both with the pop-ups and the separate category for PR, etc. In theory I like the idea of Sac Press but like communism it only works if everyone behaves, otherwise the opportunities to exploit the system are many. sactoe 2009-10-01T17:34:43Z