KMGH online article omitted Independence Institute's "free market" education agenda
Summary: Reporting on Gov. Bill Ritter's new education reform proposal, an article on the KMGH 7News website noted criticism of the plan from Pam Benigno, who was identified as "the director of education policy for the Independence Institute." The article described the organization as an "independent think tank," but omitted its "free-market" agenda and failed to disclose that its president, Jon Caldara, has distorted aspects of Ritter's education policy.
In a March 19 online article about an education reform plan Gov. Bill Ritter (D) announced that day, KMGH 7News reported criticism lodged by Pam Benigno, whom it described as "the director of education policy for the Independence Institute, and (sic) independent think tank." The article failed to identify the Independence Institute's "free-market" agenda or note that its president, Jon Caldara, has used misinformation to attack Ritter's education agenda.
From the March 19 article by reporter Russell Haythorn on the KMGH 7News website, "Governor's Education Reform Plan Unveiled":
Colorado Governor Bill Ritter unveiled his ambitious plan to overhaul the state's education system Wednesday.
The governor made the announcement on the steps of the state capitol Wednesday afternoon, with the bill's bi-partisan sponsors by his side.
The education reform plan, known as the Colorado Achievement Plan for Kids, or CAP4K, would realign or create new assessments, which could mean the end of C-SAPs and other testing methods.
The plan already has its supporters and critics.
"I think that the state standards that we have currently have been around since 1996, and we can't live in a stagnant world. Our world is changing and our educational standards need to be changing right along with them," said Pati Montgomery, principal at Lakewood's O'Connell Middle School.
"The most important thing in this state is that we raise expectations, and I don't believe you can legislate expectations," said Pam Benigno, the director of education policy for the Independence Institute, and independent think tank.
"I have concerns that we would be wiping out all of our data from our current CSAP assessments," added Benigno.
A report on Ritter's plan that 7News aired during its 5 p.m. broadcast on March 19 included video of Benigno making the statements reported in the online story. The broadcast identified her only as "Director of Educ. Policy, Independence Institute."
According to the Independence Institute's website, the think tank's Education Policy Center "is an advocate for school choice, school accountability, and teachers' rights."
—E.B.
Comments (8) Show
1 - 8 |
Agenda driven, inaccurate, obstructionist. The red strategy. With a loser like bs running for senate, the same red crew running for state offices, and grampa munster going for the nation's highest office, even the most passionately uninformed, extreme right wing advocates out there know that the repubs are gonna get rolled in november. What to do? What to do? Create the illusion of the old "tax and spend liberal" that worked on the red rubes in 2000, 2002, and 2004. Scare these dolts into the old "better the devil you know than the devil ya don't" mentality. Let's see, we got the "person-hood amendment", "the liberal supreme court is takin' away the shotguns from the people in the nation's capitol, Denver's next"!, "Iran's armin' al qaeda", "Obama's a Muslim, at least he met with a Muslim at the age of 9", "food stamp recipients are breakin' us!", and last but not least, they go after the Governor's education plan. Gays, guns and God worked for a while, but the reds need more issues to fool 'the faithfull into thinking things are ok.. With the reds and their henchmen/women, it's hide their incompetence and just ridicule any thing the other side comes up with. It'll work on the sheeple that listen to and believe red radio and channels like 7, but that's a small demographic, getting smaller every day.
Would it have been acceptable if KMGH had referred to the II's free market agenda or are they also required to use superfluous quotes around "free market" as CMM is so insistent upon doing?
Make no mistake, it's not superfluous. When you pay $3.19 for gas, $2.77 for a gallon of milk, $2.69 for a 5 lb. bag of potatoes, and $1.69 for a head of lettuce, think of the reason......no competition. That is by no mean the "free market" in action. When a tv station blindly follows the lead of a "conservative think tank", it smacks of the media in general and at large being owned by 5 concerns with their own agendas as priority over the viewers getting accurate information. That's not the "free market". It's a monopoly. Let us argue over whether that is bad or good, I don't mind. But to ignore it is purposefull. And it's what the FCC and Mr. Martin prefer.
I agree that your examples represent the lack of true free market competition. I also agree that the debate over whether the free market is a good thing is, while legitimate, a separate discussion and not really relevant to whether the quotes around "free market" are in fact superfluous.
While the II is often guilty of misinformation it seems to me the policies they advocate are hard-line libertarian free market. This is seen in areas such as the smoking ban, public transportation and school choice. So while they are no doubt conservative, and certainly sit on the same side of the aisle as the Republicans, their fiscal policies can be quite at odds with the big government Bush-style neo-cons.
There may well be reasons why CMM doesn't think the II should be called a free market think tank (personally I like free market "think" tank), But if that is the case, I'd like to know why. Otherwise, the effort to cast doubt on the "free market" moniker seems petty and a little a juvenile.
I would have the same question of the II if they referred to CMM as a "research" center.
The Independence Institute self-describes as "free market," hence the quote marks. If they self-described as "font of misinformation," which also would be appropriate, CMM would use the quote marks in that context as well.
Fair enough, but the quotes appeared only in the last few months.
I guess my point is that in my opinion, the "ii" is not advocating libertarian principles. It's running talking points for large concerns with deep pockets that fund it to do so. "libertarians" would do well to remember that a "non profit think tank" like the "ii" is funded by very "bush-style neocon" special interests. Your vote for grampa munster come november will be a vote for "bush style neocons".
Just for grins, google "neil bush charter schools cash cow". A good rule of thumb when following dependent stinking OR the depens institute's attack on ANY entity, including education: Look for the name of the biggest privateers of any program. jon the con probably is getting big time financing from the "charter and/or home schooling industries". Next up: the wholesale, merciless, frontal attack on government's maintaining of highways. jon the con will devote much time in the near and coming future whoring for the proposed toll road on I70 from Denver to the tunnel. Why? Gobbs and gobbs of taxpayer cash going into the private roads industries. Bonds and the whole 9 yards. jon the con will preach to the goobers (and they'll buy his lies) about how privatizing roads will be good. And the depens institute will get big money from those yet "unnamed" road privateers.
1 - 20 |