Hot News!
• Presidential Campaign Stump Speech Quiz Show!
• Rumor has it “Blasphemy” is banned at The Enquirer
• The Small Donor-Fallacy: Don’t believe the hype!
Contact Us
v mail, fax: (214) 481-6464
e mail: click here
Events
 Saturday July 12, 10 am-12 pm Quarterly GET-TOGETHER BRUNCH for LOCAL PEACE AND JUSTICE GROUPS @ Peaslee Neighborhood Center (215 E 14th St - free parking lot next to center) - John Davis from Sojourners Cincinnati is the coordinator and the facilitator for this session Topic: “Poverty in Cincinnati”
1) Status of Poverty in Cincinnati – John Davis - Sojourners Cincinnati
|
July 12-17 NAACP Annual Convention - Power, Justice, Freedom, Vote
|
July, 19am - 12pm Immigration
|
Wednesday, January 04, 2006
Margaret Buchanan: Conflict of Interest in Newsmaking?
Posted by The Dean of Cincinnati
Do a site specific Google search for Margaret E. Buchanan,” or ”Margaret Buchanan.” Even when allowing for Google’s “repeated results,” you’ll come up with less than 50 hits. That’s not a lot of ink spent talking about The Enquirer’s President and Publisher. But why should we expect anything else?
Margaret Buchanan sits on the Executive Committee for the Board of 3CDC. Even locating such information is strange. Go to the 3CDC website and click ”About 3CDC.” You will see a link entitled ”Board of Directors.”
Now, one might expect clicking on that link to display the Board of Directors. Instead, it brings up another screen where you find you can download a word processing document which includes the list.
This is a standard tactic designed to prevent people from bothering with such information through fatigue.
Don’t believe me? Just ask yourself a simple question: How often have you found a link to a news story, then discovered that the site requires you to register. Have you ever decided not to bother with reading the story? In the earlier days of online news, publishers thought that getting a better sense of who visited (through registration) would make it easier to sell more costly targeted advertisements—but that technique, over time, has been shown to fail.
The Enquirer, unlike many other online papers, does not require registration. They know it causes people to fatigue and stop clicking. But if you bother to download the 3CDC document, save it to whatever location to which you save such things, and open it, there you will see a list of 3CDC’s Board. And there is Margaret Buchanan’s name.
As of this morning, a site specific Google Search will give you almost 300 hits for stories including 3CDC.
What kinds of things does The Enquirer have to say about 3CDC?
Square project tests 3CDC, By Cliff Peale:
What separates good cities from great cities?, By Tony Lang
You get the picture. The Enquirer has great things to say about 3CDC. The Enquirer has no criticisms of 3CDC. The Enquirer does not investigate 3CDC, choosing instead to report the organization’s talking points.
And Margaret Buchanan, President and Publisher of The Enquirer, is on the Executive Committee of the 3CDC Board.
This is not about whether anyone thinks it a good or bad idea to renovate Fountain Square, for example. This is about understanding whether or not The Enquirer is a trustworthy source for real news.
Would Margaret Buchanan allow one of her staff writers to investigate 3CDC and the numbers behind some of its plans? Would she allow such a story to be published? Whenever The Enquirer prints praise of 3CDC, is it worth remembering that the President and Publisher sits on the Executive Committee of the Board? Should The Enquirer tell us, whenever it publishes stories that gush all over 3CDC, how their President and Publisher sits on the Executive Committee of the 3CDC Board?
• Share This Article!
Listen to this article
|  |
Register
Anonymous comments are allowed, but you can create an account above to stamp your name and to avoid typing the anti-spam code.
If you are not familiar with our rules for leaving comments, click here! The Cincinnati Beacon is not responsible for the contents of any comments. Comments do not represent the views of the moderators of The Cincinnati Beacon.
04 Jan 2006 at 08:24 am | #
Thanks for the sharing of the person(s) “behind the curtain”. Looks like we really do abide in OZ. It is of rare manner now when either publicly traded or privately held media are able to step away from the favors they owe, or wish folks to owe them. The study of historiography is so applicable to these matters. Knowing where the writer or leader came from and how they got to this point. Who is placed to chair or advise an elected government committee so that fervently vested business interests control the agenda? It may not even reach 6 degrees of separation; it could only be one or two. Why do political parties “load” their cloistered committees with folks that are being granted favors in exchange for their “vote”? Why do party old timers set on their hands and allow for the gatherings to wither on the vine? Party demise has fallen into the hands of those who, while in noble manner espouse and pontificate that they are “true” to the cause, but will usher in the side door the person who becomes the highest bidder with perceived money or power. We end up with “stars” without connection to a stronger base of civic involvement, that as soon as their luster has run its course, have to reinvent themselves to keep the charade going. Our individuals turn backs on cultures and people for their star moments on the coattails of those who have actually worked so very hard for their level of success; any blip on the media screen is fair game for the photoseekers, while the real work is done by the quiet and steady masses. Thanks for the morning awakening, it’s better than coffee!
04 Jan 2006 at 09:57 am | #
It is unfortunate the Enquirer has failed to do honest reporting involving 3CDC. However, those of us who have been around here for more than 20 minutes know that 3CDC’s efforts to make downtown come alive have failed at every turn. Anyone with half a brain knows 3CDC on the label means failure! Too bad the Enquirer doesn’t report what is happening and has happened.
04 Jan 2006 at 12:54 pm | #
If you don’t like what the Enquirer publishes, then don’t buy the newspaper. They’re selling a product, it’s time you realized that they don’t “owe” you anything.
04 Jan 2006 at 01:21 pm | #
Yes, This is true but their product is “news” not propaganda.
04 Jan 2006 at 01:28 pm | #
Yes they do! There selling lies and bad deals.
They owe us a little honesty about major deals that will cost us well over $42 million. Much more than the $4 million they reported. This is supposed to be the paper of record, not the PR machine for big business and criminal politicians. When they reported those lies, then channel 5 and other news sources echo those numbers.
I don’t buy their paper because they have proven to be dishonest time and time again. Their lies still affect me and the entire city though. It’s too bad it’s the Post that’s going out of business. At least the Dean helped get rid of No Reporte Korte “the Jayson Blair of Cincinnati”.
04 Jan 2006 at 01:32 pm | #
"Yes, This is true but their product is news not propaganda.”
Their product is propaganda disguised as “news”. They are the Fox of newspapers.
04 Jan 2006 at 02:53 pm | #
In the sickening and constant pursuit for profit, whatever happened to the old valuables—like information, or trust?
04 Jan 2006 at 03:59 pm | #
You can trust that they’ll represent the good ole boys and make a profit.
04 Jan 2006 at 04:17 pm | #
common knowledge about Buchanan. is she still chairing the Marketing Committee? THAT was the real scandal about The Enquirer failing to disclose her conflict.
04 Jan 2006 at 04:53 pm | #
Yes, That’s the point. Even if she wasn’t the PR person, they should’ve disclosed her relationship or confict of interest.
04 Jan 2006 at 07:03 pm | #
Remember, The Enquirer is our finest and indeed only morning newspaper!
04 Jan 2006 at 07:29 pm | #
People should boycott them!
If they aren’t going to be honest, they don’t deserve our support. As a matter of fact, there should be a class action lawsuit. Lying about the costs to benefit your boss is inexcusable.
05 Jan 2006 at 02:10 am | #
I know little about these matters, but I know conservatives and liberals alike are damn tired of the way The Enquirer is being run. Would it do any good to petition Gannett for changes? If so, how would the community go about it? The paper is junk and there is little prospect of it getting any better as long as current leadership stays on board. The Enquirer has long been the “cash cow” of Gannett so irate readers may carry some clout. Irate advertisers would carry more!
05 Jan 2006 at 06:19 am | #
The Enquirer’s readership is up. The only people who are angry, right now, are those who are into news, politics, events, etc.
I figure the only way to make such frustration reach critical mass is to keep writing about.
You can help. Forward all stories like this one to your friends. Encourage them to do the same. Write letters to the editor. Encourage your friends to do the same.
05 Jan 2006 at 08:04 am | #
Can anyone identify a single media outlet that is NOT biased by the viewpoints of those in charge?
05 Jan 2006 at 08:35 am | #
Readership figures are highly suspect at most print outlets. The real number is how many copies are sold. If you were to believe a newspaper’s circulation department they’d tell you 2-3 people read each copy sold! Wanna buy a bridge?
05 Jan 2006 at 09:01 am | #
Where is Kevin Osborne?????
He was heir apparent to the City Hall beat and now he isn’t even there.
If anyone has seen this short, goateed, supple man, please alert the media authorities, he reports honestly and isn’t afraid to tackle the facts...should be considered armed with a pen and dangerous.
05 Jan 2006 at 11:08 am | #
“The Enquirers readership is up.” (comment #14)
The Enquirer has not gained readership. Both the Enquirer and Post have lost over 3000 subscribers in the past 6 months alone. In fact, I don’t think any paper in the world has gained readership. The newspaper industry just had a conference to discuss subscription attrition.
If people seriously want to hurt the Enquirer, organize a boycott of car dealers. Dealers’ ads are a top source of income for all media, including newspapers (just look through one). It’s also a big reason why the media hasn’t been critical of the U.S. auto industry or energy/environmental policy. Media won’t bite the hand that feeds them.
05 Jan 2006 at 12:30 pm | #
I think readers want more, but there aren’t many options for news. If a group identified the big car dealers and contacted them about these concerns, they would react.
05 Jan 2006 at 01:19 pm | #
What do you mean when you write: “If a group identified the big car dealers and contacted them about these concerns, they would react.”
05 Jan 2006 at 02:06 pm | #
If people put pressure on the companies that advertise with the Enquirer to stop advertising with them. They would tell the Enquirer to change. That along with letters to the editor might wake them up. Their advertisers have more pull than their readers.
05 Jan 2008 at 04:16 pm | #
It seems like just last year that the Dean broke this story about Margaret Buchanan’s conflict of interest in newsmaking. The Enquirer is still writing glowing reviews of everything that 3CDC does without disclosing the fact that the president of the company is on the board of 3CDC.
The Enquirer never gives 3CDC’s critics a chance to discuss their perspectives and they have failed to report on how much garage revenue city council gave up in the Fountain Square deal. Apparently the loss of a $100 million revenue stream isn’t newsworthy to Margaret Buchanan’s Enquirer.