Advertisement
Regarding "Reporter Who Told Story of 2004 Vote Thievery Hushed by Mainstream Media Mogul by Greg Szymanski," the line "Koehler has developed his own column, separate and apart from hisediting duties. Today, he’s published in 12 different newspapers,including The Chicago Tribune" is not true.
The Chicago Tribune does not publish Koehler's column. The last published essay by Koehler in the Tribune was November 15, 2002 and the paper published the following letter to the editor by him on May 16, 2005:
The deafening sound of media silence
The Chicago Tribune has done a lot of tough, courageous investigative work over the years, and is a paper I have long admired and relied on for my news. So my disappointment at its lack of coverage of the well-documented irregularities in the 2000 and 2004 elections, and its unconcern about the security of future elections, is profound indeed.
This disappointment turned into active dismay after public editor Don Wycliff chose to write a column ("When winning isn't everything," Commentary, April 28) dismissing the concerns of a substantial number of readers who had e-mailed the Tribune recommending it publish a column I had written, "The Silent Scream of Numbers," discussing those irregularities and reporting on a national election-reform conference in Nashville last month.
Wycliff's column placed anyone deeply concerned that massive election fraud had occurred on Nov. 2 on a moral plane beneath Richard Nixon, who swallowed his narrow defeat in 1960 without noticeable protest.
Many experts have sounded the alarm about unverifiable electronic voting and U.S. Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.) has written a 102-page report on the massive disenfranchisement that occurred in inner-city and college precincts in Ohio on Nov. 2. But despite that, in an e-mail to me Wycliff said the issue would only be worth media attention if John Kerry "and all the other folks who had the most to gain from the election" were crying foul, not ordinary citizens.
Of all my objections to what Wycliff has written on this issue, both in his column and to me personally, I find this contention the most dispiriting. It reflects the wrongheaded, "horse race" coverage of elections the media have shoved down our throats for as long as I can remember.
Wycliff even used a sports analogy, pointing out that "it's not the pregame prognostication and expert opinions that count, but the numbers on the scoreboard after the contest has actually been played."
The Bush team won; the Kerry team lost. And the voters must be the equivalent of sports fans then, either jubilant or disappointed when the game is over, but couch potatoes either way, not participants.
Anyone else just a little bit offended?
As one of the hundred or so readers who responded to the column put it:
"Winning isn't everything, but fair elections are everything."
In my column, I quoted exit-poll analyst Jonathan Simon:
"When the autopsy of our democracy is performed, it is my belief that media silence will be given as the primary cause of death."
The Chicago Tribune does not publish Koehler's column. The last published essay by Koehler in the Tribune was November 15, 2002 and the paper published the following letter to the editor by him on May 16, 2005:
The deafening sound of media silence
The Chicago Tribune has done a lot of tough, courageous investigative work over the years, and is a paper I have long admired and relied on for my news. So my disappointment at its lack of coverage of the well-documented irregularities in the 2000 and 2004 elections, and its unconcern about the security of future elections, is profound indeed.
This disappointment turned into active dismay after public editor Don Wycliff chose to write a column ("When winning isn't everything," Commentary, April 28) dismissing the concerns of a substantial number of readers who had e-mailed the Tribune recommending it publish a column I had written, "The Silent Scream of Numbers," discussing those irregularities and reporting on a national election-reform conference in Nashville last month.
Wycliff's column placed anyone deeply concerned that massive election fraud had occurred on Nov. 2 on a moral plane beneath Richard Nixon, who swallowed his narrow defeat in 1960 without noticeable protest.
Many experts have sounded the alarm about unverifiable electronic voting and U.S. Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.) has written a 102-page report on the massive disenfranchisement that occurred in inner-city and college precincts in Ohio on Nov. 2. But despite that, in an e-mail to me Wycliff said the issue would only be worth media attention if John Kerry "and all the other folks who had the most to gain from the election" were crying foul, not ordinary citizens.
Of all my objections to what Wycliff has written on this issue, both in his column and to me personally, I find this contention the most dispiriting. It reflects the wrongheaded, "horse race" coverage of elections the media have shoved down our throats for as long as I can remember.
Wycliff even used a sports analogy, pointing out that "it's not the pregame prognostication and expert opinions that count, but the numbers on the scoreboard after the contest has actually been played."
The Bush team won; the Kerry team lost. And the voters must be the equivalent of sports fans then, either jubilant or disappointed when the game is over, but couch potatoes either way, not participants.
Anyone else just a little bit offended?
As one of the hundred or so readers who responded to the column put it:
"Winning isn't everything, but fair elections are everything."
In my column, I quoted exit-poll analyst Jonathan Simon:
"When the autopsy of our democracy is performed, it is my belief that media silence will be given as the primary cause of death."