The newsroom at the Oklahoman has always been an exception to the rule when it came to paid volunteer time for political campaigns. That is the case here as well. Where's the beef? I don't see it.

Jobs were not threatened. Advancement in the workplace was not promised. It was an option. Plain and simple. You guys are really grasping at straws.

I understand perfectly well. That's why I mentioned the 2 percent cut. Learn to read and stop yelling. You may have cardiac arrest.



I wasn't aware of the plan, but if so, welcome to the club. Numerous state agencies are already doing these. In other states, people are getting laid off. Join the club. And I have had no commentary about Mr. Couch, so I don't know what you're talking about.



Oh, wow. A whole year. Well state government has had one since 1992. I feel so sorry for you. And wow, eliminating jobs by attrition. Again, you have it so rough considering the fact this happens everywhere else.



You're so melodramatic. I don't suppose you read the New York Times, Washington Post, etc., but the amount of press our city has generated in the last few years, mostly due to MAPS, is staggering.

Quite contrary to your angry, hysterical post, I'm sure OKC will get very, very good press for becoming one of the elite destinations for rowing in the United States, for having the only wind-power-generated transit system, for having a world-class destination park, etc. We know this will happen because we've received great publicity for less. And the angle will be that we had the vision to do this despite the recession.

Now run along now, JustTheFacts. I can see with your FOUR WHOLE POSTS on this board you are a troll who has been sent here to politick. The regular users of this site aren't so dumb as to fall for your flimsy arguments. We know you're just another NTM troll.


First of all, it is childish to call people you do not know nasty names like Trolls and to state they are doing it for a reason they are NOT.

I found this thread because my "college aged - living on her own" daughter - was upset recently when it took so long for the police to respond to her 911 call for a hit and run done to her with her infant son on the side that was smashed in by the other driver. I explained to her how short we are in safety personnel and to not be mad at the officer working the call. I will be HAPPY to get the incident number my daughter was given by the officer who eventually came out on the call since you doubt my veracity.

As we talked, I mentioned that I was upset that the city would ask for more money for dessert (MAPS3) basically when the city can't pay for dinner (basic city cervices).

I am still waiting for police to arrive on several 911 calls over the last 3 years that NO one came out for period!

She wanted to know more and so I began to look for articles on both sides of the fence for her to make her own choice.

That is when I stumbled on this site and registered so I could voice MY opinion just as I assume you voice yours and not someone else's opinion as you claim I am doing.

I never claimed that the City had it worse than anyone else so don't try and put words I did not express in your reply. Again, I am saying you don't pay for dessert before you can afford dinner.

You, appear to be the hysterical, angry, melodramatic one who adds statements not made by me.

I have actually made more than 4 posts as you claim but since I just found this site today and registered today - my posts do not post until a moderator has time to review them and approve.

You were a beginner on here one time also. Everyone who posts here starts out with zero posts. So are you saying ALL newbies are Trolls sent to "politick" (your spelling) and ALL newbies are NTM trolls?

Your snarly, sarcastic name calling does not make your points better. And actually we are supposed to be respectful of each others right to voice an opinion and to not be always agree with each other on this forum so perhaps you should read as you chided me to do.

I certainly hope you are nicer to people in person who have a different opinion than you.

So please get your facts straight before you sling mud on your neighbors.

Dear JustTheFactsPlease,

Thanks for registering at OKCTalk! We are glad you have chosen to be a part of our community and we hope you enjoy your stay.

To better understand the features and permissions available, you probably want to review the Member Group feature chart.

Home (http://www.okctalk.com/feature_chart.php)

If you read the New User registration page, then you know as a new member your first 5 posts require moderator approval. Normally this just takes a few minutes and at the most a couple of hours. Unfortunately this is required because of the large amount of SPAM posted on message boards. If you would like to bypass this requirement, you can make a one-time donation of $4.95 to get promoted up to a Participating Member and start posting away.

I try very hard to keep OKCTalk clean , informative, and fun for everyone. Your comments and suggestions are always welcome.

First of all, it is childish to call people you do not know nasty names like Trolls and to state they are doing it for a reason they are NOT.

I found this thread because my "college aged - living on her own" daughter - was upset recently when it took so long for the police to respond to her 911 call for a hit and run done to her with her infant son on the side that was smashed in by the other driver. I explained to her how short we are in safety personnel and to not be mad at the officer working the call. I will be HAPPY to get the incident number my daughter was given by the officer who eventually came out on the call since you doubt my veracity.

As we talked, I mentioned that I was upset that the city would ask for more money for dessert (MAPS3) basically when the city can't pay for dinner (basic city cervices).

I am still waiting for police to arrive on several 911 calls over the last 3 years that NO one came out for period!

She wanted to know more and so I began to look for articles on both sides of the fence for her to make her own choice.

That is when I stumbled on this site and registered so I could voice MY opinion just as I assume you voice yours and not someone else's opinion as you claim I am doing.

I never claimed that the City had it worse than anyone else so don't try and put words I did not express in your reply. Again, I am saying you don't pay for dessert before you can afford dinner.

You, appear to be the hysterical, angry, melodramatic one who adds statements not made by me.

I have actually made more than 4 posts as you claim but since I just found this site today and registered today - my posts do not post until a moderator has time to review them and approve.

You were a beginner on here one time also. Everyone who posts here starts out with zero posts. So are you saying ALL newbies are Trolls sent to "politick" (your spelling) and ALL newbies are NTM trolls?

Your snarly, sarcastic name calling does not make your points better. And actually we are supposed to be respectful of each others right to voice an opinion and to not be always agree with each other on this forum so perhaps you should read as you chided me to do.

I certainly hope you are nicer to people in person who have a different opinion than you.

So please get your facts straight before you sling mud on your neighbors.

Dear JustTheFactsPlease,

Thanks for registering at OKCTalk! We are glad you have chosen to be a part of our community and we hope you enjoy your stay.

To better understand the features and permissions available, you probably want to review the Member Group feature chart.

Home (http://www.okctalk.com/feature_chart.php)

If you read the New User registration page, then you know as a new member your first 5 posts require moderator approval. Normally this just takes a few minutes and at the most a couple of hours. Unfortunately this is required because of the large amount of SPAM posted on message boards. If you would like to bypass this requirement, you can make a one-time donation of $4.95 to get promoted up to a Participating Member and start posting away.

I try very hard to keep OKCTalk clean , informative, and fun for everyone. Your comments and suggestions are always welcome.

I stand by my comments. Thank you for your concern.

I'm going to note that you suggest you have no agenda here other than the alleged poor police response time your daughter experienced. That implies that you have no connection to public safety in OKC. If I'm wrong, please clarify.

I stand by my comments. Thank you for your concern.

I'm going to note that you suggest you have no agenda here other than the alleged poor police response time your daughter experienced. That implies that you have no connection to public safety in OKC. If I'm wrong, please clarify.

That and my own personal issues with the lag times I have experienced over the years as well.

For the police to NEVER show up on a call where someone keeps driving through your yard over and over acting like they are going to smash your home; or waiting 2 hours for police to respond to a man in the apt parking lot waving a gun saying he is gonna shoot someone; or not responding to a fireworks in a dry field next to an apt complex that did catch fire 30 minutes later when no police came to stop the jerks using fireworks in a reckless manner. These are but a few of the issues I have dealt with in the last three years.

For this and all the calls not handled in a timely manner I am opposed to paying for Frills until we can pay for needs. I have no ties with Police or Fire or their unions.

But I am informed and I am active in my community and I care deeply that OKC does the right thing.

I am not mad at anyone who has a different opinion, I do not however appreciate being called names I am not.

That and my own personal issues with the lag times I have experienced over the years as well.

For the police to NEVER show up on a call where someone keeps driving through your yard over and over acting like they are going to smash your home; or waiting 2 hours for police to respond to a man in the apt parking lot waving a gun saying he is gonna shoot someone; or not responding to a fireworks in a dry field next to an apt complex that did catch fire 30 minutes later when no police came to stop the jerks using fireworks in a reckless manner. These are but a few of the issues I have dealt with in the last three years.

For this and all the calls not handled in a timely manner I am opposed to paying for Frills until we can pay for needs. I have no ties with Police or Fire or their unions.

But I am informed and I am active in my community and I care deeply that OKC does the right thing.

I am not mad at anyone who has a different opinion, I do not however appreciate being called names I am not.

You would find that I'm a nice person. But I admit I'm jaded to all of these brand-new posters arriving two days before a major vote all using the same, tired arguments. Yes, these people are trolls, and with your sudden arrival, it seemed like you were just working the Sunday afternoon shift.

And I'm certain you're a really swell guy yourself, but you may want to check the content of your preceding post, and the snarky tone you used. The one in which you suggested I called Jim Couch a liar and hadn't heard of the term budget cut, when I had addressed it in my post.

So Mike, where were you when the Washington Post let all of their workers off for the inauguration?



FYI, they pretty much shut DC down during the inauguration due to traffic and no parking. It doesn't have anything to do with their political party. Public transportation is strained to the max with the influx of tourists and no parking makes public transportation essential. The feds also shut down because the employees probably wouldn't even be able to get to work or home without adding many hours to their commute. Plus, with that many people to manage, they don't need more crowds for security/safety purposes.

This is a long thread and I read it but am sure I missed a lot. I was wondering if someone could break it down for me, simply, so that I can understand how the P & F hope to make their lot better if MAPS is voted down.

What is sounds like, to me, is that F & P are worried that the money that could go towards increasing staffing will get sucked into a black hole so that they won't get any funding if MAPS is passed. Is that right?

If MAPS is defeated, how does that help the F & P get additional funding, or is that the argument? What would need to happen at that point? How long would it take and how likely would it be that the people of OKC would vote extra funding for the F & P if MAPS is defeated?

I am not trying to be belligerent and have sort of been staying out of the discussion because both sides are so angry. My inclination is to agree with Kevin that the F & P definitely need a permanent funding source. I apologize if these seem like stupid questions but there is just so much anger that I was hoping someone would just lay out the issue, simple and sweet. Thanks.

You would find that I'm a nice person. But I admit I'm jaded to all of these brand-new posters arriving two days before a major vote all using the same, tired arguments. Yes, these people are trolls, and with your sudden arrival, it seemed like you were just working the Sunday afternoon shift.

And I'm certain you're a really swell guy yourself, but you may want to check the content of your preceding post, and the snarky tone you used. The one in which you suggested I called Jim Couch a liar and hadn't heard of the term budget cut, when I had addressed it in my post.

I can concede some when warranted it was the "No pay cut. No layoffs. Not even furloughs." comment you made which, Mr. Couch, himself said IS going to happen that made me feel like you were saying he is a liar. I apologize. I am a very nice person and this whole thing is upsetting. I do not like to see people hurt and people are already hurting and this just seems to be so wrong to do at this moment when Mr. Couch has said the city is cutting Police and Fire another 3 million plus but wants the taxpayers to pay multi millions for a new park, etc. at this time. I think we should take care of what we have and try the tax in a year or so when things are better if they are better right then.

It just is wrong. He has been meeting with City employees for a couple of weeks telling them there will be job cuts/layoffs, there is already pay cuts starting January 1, 2010, and he said furloughs would happen as well.

This was on Craigslist:

--maps hell no- (http://oklahomacity.craigslist.org/rnr/1494645764.html)

If we are so broke from sales tax losses - why are we adding a bigger sales tax to go deeper in the hole?

I can concede some when warranted it was the "No pay cut. No layoffs. Not even furloughs." comment you made which, Mr. Couch, himself said IS going to happen that made me feel like you were saying he is a liar. I apologize. I am a very nice person and this whole thing is upsetting. I do not like to see people hurt and people are already hurting and this just seems to be so wrong to do at this moment when Mr. Couch has said the city is cutting Police and Fire another 3 million plus but wants the taxpayers to pay multi millions for a new park, etc. at this time. I think we should take care of what we have and try the tax in a year or so when things are better if they are better right then.

It just is wrong. He has been meeting with City employees for a couple of weeks telling them there will be job cuts/layoffs, there is already pay cuts starting January 1, 2010, and he said furloughs would happen as well.

This was on Craigslist:

--maps hell no- (http://oklahomacity.craigslist.org/rnr/1494645764.html)

If we are so broke from sales tax losses - why are we adding a bigger sales tax to go deeper in the hole?

I'm trying not to be snarky, but I don't recommend Craigslist as a place to form opinions on public policy.

I'll take you at your word that you really care about your city. I want to offer a point for you to think about.

The reason our city is leading the nation right now, and why we have the lowest unemployment, is largely due to us investing in ourselves, even when we were hurting.

The downturn in city revenues is temporary. All economists agree on that, and I'm sure, if you're being honest, you would agree on that as well.

The point to consider about MAPS is that we are already paying this tax now. It is not an additional tax hardship being suggested.

But most importantly, we need to be planning for the next ten years. We cannot afford to put off investing in our future just because we are experiencing a temporary downturn.

It is true that our public employees pay is tied to city revenues. Economists are saying we need to pass MAPS 3 so we can see continued growth in our city revenues. This will ultimately help all city employees.

Conversely, if our city were to decline, or lose momentum, a more protracted downturn would put more pressure on city workers' wages and staffing.

You are passionate in your argument, and it seems to "make sense," but it is shortsighted.

Our passing MAPS does not diminish our ability to find funding sources for public safety. It's a separate issue related to infrastructure and growth.

We cannot afford to stop the momentum we've worked hard for.

That is as nice as I can be. I hope you reconsider your position.

But please remember that people here were very civil prior to the sudden arrival of anti-MAPS politickers and we look forward to them leaving for good after Tuesday.

The newsroom at the Oklahoman has always been an exception to the rule when it came to paid volunteer time for political campaigns. That is the case here as well. Where's the beef? I don't see it.

Jobs were not threatened. Advancement in the workplace was not promised. It was an option. Plain and simple. You guys are really grasping at straws.
Actually, it's not just "those guys." I've already said my say about the Oklahoman ... see Doug Dawgz Blog: Quo Vadis, Oklahoman? (http://dougdawg.blogspot.com/2009/11/quo-vadis-oklahoman.html) ... some bad stuff has happened internally and the part that the public CAN see isn't very pretty, in my opinion. Reporting hasn't been complete, stories haven't been assigned.

Doug, I know your issues with the Oklahoman regarding coverage of MAPS. Do you feel that giving non-journalist employees pay for volunteering on this campaign as part of a routine and ongoing practice is unethical? I was a journalism major and I don't see the problem.

If the DOK had said it was OK to go volunteer for an organization campaigning about MAPS, no matter which side of the issue it is, then their stance would have been OK. However, when the DOK supports MAPS then suggests its employees campaign FOR MAPS, thats not right. Its like endorsing a political candidate then telling your employees to go campaign for that same candidate. They goofed, they seem to have retracted it. I don't see the harm done.

FWIW, if a company provides for employees to do community related volunteer activities as a paid perk, that's fine by me.

Also FWIW, how that paid perk is used ought to be left to the employee?
SDo yeah, in my opinion, the perk should be available to staffer bill no matter which way staffer bill intends to vote.

Likewise, if staffer bill preferred to request to go pull weeds at a scout camp, whether BSA, GSUSA, Campfire, or Rainbows for Life etc., and not go do something on either side of MAPs, that should be permissible as well.

I guess I missed the part where DOK told staff you can ONLY use the perk for YES work? Was that actually the directive, or was that merely a presumption by some?

The original post on this thread stated there was a memo sent encouraging employees to use their paid volunteer time to campaign FOR MAPS. Later information said the memo was retracted. Unless there was more info, the DOK goofed, retracted themselves and life goes on.

Doug, I know your issues with the Oklahoman regarding coverage of MAPS. Do you feel that giving non-journalist employees pay for volunteering on this campaign as part of a routine and ongoing practice is unethical? I was a journalism major and I don't see the problem.
Only if the same courtesy was extended to the opposing side, but if not, yes, that's what I think.

I find it rather humorous that those opposed to MAPS3 are complaining about a few companies paying thjeir employees (volunteers) to campaign for it's passage, when 2 of the most vocal on the Not This Maps side (Police and Fire Union Presidents) are on the City payroll.

I find it rather humorous that those opposed to MAPS3 are complaining about a few companies paying thjeir employees (volunteers) to campaign for it's passage, when 2 of the most vocal on the Not This Maps side (Police and Fire Union Presidents) are on the City payroll.

What's so humorous about it? The Union presidents, be they right or wrong, are doing the job they are expected to do as union presidents by campaigning for or against MAPS3. The police dept and fire departments are not issuing orders or memos to its employees to actively campaign while on the job.

The Daily Oklahoman, however, is telling its employees that they can get paid volunteer leave, but ONLY if they volunteer to campaign for MAPS3.

I've also seen it mentioned in this thread that the Oklahoman withdrew this memo, but I've not seen this documented anywhere. does anyone have a link?

d volunteer leave, but ONLY if they volunteer to campaign for MAPS3.

I've also seen it mentioned in this thread that the Oklahoman withdrew this memo, but I've not seen this documented anywhere. does anyone have a link?

Dude the link is already posted in the thread. Go back a couple of pages and read it.

Dude the link is already posted in the thread. Go back a couple of pages and read it.

I did. I don't see anywhere on there that says the Oklahoman withdrew the memo, just that the NIC dept of the Oklahoman won't do it.

I did. I don't see anywhere on there that says the Oklahoman withdrew the memo, just that the NIC dept of the Oklahoman won't do it.

You're not looking closely enough. The Gazette updated its story. It has a link to a memo from Kelly Dyer. It's on the thread.

You're not looking closely enough. The Gazette updated its story. It has a link to a memo from Kelly Dyer. It's on the thread.

I don't know how much more closely I can look at it.

The only thing from Kelly Dyer Fry on there is that the NIC will not participate.

The Daily Oklahoman, however, is telling its employees that they can get paid volunteer leave, but ONLY if they volunteer to campaign for MAPS3.

I've also seen it mentioned in this thread that the Oklahoman withdrew this memo, but I've not seen this documented anywhere. does anyone have a link?

Look at posting #13 in the thread. They realized it was wrong and they withdrew the memo several days ago.

Look at posting #13 in the thread. They realized it was wrong and they withdrew the memo several days ago.

And again, the only thing that post 13 has is a statement that the NIC department of the Daily Oklahoman would not be participating, nothing about the memo being withdrawn.

The Daily Oklahoman, however, is telling its employees that they can get paid volunteer leave, but ONLY if they volunteer to campaign for MAPS3.

I've also seen it mentioned in this thread that the Oklahoman withdrew this memo, but I've not seen this documented anywhere. does anyone have a link?

OK, you're correct about the withdrawal issue and NIC. However, the original memo simply points out that this time is available and asks if anyone wishes to campaign for MAPS, they can use the paid volunteer time to do so. It doesn't state that if they wish to campaign for the "no" side that they CANNOT use this time. In looking at that, the DOK probably shouldn't have sent the memo but its not too out of line, IMO.

I guess I missed the part where DOK told staff you can ONLY use the perk for YES work? Was that actually the directive, or was that merely a presumption by some?

It is a presumption. The memo says nothing about only being able to do this for the YES side. It's simply a matter of the Oklahoman promoting the opportunity because they support MAPS, and reminding employees of the paid volunteer time option. It's ridiculous to be upset that this "endorses" MAPS and therefore is bad. It's obviously no secret they are in favor of MAPS as a company. If they had said you can only campaign for the YES side, that would be a problem, but that was never stated in any way shape or form.


The Daily Oklahoman, however, is telling its employees that they can get paid volunteer leave, but ONLY if they volunteer to campaign for MAPS3.

WRONG.



I've also seen it mentioned in this thread that the Oklahoman withdrew this memo, but I've not seen this documented anywhere. does anyone have a link?

That is also wrong. They sent an email reminding the newsroom staff (the journalists) that--as always--they are not eligible for this benefit.


the original memo simply points out that this time is available and asks if anyone wishes to campaign for MAPS, they can use the paid volunteer time to do so. It doesn't state that if they wish to campaign for the "no" side that they CANNOT use this time.

Exactly.

It is a presumption. The memo says nothing about only being able to do this for the YES side. It's simply a matter of the Oklahoman promoting the opportunity because they support MAPS, and reminding employees of the paid volunteer time option. It's ridiculous to be upset that this "endorses" MAPS and therefore is bad. It's obviously no secret they are in favor of MAPS as a company. If they had said you can only campaign for the YES side, that would be a problem, but that was never stated in any way shape or form.



WRONG.



“As we have said all along, OPUBCO (Oklahoma Publishing Company) employees should feel free to vote as they please next Tuesday, but if you are in favor of MAPS 3 and would like an opportunity to earn paid Volunteer Leave to support this initiative, this is a worthy opportunity for you!”

Show me the part that says you get to take advantage of this "worthy opportunity" if you are not in favor of MAPS3 and would like to volunteer for NTM.

It doesn't say you can't either. It's an ongoing policy, not a one-time thing just for MAPS. If the policy covers volunteering for YFM, it covers volunteering for the NO campaign.

It doesn't say you can't either. It's an ongoing policy, not a one-time thing just for MAPS. If the policy covers volunteering for YFM, it covers volunteering for the NO campaign.

you actually expect anyone to believe that?

OK, you're correct about the withdrawal issue and NIC. However, the original memo simply points out that this time is available and asks if anyone wishes to campaign for MAPS, they can use the paid volunteer time to do so. It doesn't state that if they wish to campaign for the "no" side that they CANNOT use this time. In looking at that, the DOK probably shouldn't have sent the memo but its not too out of line, IMO.

"not too out of line" . Is that like being "sort of pregnant"? The memo seems to carry the implied expectation that employees use their time to campaign for maps.

for those the question why we don't have more police and fire with the passing of maps 1 and our "growth" ..... did you ever think that if maps 1 didn't pass ... that OKC would have far less police and fire then we do now????

BoulderSooner- The passage of previous maps has absolutely nothing to do with staffing levels. The only benefit public safety has seen is in the form of use tax monies for capital improvements such as firetrucks, police cars, etc. The staffing requirements are actually set for the fire dept. at 948 firefighters from the 3/4 cent sales tax of 1989. Which by the way the city has tried twice to drop below this number and the firefighters have had to file suit to keep these positions. So this issue is not a new one and has been ongoing for quite some time. Try again!

"not too out of line" . Is that like being "sort of pregnant"? The memo seems to carry the implied expectation that employees use their time to campaign for maps.

The memo didn't carry any implied expectation. It outright said it, what it did NOT do was say they can't use the time for anti-MAPS volunteer work. It was a poor choice on the DOK's part, but it wasn't something to boil them in hot oil over.

The memo didn't carry any implied expectation. It outright said it, what it did NOT do was say they can't use the time for anti-MAPS volunteer work. It was a poor choice on the DOK's part, but it wasn't something to boil them in hot oil over.

I think we're on the same page about this. I think the impied expectation was that it was only to campaign for maps. The ommision of campaigning for the other side wasn't accidental, in my mind.

I think we're on the same page about this. I think the impied expectation was that it was only to campaign for maps. The ommision of campaigning for the other side wasn't accidental, in my mind.

Probably not.

Probably not.

I think you might be way too charitable.

when did maps 1 get passed? we are 50 people LESS than in 1998. the only resaon we are werewe are is cause of the 1989 tax of 200 additional fireifhtgers adn we are at teh number. maps 1 really ahsnt done that much tio help get jobs so once agian the yes people are misinformed. i am sorry that you yes people are less eduicated when it comes to the real matter of the fd staffing. maybe one day you will learn. no wait you wont.

you actually expect anyone to believe that?

Not everyone has a crippling distrust in government and business.

The only problem I have with the Oklahoman giving paid leave to campaign for Yes on Maps (if it's campaigning ONLY for yes) is that as a news organization, they should be neutral. I mean the owners, etc. can and should support whatever they want, but it just makes the paper seem bias (imagine that) and non objective. A restaurant, car dealership, clothing store, textile factory, whatever - cool. But not a journalistic institution.

Isn't that kind of pointless when the company's position is more than obvious?

And there is no proof that they were denying the same paid volunteer time to NO campaigners.

Well that's what I was wondering, jbrown. I mean if both the Yes and the No sides are allowed paid volunteer time, then I see nothing wrong.

But as far as the company's position, I would expect a news organization to be, at least on the surface, impartial. Everyone and their dog knows the Oklahoman's position on Maps, but the TYPE of company the Oklahoman is makes all the difference. But then on second thought, news papers endorse political candidates all the time, so maybe I'm off base with my concerns.

I hope Maps3 passes, btw.

The only reason this thread didn't stop at about 8 postings is because its the Daily Oklahoman. If it had been the Gazette or Channel 9 doing the same thing, there wouldn't have been any significant concern. This is a non-issue.

The only reason this thread has been so long is that there are some who see this as "so what". The clear expectation of the paper was to put their workers to the use of one side and encouraged them by giving them paid time off. To those of us who have lived here long enough to know what the joklahoman is all about, it's no suprise. It is suprising to see people defend it just because it supports their cause.

I'm just surprised anyone expects newspapers, which are privately owned and for-profit businesses, to do anything other than what they want. The history of journalism in the US demonstrates that that has been the case from the beginning. To get fair and balanced, you need a second newspaper with a different point of view. I would like to point out, however, that all the major newspapers in Oklahoma City have come out with editorials supporting MAPS.

The only reason this thread has been so long is that there are some who see this as "so what". The clear expectation of the paper was to put their workers to the use of one side and encouraged them by giving them paid time off. To those of us who have lived here long enough to know what the joklahoman is all about, it's no suprise. It is suprising to see people defend it just because it supports their cause.

I would feel the same way if they were on the other side. It's a non-issue.