Recently in Print Category

It's difficult to know exactly where Shane Goodman, editor of CityView, stands based on a quick read of his latest editorial. On one hand, he seems to think there are too many women staffing news desks around the land, and that their very presence is leading to him being force-fed soft news stories on throw pillows. On the other, he wants readers to enjoy the publication's latest soft news piece on how women can get and keep a man -- which is, ironically, written by what must be one of the last few male reporters on the CityView roster.

His primary dig seems to be directed to The Des Moines Register, but there is little need for me to start defending that publication's honor. Rekha Basu, a seasoned journalist on the DMR staff that I greatly admire, already took care of business in that respect.

What's important to note is that CityView promotes itself as central Iowa's "alternative" weekly. Basically, CityView wants you to think that it is an alternative to what is customary and conventional. Viewing Goodman's column in that light, several things come into focus.

1) The column is an apology to (like-minded male) readers. He is simply saying, "Damn it, I don't want to run this useless fluff, but these silly women have taken up reading and writing and forced my hand."

2) Goodman has a very low opinion of his own female employees and readers. He wrote, "Only a third of our staff at the office is men..." and "...occasional static from some females about not having enough news for women." Logically, if his news crew was predominantly women and, at least in his mind's eye, women are only interested in reporting on "hot colors for throw pillows," then it would follow that CityView would offer a more than adequate supply of soft news that would appeal to soft-news-seeking female readers, right?

3) Goodman stereotypes his male readership, possibly in an attempt to remake them in his own image. He wrote, "There's something for all of us guys to learn in the book, too, if we can put down our TV remotes, wrenches and the Sports Illustrated swimsuit edition long enough to soak it in."

I've worked with enough older male journalists and editors to understand the whole hankering for days gone by -- newsrooms filled with male smoke, male obscenities and male flatulence. It was so much easier when the sexes didn't publicly mingle, male reporters covered male policymakers and community leaders, and "skirts" were only good for the occasional scandal. Back then, at least I'm told, reporters felt free to call each other "boobs" or "panty-waists" or even "pussies" for not getting out there and banging some heads together -- well, at least when they weren't sharing a cigar and beer at the country club with those who were overdue for public flogging. 

I also get that it is much more convenient to point to 'chickification' instead of unraveling the news industry's woes of technological advancements, decreased readership, low ad revenues and ever-increasing expenditure costs.

What I get most of all -- and this is mostly due to the wonderful and educational time I've spent with older journalists both male and female -- is that leaders don't scapegoat. Leaders consider all options and, upon having made a thoughtful decision, don't screw it up with public blood- or testosterone-letting.

A new study provides the proof of what many have already known to be true: Restricting the availability of legal abortion services does not reduce the number of women attempting to end unwanted pregnancies. In fact, the survey conducted by the Guttmacher Institute found that abortion occurs at roughly the same rate in regions regardless of legality -- including geographic areas in which access to abortion is severely restricted.

What does appear to make a difference in the overall abortion rate, however, is access to contraception, which the study found had cut abortion rates in half during the last decade.

Worldwide, the rate of unsafe abortion has not decreased at the same pace as that of safe procedures. The estimated global number of safe abortions fell from 25.6 million in 1995 to 21.9 million in 2003, and the rate declined from 20 to 15 per 1,000. In contrast, the estimated number of unsafe abortions changed very little--from 19.9 million in 1995 to 19.7 million in 2003.

But the study is also quick to point out that the only thing that is truly accomplished by more restrictive laws regarding abortion is a higher maternal death rate. 

Pregnancy termination is a universal practice: It occurs in all parts of the world--east and west, developed and developing, rich and poor--and among women of all types, single and married, adolescent and older. However, in less developed regions that have restrictive abortion laws, many women--especially those who are poor and cannot pay for safe procedures--end unwanted pregnancies themselves, or at the hands of unskilled personnel using unsafe methods. By doing so, they risk their health and even their lives.

More government money has been spent on the cause of sexual abstinence in Texas than any other state, but it still has the third-highest teen birth rate in the country and the highest percentage of teen mothers giving birth more than once.

What else do you need to know? Abstinence-only sexual education has failed our young people.

The abstinence-only approach to sex education, which has cost U.S. taxpayers at least $1.3 billion since 1996, has fallen out of favor in many parts of the country. Half the states had withdrawn from Title V by the time it ended in June. In other recent developments:

• The American Medical Association adopted a report that found that sex education programs based on promoting abstinence produced "no delay of initiating sexual activity, no reduction in the number of sexual partners and no increase in abstinence." The AMA recommended schools use comprehensive sex education instead.
• A study released by Columbia University found that earlier progress in increasing contraceptive use among teens has stalled. Another troubling trend: The CDC reported that birth rates among adolescents ages 15-19 are continuing to increase after years of decline; so are rates of gonorrhea and syphilis infection.

You might think that between health care reform, banking regulation reform, possible cap-and-trade legislation and tweeting that U.S. Sen. Chuck Grassley's dance card is filled. Well, think again.

A press release sent out tonight by his office provides the prepared text of a floor statement offered today in which Grassley takes on a Time Magazine cover article on sustainable agriculture and "cheap food." In the title of the speech Grassley gets to the heart of the matter, describing the article as "skewed."


"I rise today in response to Bryan Walsh's recent article published on August 31, 2009 in TIME Magazine titled 'The Real Cost of Cheap Food.' Unfortunately this is one of the most skewed and one sided articles I've ever had the opportunity to read, particularly in the main stream media. This report was far from objective journalism," reads the first paragraph of the prepared statement.

While I do not 100 percent agree with Grassley's assessment of Walsh's report, I do agree with quite a bit of it. There continues to be a disconnect between consumers and producers of food. That is, a lot of light has been shown on certain agricultural practices that seem unnecessarily cruel to those who don't understand why they are done. For instance, many people are upset that hogs are castrated. Those who are summarily against larger hog operations frequently cite the reason for this practice as a way to quell aggression. The fact is, however, that even "free range" hogs are castrated to prevent "boar taint," or an unpleasant taste that can develop in the meat.

Likewise, ringing of hogs -- placing metal rings in hog snouts to discourage rooting -- is a practice that often occurs with "free range" hogs as well as those in confinement facilities.

What we need is an honest and open conversation about agricultural practices and the hows and whys those practices were developed. It could be that society is willing to pay more for pork that they can verify is produced on a farm that does not practice ringing. It could be that they don't want to pay more. Until we have an honest conversation, however, we'll never know. 

Take the jump to read the full Grassley statement.

Christian Fong, who I believe is the youngest of the Republican hopefuls set for a 2010 gubernatorial primary, issued a press release about an upcoming 17-city tour. While that in and of itself is typical campaign fare, a note at the bottom of the announcement was unusual.

Fong will be making himself available to members of the press prior to each event, but will not be allowing press to attend the actual events.

Todd Dorman, columnist for The Gazette, asked Fong about the decision.

Fong says it's not for his protection, but for his audience.

"If people in the room know that press is sitting there, does it inhibit them from sharing freely with me because they're afraid they're going to get quoted in their local paper?" Fong said.

As Dorman notes, and I feel compelled to reiterate, "Uhmmm... This is Iowa, the first-in-the-nation caucus state."

If there is one thing residents of Iowa (and New Hampshire) are well versed in doing it is attending campaign events, cutting through the noise and developing an opinion based on the policy expressed. For the record, we are also not so dense as to believe that with cameras and tape recorders whirling in the background that what we say is private. Further, if we are compelled to ask a private question of a candidate, we know how to do that as well.

When I first read the sentence, I thought it might be a publicity stunt of sorts. You know, an effort to build a momentum around the tour by painting it with a shroud of mystery. But in this day and age of "citizen journalists," building publicity by way of a traditional press ban has inherent risks. Journalists with ethics, having been informed that they are not welcome, will not attend. They will find other, more productive ways to spend their time -- probably with another statewide candidate that feels he/she can benefit from the message distribution services the press provides.

Those who do attend Fong's closed door events will be the types of reporters who never intended to file a balanced report. Video they shoot or recordings they make will be spliced, information removed from context, and their "reporting" will be the resulting press coverage from the event(s). And, without other, more balanced news reports available, the pieces distributed by the unethical will be afforded more value than their actual worth. 

So, upon a second look, I really have no idea why the Fong campaign has chosen this route. It places a wedge between a little-known candidate for statewide office and the members of the press most likely to provide him a fair public viewing. It alerts residents that the campaign, and possibly the Governor's Office (if he should win it), has already settled on a less-than-transparent mode of operation.

While it is true that Washington-based Burgerville isn't your typical fast food joint, it is also true that its experiences with providing employees affordable health care coverage is something that should make others in the industry stand up and take notice.

The Wall Street Journal reports:

...Four years ago, executives of Burgerville, a regional restaurant chain, agreed to pay at least 90% of health-care premiums for hourly employees who work at least 20 hours a week. Today, the executives say the unusual move has saved money by cutting turnover, boosting sales and improving productivity...

In absorbing more of the costs, Burgerville's annual health-care bill nearly doubled, to $4.1 million from $2.1 million. But company leaders figured the move would boost recruiting and retention...

Executives say the plan paid for itself, and more. Turnover in 2006 plunged to 54%, from 128% in 2005. That's a big deal when it costs an average of $1,700 to replace and train a restaurant worker, according to People Report.

Mr. Harvey believes part-time hourly employees work harder to qualify for more hours, which are assigned on a priority system based on performance. Employees must work 20 hours a week to qualify for the health plan. "As soon as employees realized the value of the health-care benefit, they started to work to win the 20 hours," Mr. Harvey said.

Burgerville says that work ethic translates into higher revenue. Sales rose 11% in 2006 after the plan was implemented, with the average check rising to $7.41 from $6.90. Last year, the average check reached $8.50, and employee turnover fell to 52%. Annual revenue at the chain is about $70 million...