Several reporters spent yesterday catching up with the story of the evacuation of Gartley Hall at the UH Manoa campus which you read here yesterday. The story was still developing as growing concerns prompted a call to vacate the building immediately rather than allowed an extended Friday deadline.
The Star-Bulletin’s Craig Gima has the best story this morning with many details of the Gartley situation, and Dennis Oda’s basement photo completes a fine package.
On the other end of the spectrum, K-5 News at 9 p.m. ran a story last night but didn’t even send a crew for video of the building, instead relying on Google Earth for its graphic. Sort of drive-by reporting, I suppose.
Then there’s the puzzling story of the day.
The headline on a Star-Bulletin story by Gary Kubota reads:
Ethics issues could block private hiring of furloughed teachers
The first paragraph sets out the story:
Parents said a state ethics opinion poses a major hurdle in hiring teachers privately to instruct their students during the 17 days when Hawaii public schools are on furlough because of budget cuts.
But no details follow about the ethics opinion, its substance, or how it applies to this situation. All is says is that groups were advised of the opinion, whatever it says. At least in the online edition, there’s no link to the opinion, no summary of the opinion, not even any paraphrasing of the opinion.
We do get to read reactions to the opinion we know nothing about.
The Ethics Commission does have phones, and is a short walk from the Star-Bulletin newsroom, so I’m sure Kubota would have included this information in his story.
I have to conclude that this is a case of editors gone wild, slashing the substance of a story to fit into one of those small holes in the SB tabloid-style print edition.
One interesting side note. School Superintendent Pat Hamamoto has been a very visible and vocal advocate for her school system during the ongoing budget battle this year, refusing to simply line up with Governor Lingle’s game plan and instead continuing to push back against the most draconian cuts. And she’s been backed up by members of the Board of Education who have also kept telling us about the importance of education.
The University of Hawaii, on the other hand, has had little public advocacy and less publish push back from its leadership team. UH has been hurt by the transition to a new president and relatively new top administrators, who have been unable or unwilling to stand up for higher education the way that the DOE has so aggressively fought for the funds needed to serve their students.
It’s an interesting contrast.
And so it goes on this Wednesday morning.
Discover more from i L i n d
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
I agree that it is frustrating to read the story about the ethics opinion and be provided with no details on the opinion.
I understand that there is a “pat-ourselves-on-the-back” Society of Professional Journalists.
Is there any group that also dings poor reporting/editing/headlines?
In the Midweek Dan Boylan has a good article saying essentially it’s time for UH professors to make the sacrifices the public school teachers are making. And he can say this because he’s one of them, might not make him any new friends on campus, but kudos to him for making and taking a stand on the issue.
There has certainly been more press coverage of DOE spats with the Gov than about UH relationships. But that might say more about the tactics of “going public” and what the press likes to cover than the hearts and minds of UH leadership vis a vis DOE leadership.
Does the data suggest that the DOE tactics have been substantially more effective in protecting the DOE budget at the Legislature and with the Governor than UH’s approach? I don’t know the answer, but the numbers should be available in the State Budget Bill and subsequent restrictions. It would also be interesting to see in black and white how both have fared relative to other agencies.
And nothing against the DOE, they did what they had to do to settle and balance their budget. But isn’t it the case that they cut teacher salaries more than UH has proposed to cut its faculty? And didn’t the DOE agree to reduce the teachers’ work schedule ALL out of instructional days while UH is proposing a methodology with NO reduction in instructional days? That seems contrary to your assertion that the DOE is fighting more aggressively to serve their students than UH leadership?
p.s. Dan Boylan’s column mentioned by a previous commenter is at:
http://www.midweek.com/content/columns/mostlypolitics_article/uh_profs_need_a_lesson_in_humility/