Confused Albuquerque Tea Partiers got help from the Journal today in finding their way to the right tax protest on April 15.

In a article on the front of the Metro & NM section, Journal Assistant Politics Editor (that’s the first time I’ve ever even heard that term at the Journal, much less seen it as a byline) Steve Williams helpfully provides the location of the REAL Tea Party – and debunks the FAKE signs planted all over town by apparent anti-tea party pranksters.

The story, which helpfully included quotes from the organizers and a hefty paragraph outlining Tea Party beliefs, struck some as an oddly-placed valentine to the Tea Party – masked as news.

From today’s SouthWest Organizing project blog post “Taxes Aren’t Charity:”

If there was ever an outright endorsement of a political rally by the Albuquerque Journal, it has to be the “article” this morning making sure that Albuquerque residents know where the anti-tax tea party rally is going to be held tomorrow.

It’s so blatant, it’s laughable:

The Albuquerque Tea Party will hold its second annual tax day rally Thursday.
Organizers want to make sure that those who want to attend go to the right place,…

We sure hope the Journal advertises our next rally in a similar fashion…

SWOP makes a good point. How many organizations can count on getting the Journal’s ear and actually get a whole news story telling readers about their planned rally or event?

The Greater Albuquerque Chamber of Commerce perhaps. Or maybe the New Mexico Oil and Gas Association. But certainly not SWOP, nor any other groups who don’t meet the Journal’s ideological litmus test.

I had been wondering when the Albuquerque Journal would offer up the story that appeared on the front page Monday, Feb. 22 about the mayor and the firefighters’ union.

What initially piqued my interest wasn’t the issue itself, but rather a column the Journal ran on its Op-Ed (opposite editorial) page on Feb. 15, entitled “Berry Gives AFD The Cold Shoulder” (subscription required). That particular column caught my eye because it obviously had not been edited.

The piece was written by a firefighter, who can’t be expected to know journalistic writing style, and the column’s blatant non-adherence to basic Journal style would have made it clear enough that no one at the state’s largest newspaper took the time to proofread and edit it.

But as further proof, a written piece with the exact wording by the same firefighter appeared Feb. 11 in the Weekly Alibi, four days earlier, boxed and labeled “Paid Advertisement.”

This post is not meant to pick on the firefighter’s column, but to question the Journal’s willy nilly publishing of columns, with little or no fact-checking or editing, a practice that turns the Op-Ed page into a “he said-she said” smorgasbord of opinions, without benefit of a reporter or staff columnist to sort it all out.

After noticing the firefighter’s column, I wondered whether the Journal would address the allegations it had made. Monday’s front-page story, as it turns out, did not. What it did explain is that union leaders at City Hall draw government salaries while working full time on union duties, a practice a District Judge ruled legal earlier this month. It then collected comments on the issue from city councilors, who predictably were split along party lines.

It did not address or even make reference to the allegations in the firefighter’s column, two of which warranted at least some reportage. These were that:

• In a time of financial hardship the mayor has hired a “well-known union-busting firm” that the firefighter says has a vested interest in “turning labor against the mayor.”
• The mayor’s chief administrative officer has repeatedly canceled meetings on ways the city can make up its budget shortfall.  Firefighter/columnist Mathew D. Blanchfield claims that his union has “ideas that could cut over a million dollars from (Albuquerque Fire Department’s) budget just this year.” What are those ideas?

This column was thrown at the public, with no follow up or indication of whether the firefighter’s allegations have any traction. Furthermore, it’s hard for readers to follow the story when so much time lapses between random “installments.” Monday’s “Union Work on City’s Dime” appeared a full week after the firefighter’s column (understandably because reporters’ attention necessarily was focused on the Legislature), and the firefighter’s Feb. 15 column was taking issue with a Journal story from Jan. 28.

That the Journal ran the firefighter’s column unedited was clear — even before discovering the identical copy in the Alibi ad — because of basic style errors Op-Ed page editors neglected to fix. The first paragraph referred to the union president as “Mr. Diego Arencon,” and the Journal, unlike The New York Times, does not use the term “Mr.” (And even the Times doesn’t use Mr. on first reference). Use of Mr. is not Journal style, which calls for use of full names on first reference, last name only after that.

In this particular column, an even more egregious example of editing neglect was the fact that the “Berry” in the headline was never explained as Albuquerque Mayor Richard Berry in the column; any reader from out of town likely would have no clue as to who the “Berry” in the headline might be. While there are references to “the mayor”, the first doesn’t appear until the third paragraph. Berry is mentioned only once, and then only as “Berry” as part of a Journal story quote from Jan. 28.

The Journal has traditionally run guest columns on its Op-Ed pages, and up until 2001 I thought it a universal practice. I learned otherwise at a national seminar for editorial writers and editors that year, during which the Journal’s frequent use of lay columns — especially those by politicians — raised the eyebrows of the four other editors and writers in my seminar work group. Before the seminar, each of us had read a week’s worth of the others’ editorial pages in order to critique them. And all four of my colleagues – the editors of the super conservative Augusta (Georgia) Chronicle, the more liberal Toledo (Ohio) Blade, and Canada’s Calgary Herald, along with a capitol bureau chief whose articles appeared throughout Pennsylvania — expressed surprise that the Journal would readily give up so much space to state politicians.

They also wondered why the Journal had no local columnists on its editorial pages – and there were none in the Journal the week we critiqued, even back in those more robust economic times. In contrast, the other papers predominantly featured news columnists, either staff members or from state news services.

Especially impressive was the Op Ed page at the Calgary Herald, described by its editor at the time as a “small-c conservative newspaper, clearly right-leaning, that supports small government, low taxes, fiscal restraint in government spending, free enterprise, a free market and mostly traditional family values,” serving a booming city nearing a million people, dominated by the oil and natural gas industry, plus high-tech financial services, transportation and retailing. I give this background because it parallels somewhat the demographic here in New Mexico and of the state’s largest newspaper.

Yet, its editorial pages couldn’t have been more different. Its Editorial page contained locally produced editorials and letters, and its Op Ed was completely filled with columns, nearly all by staff columnists. There was never more than one column a day by a non-newspaper person, and then only three the entire week. Most were university or government experts, not politicians. They also tended to eschew “think tank” experts.

Occasionally, a clearly marked “Guest Column” appeared on the page, always accompanied by guidelines stating that “Readers are welcome to submit guest columns for consideration. They should be about 700 words and faxed …”

It’s been a while since I’ve seen a “guidelines” box in the  Journal, which also is far from diligent in noting its guest columnists’ qualifications.

Yet a cacophony of special interest columns run on the Journal’s Op-Ed page virtually every day. Several have appeared in recent weeks related to proposed legislation. Some “guest” writers appear quite often, like Terri L. Cole of the Greater Albuquerque Chamber of Commerce (whose frequency we’ve written about before). One line in a recent (Feb. 10) column by Cole and Chamber Board Chairman Del Archuleta, “Restaurant Surtax Has Problems,”  illustrates how comfortable and secure she and other groups are in getting their “side of the story” in print. The column self-explains this point:

Several days ago, as part of our advocacy efforts at the Legislature, the Greater Albuquerque Chamber of Commerce testified in the House Business and Industry Committee in opposition to HB 189 (a surtax on restaurants that would benefit tourism). This may be construed by some as ‘counter intuitive to our mission.’

So, we wanted to ‘explain our vote’ for the benefit of those who might not fully understand our position.

And the Journal let them explain – over nearly 18 column inches. This column in particular seems a better candidate for publication in the Chamber’s weekly full-page ad in the Journal’s Business Outlook. But that costs money, and I’m sure they’d prefer to get in as many free ads –  I mean columns – as possible.

For the record, a quick call to Laura Marrich, editor of the Alibi, revealed that she “wasn’t approached on an editorial level at all” about the firefighter’s column/ad but first saw it when she opened the paper. (Advertising and news at the Alibi are separate departments, as they are at the Journal).

Running columns by guest writers can be a service to Journal readers, especially when they arrive on the editor’s desk current and complete, with no need for heavy editing. But too often at the Journal, columns are just thrown on the page, pretty much telling the readers, “You sort it all out.” As we’ve noted on this site before, many are run lacking even a clear description as to the qualifications and backgrounds of the writers or the groups the writers represent. The reader might not realize, too, that many are written by public relations firms in service of the person getting the byline.

These columns should at least be edited for clarity, background and style. To run them “as is” without basic editing, let alone a cursory fact check, and with no independent follow-up by a staffer, is the same as running as ad, with no added value to the reader. It’s a further swipe at the Journal’s credibility.

Did anyone else find the Albuquerque Journal’s description of the state Environmental Improvement Board as “seven people appointed by a governor” rather jarring?

The description appeared Feb. 20 in an editorial called “Board Overreaching On Global Warming.” The editorial took the position that it “shouldn’t be up to a relatively obscure, appointed board in New Mexico to solve global warming, especially when Congress has yet to decide on how to address that issue nationally.”

The editorial follows a Feb. 7 news story that gives inordinate space to critics of the EIB’s mission generally and each of its current members specifically. I wrote about that story last week. The critics included close Journal allies Terri Cole of the Greater Albuquerque Chamber of Commerce,  oilman Harvey Yates of the State Republican Party and discredited Journal columnist Marita Noon of the Citizen’s Alliance for Responsible Energy,  all of whom complained that the board is stacked with environmentalists and shouldn’t have the right to help decide the state’s environmental policy.

The news story notes that the EIB is responsible for setting statewide regulations enforced by the Environment Department concerning environmental and consumer protection, and for hearing appeals on department decisions.

At the same time, it poses key issues regarding the EIB’s legitimacy as if they are questions whose answers have yet to be determined. From the story:

Simmering below that debate are questions over whether the kind of sweeping change proposed should be up to duly elected legislators instead of an appointed board, and whether there is an unfair environmentalist tilt to the board.

That’s why I thought it was so interesting that the Journal’s editorial Saturday following up on the news story described the EIB as merely “seven people appointed by the governor.”

It seems to me that completely glosses over what happened last week at the legislature, as the Senate roundly rejected Gov. Richardson’s nomination of Neri Holguin, an environmental advocate and political consultant from Albuquerque.

Clearly, the legislature holds sway over the Environmental Improvement Board – no one gets on there unless legislators say so.

Seems like the Journal is ignoring that fact.

And it seems to me that the Journal has gone ahead and answered all those questions it was asking about the legitimacy and makeup of the EIB, too.

Two fascinating Journal stories on New Mexico’s oil and gas industry recently caught my eye – and two more got my attention only after someone else pointed them out (more on those later).

The first was the Sunday A1 article “New Mexico’s Emissions Battle: Some Question Rule Maker’s Environmental Ties.”

What grabbed me first was the prominent front-page picture of oil and gas industry mouthpiece Marita K. Noon of the Citizen’s Alliance for Responsible Energy. We’ve written about her before and questioned why, with her many misrepresentations and her hackneyed prose, the Journal keeps using her as a featured guest opinion writer.

The Journal story is ostensibly about a lawsuit filed by an environmental group aiming to force the state’s Environmental Improvement Board to adopt tougher standards on greenhouse gas emissions in order to help curb global warming. The article makes clear that the state’s oil and gas producers are diametrically opposed to tougher restrictions, which they say will devastate their industry and the state’s economy.

And then the article essentially devolves into an oil and gas-driven scorecard of each member of the Environmental Improvement Board, with Noon and others saying various members should be disqualified for their association with known environmental groups.

We learn that Noon has a special name for EIB chairman Gregory Green, who is a lobbyist for the New Mexico Wildlife Federation, the New Mexico Audubon and the Coalition for Clean Affordable Energy.

She calls him “Greg Green and his Gang Green.”…aw, isn’t that just hilarious? (At least she didn’t call him a watermelon).

The story later quotes Green shrugging off Noon’s name calling with this: “Unfortunately in some circles, that is the level of debate.”

Indeed.

And the story goes on and on, listing each member and their (gasp) environmentalist ties, accompanied by scathing criticism from the oil and gas industry like Republican State Party Chairman Harvey Yates, Jr. (himself an oilman) and Journal cohort Terri Cole of the Greater Albuquerque Chamber of Commerce.

I’m confused – isn’t it called the Environmental Improvement Board? Shouldn’t the people on it be concerned about protecting the environment? It’s not called the Promotion of the Oil and Gas Industry Board, is it?

Noon’s name calling brings me to the second article, “Oil, Gas Group Retools Approach.”

It’s all about how the New Mexico Oil and Gas Association, with whom Noon works closely, recently fired longtime president Bob Gallagher for, well…we’re not sure. The Journal didn’t get an interview with Gallagher on the subject, instead choosing to repeat “Internet rumor mill” gossip that pressure from the Richardson administration led to his firing (a claim the story admitted that a Richardson spokesperson “ridiculed”).

Also, the article paraphrases Gallagher’s interview with some other paper in which he says he was told he damaged the association’s image so badly he could no longer be effective.

We are pretty sure the gas producers are now looking for someone to speak for the industry who’s not quite as “adversarial” as the famously intense and acerbic Gallagher.

That’s because the story’s final quote comes from John Byrom, an NMOGA member who said he wants the association to build new, more positive relations with regulators, legislators and the new governor: “No more finger-pointing and name-calling.”

So, I can’t help but wonder – how does calling someone Gang Green fit into that?

Finally, I share former state Land Commissioner and former U.S. Bureau of Land Management director Jim Baca’s bemusement on his blog, Only in New Mexico, at the Journal’s juxtaposition of two other oil-and-gas related pieces Sunday  – one a guest op-ed and one a news story.

The guest op-ed was from an oil and gas lobbyist decrying the New Mexico Pit Rule that would require the industry to be responsible for keeping the state’s groundwater clean.

The news story was about, writes Baca: …”the very real possibility of a gigantic sinkhole opening up and swallowing part of Carlsbad because of oil and gas related extraction of brine water from the site. The owner of the company that caused it said it was the state’s fault for not having tougher regulations.”

I could comment further, but do I really need to? The mixed messages here really boggle the mind.

Useful information…not rhetoric.

That’s what the two stories about the New Mexico Rail Runner in the Jan. 24 edition of the Albuquerque Journal contained.

The stories came in the wake of the Rio Metro Regional Transit District’s announcement that it will have to end weekend service if the state doesn’t come up with more money to fund it.  Possibilities for lessening the funding gap – but not closing it – include upping the cost of weekend fares or reducing some staffing. (UPDATE: Today the Journal reported that state officials have been able to repurpose $750,000 in federal funds to close the gap, though fares may still be raised and some trains may be cut).

What the stories in the Sunday package conveyed wasn’t all pleasant information, especially from the perspective of Rail Runner fans. But together the stories presented a factual and fair picture of what’s going on financially with the Rail Runner right now.

In reporter Jessica Dyer’s story, “Fares Cover 13% Of The Cost,” we learned that the Rail Runner’s fare revenue lags behind similar, more established rail systems around the country.  But the story also quotes a couple of transportation experts who note that making a profit has never been the point of public transportation systems.

“It (public transportation) exists for the common good, just like roads do,” says Virginia Miller of the American Transportation Association, a Washington, D.C.  advocacy organization.

Yes, that’s an advocacy organization Dyer quotes there.  But the point Miller makes is a valid one  - and one that’s almost always missing in the overheated rhetoric that usually accompanies discussions of the Rail Runner.

Dyer wraps up her news story by giving readers a useful, fact-filled comparison of the Rail Runner with three other similar rail systems across the country.

Now to the more feature-y “Rail Runner Dilemma: Commuters Deplore Possible Loss of Weekend Service,” by Lloyd Jojola, which begins with a lively series of quotes, including comments from an Albuquerque gallery owner who says the train has enhanced his business and several devoted riders who cherish the service.

“I would pay more, if that made a difference,” said one rider.

Jojola’s story digs more into the business community’s view of the Rail Runner and how it has benefitted commerce in Santa Fe and Albuquerque. The story quotes representatives from the Downtown Action Team, the Santa Fe Chamber of Commerce and the Greater Albuquerque Commerce, all of whom say the train has been a boon.

Both stories in the Rail Runner package tackle the significant financial problems the train now faces.

But both stories take pains to represent the good and the bad facts about the controversial train – and that’s a refreshing and much-needed change from what we usually read about the Rail Runner in the Journal.

Did anyone else notice the jarring headline on that Dec. 21 guest opinion piece (subscription required) on the food tax by Voices for Children policy director Bill Jordan?

In it, Jordan argued against the Greater Albuquerque Chamber of Commerce’s position that reviving the food tax would be a good way for state government to make up for a projected shortfall for FY2011. We’ve written about the Journal’s cozy relationship with the Chamber before.

Jordan opined that the shortfall was caused by declining revenues, not increased spending. And he argued that New Mexico now has a plethora of other revenue-raising solutions – other than levying a tax on food- at its disposal to make up that shortfall and prevent the burden from falling disproportionately on the state’s poorest and neediest. The solution lies in a mixture of cuts and revenue boosters, not just more drastic cuts to education and healthcare and not just the food tax endorsed by the Chamber, Jordan said.

That’s what made the headline the Journal chose to put on the piece particularly obtuse.

“Food Tax Nibbles At All-You-Can-Spend Problem,” it read.

Now, we all know you can’t write the headline for your own guest newspaper column. You submit it, and you get what you get from the newspaper gods.

But this headline runs completely counter to Jordan’s basic premise – and it seems like a particularly egregious example of a newspaper injecting its own bias on someone’s guest opinion.

“It’s free, available to every New Mexican and just might save you money on your prescription drugs.”

That’s the lead paragraph of a clear, engaging news story that appeared prominently at the top of the Metro & NM Section on A6 of the Nov. 2 Albuquerque Journal. The story written by Rivkela Brodsky – “Drug Card Offers Discount on Medicine” — clearly reported that the Greater Albuquerque Chamber of Commerce was “rolling out a discount prescription card today that will be accepted at 250 pharmacies throughout the state.”

Her story explained how the card would work, quoted chamber president/CEO Terri Cole and included a pull-out box with at-a-glance information on how to get the card. Early on, it was evident from Brodsky’s story that Cole had met with the Journal’s editorial board to unveil the program.

I must admit I don’t always read stories all the way through, but this was clearly written (and revealed some actual news) and I continued reading all the way to the last leg of copy over six columns, at which point the reader learns that Don Chalmers, president of Don Chalmers Ford and former chamber chairman, and Norm Becker, president and CEO of New Mexico Mutual and vice chair of the chamber’s Healthcare Planning Council, had accompanied Cole into the Journal for a briefing on the program.

Why is this worth comment?

Normally, it would not be, other than to compliment the reporter; I remember thinking the story was solid reportage that further demonstrates that Brodsky, one of the newer and younger reporters at the Journal, is a reliable Journal asset.

No, what set me off was that just five pages later on A-11, the same newspaper, the reader encounters this: “Chamber Offers Discount Drug Cards.”  What?

Appearing on the Journal’s Op-Ed (Opposite Editorial) page, this duplication of effort was “By Michael Zientek and Terri L. Cole, Greater Albuquerque chamber of Commerce.” (Zientek is chairman of the board of the Chamber.) Its thunder already stolen, this story announces nonetheless that, “The Greater Albuquerque Chamber of Commerce is launching a new statewide prescription assistance program called the New Mexico Drug Card.”

Then, over nearly 20 precious column inches – precious because the space for written copy has shrunk commensurate with the reduction in newspaper ad sales – the column basically repeats the news story on A6.

Running in the same paper, one can’t help but think the column unnecessary and a further example of that “coziness” between the Journal and the Greater Chamber that my colleague Tracy Dingmann and I have written about in previous posts. And, in running the chamber’s statement, the Journal was wasting space that could have been used to enlighten readers a different event or issue, or provide a platform for another public voice or different interest group.

It is a news story that could affect many New Mexicans, so it does merit visibility. But the Journal prominently played its own news story and the Greater Chamber has another vehicle in which to tout its new program: that is, its weekly full-page “Business Plan” advertorial that runs Mondays in the Journal’s Business Outlook.

Which is what prompts this post: That’s exactly what the chamber did on Nov. 16.

“Sign Up for the New Mexico Drug Card” is the main feature of the full-page advertorial – an informative page that repeats much of the information in the original news story; what’s new is it includes a picture of the drug card and comments from Chamber-member pharmacists with their take on the new program.

Nothing wrong with that. But the Op-Ed column in between was a gratuitous overdose in service of the Chamber.

I have written before about what I and many other old-school newspaper journalists think is the troubling coziness between the Albuquerque Journal and the Greater Albuquerque Chamber of Commerce.

That’s because it bothers me to see the paper enter into any kind of relationship that looks like it might give it a reason to favor one business or group of businesses over the other.

But plenty of Journal watchers, even ones who I think who should know better, have told me they just don’t see a problem with it.

Well, something happened the other day that I think starkly illustrates what can go wrong when newspapers get too cozy with their advertisers.

Veteran Hartford Courant consumer columnist George Gombossy made national news in August when he chose to leave the paper after his bosses told him to “be nice” to a prominent advertiser and refused to run a column that was critical of another prominent advertiser.

Gombassy had worked for 40 years at the paper, writing columns online and in the paper on behalf of Connecticut consumers who read the Courant.

In July, the paper got new management and Gombassy began to receive pressure from his bosses to ease up on his criticisms of local businesses. Specifically, Gombassy was given a list of the paper’s major advertisers and told that he needed to notify his bosses before he wrote anything about them. He was also told to pay a visit to a local plumbing company that had complained about his coverage, and was told to “be nice” to them.

On Aug. 2, Gombassy submitted a column about the fact that the Connecticut Attorney General’s was currently investigating the mattress chain Sleepy’s after receiving a number of serious complaints from Connecticut residents. The company, which is the largest mattress chain in the U.S., maintains 74 stores in Connecticut and is a major advertiser at the Courant.

According to Gombassy, the editors held the column without explanation. The next day, Gombassy was called into his editor’s office and told his position was being eliminated. He was told he could take another similar position at half the pay. Gombassy says he was ultimately asked to leave the paper and worked his last day on Aug. 14.

But consumers in Connecticut got to read the Sleepy’s column anyway. A frustrated Gombassy ultimately ran it on his new national consumer blog.

You can read the piece, which detailed a troubling trail of complaints, including horrifying allegations of old mattresses being sold as brand new and, in at least one case, a mattress sold that was infested with bedbugs, here.

Yesterday Gombassy announced that he is now suing his former paper under Connnecticut’s Free Speech statute, which protects workers from being fired or punished for exercising their First Amendment  rights in the workplace.

From yesterday’s ctnewsjunkie.com story:

“While the statute has been used by other workers who were punished for speaking out in the workplace, this is the first time a journalist has used it in Connecticut to contest his firing for acting on behalf of the public to protect the consumer,” he (Gombossy’s attorney) said.

“Our suit, if successful, should result in less pressure on journalists to commit unethical acts on behalf of advertisers as media publishers will know that it will be at their peril,” Gombossy said in a brief statement.

So, I’m wondering…. If you lived in Connecticut and read the Hartford Courant, wouldn’t you appreciate knowing whether the store you bought your mattress from had a bedbug problem?  Or sold old mattresses as new?

I think you would.

But the Hartford Courant allegedly didn’t want you to read bad things about its advertisers – not in its pages or on its blogs. So, according to Gombassy, they blocked the story and let Gombassy go.

I am not saying anything like that has happened or is happening at the Albuquerque Journal.

But the Gombossy saga provides a good example of how readers who have been led to expect nothing but objectivity and straight talk can be done wrong when any newspaper gets too cozy with the people who pay the bills.

My colleague Denise Tessier writes about the new partnership between the Greater Albuquerque Chamber of Commerce and the Albuquerque Journal today and calls it “a little cozy.”

I’ll say.  The chamber bought two full pages in the Journal‘s A1 section and filled them full of glowing copy about events and awards and messages along with outright ads from chamber heavy hitters like PNM and Gap Inc.

Essentially, it’s the Chamber newsletter, but printed on Journal paper.  Do any other readers find that a bit confusing? Any other journalists? A similar arrangement between the Los Angeles Times and the Staples Center caused a giant stink 10 years ago and led to the resignation of the paper’s publisher.  I wrote about the section last week before I saw it, and I stand by my opinion that such a venture sends mixed messages to readers.

The Chamber pages also include tributes to outstanding chamber volunteers. Featured is Journal Editor Kent Walz, who is cited for his “continued dedication to fair, objective reporting of the news and for understanding the importance of a vital New Mexico economy.”

The section also lists events, including a mayoral forum on Aug. 20 that is sponsored by the Chamber. The section in the Journal doesn’t mention it, but material elsewhere from the Chamber says Walz will moderate the forum.

It is obvious that the Chamber has invested a great deal of money and trust in this new partnership with the Journal. It is also obvious that the Chamber considers Walz a cherished member and an ally, and has asked him to personally partner with the chamber on at least one highly-newsworthy venture.

It makes me wonder about the rules all of the rest of us followed as reporters and editors at the Journal.  In order to preserve our objectivity and so as not to create an appearance of a conflict of interest, we weren’t allowed to have political bumper stickers on our cars or yard signs on our lawns. Signing petitions was frowned upon, as was expressing any kind of political opinion on or off the job.  We literally had to ask Walz’s permission to join any group  – political, philanthropic, you name it – that could in any way be conceived to ever come up in our coverage.

Like my Journal Watch colleague Denise, I understand that the editor of the paper is a public figure who needs to maintain certain relationships in the community.

But this one makes me queasy. The chamber and the Journal are two very powerful entities in the community, and I hope the readers aren’t going to suffer because they’re doubling up so publically.

What if a story comes up that would make one of these chamber businesses look bad?  Would the Journal write that story?

Tell me what you think.

The first installment of the Greater Albuquerque Chamber of Commerce’s venture with the Albuquerque Journal, reported by Tracy Dingmann on Clearly New Mexico last week, made its debut today (July 13, A-3 and A-4).
The good news for journalism is that the Chamber’s “Business Plan” looks like an ad, not an advertorial, with the words “Paid Advertisement” at the top of each of its two full pages in a prime location, the A section. Three of the Chambers’ member businesses have what are also obviously ads at the bottom of the second page.

It’s an effective way for the Chamber to get its messages out in a manner most groups could not afford, and President and CEO Terri Cole alludes to the tight economy in her welcoming message.

It’s also a way to help the Journal weather this difficult economic time by garnering a significant regular advertiser, which it certainly needs considering its loss of national Sunday inserts like Linens ‘n’ Things, the reality of local business closures and the shrunken classified ad section.

The Business Plan is like a chamber newsletter, listing its board of directors (a who’s who of community leaders), news from the chamber and sections that give individuals and businesses pats on the back.

It’s in that pats-on-the-back category where things get a little cozy. We can get past the Albuquerque Journal’s listing as one of the sponsors of the Chamber’s upcoming annual meeting – the Journal, after all, is a business and part of the community, and sponsors many kinds of events. And it’s a kind of tradition for hometown newspapers to be business boosters simply by virtue of printing the news about business openings, features about business personalities, and reviews of restaurants, providing businesses with publicity that is beneficial beyond advertising.

Where it gets sticky is the section where the chamber announces its “Volunteer Recognition” awards. Journal editor Kent Walz, who appears in paragraph form near the end of its nine-honoree list, gets prominent play with a photograph at the list’s beginning. (The only other photograph is of  Police Chief Ray Schultz.) The text says Walz will receive the “Media Business Leadership Award” for “his continued dedication to fair, objective reporting of the news and for understanding the importance of vibrant New Mexico economy.” Sounds like an award for doing his job. Not exactly a “volunteer” role, but a smart move by the Chamber.

And “sticky” because it has the appearance of the chamber going beyond the buying of ad space to buying also the Journal’s editorial goodwill.