Cartergate, The Star-Telegram & Other Fort Worth Texas Scandals

A few days ago I got an email with the subject line "Mike Lee responds."

Mike Lee is a Fort Worth Star-Telegram reporter who had written the article in the Star-Telegram about last Thursday's Steve Doeung date in Tarrant County Court.

Many of the people who eye witnessed the courtroom proceedings were appalled at the disconnect between what they eye witnessed and what they read in Fort Worth's sadly corrupted main newspaper of record.

The emailer to whom Mike Lee responded had asked why there was no reference to the CARO rally in the article.

Mike Lee responded with...

"I put that in the story, and it evidently got cut out to make the story fit on the page. There are 3-4 paragraphs missing from the end, too."

The emailer, whom Mike Lee responded to, then opined...

"IMO it is wrong to attack a reporter like Mike Lee who works hard to understand and communicate the issues. He just works at the ST and has no control over what the publisher decides to print. Our slings and arrows should be pointed at the publisher not the messenger."

Now, maybe I am way off base here, but if a reporter does not accurately report something I'm not quite seeing how it is that that reporter works hard to understand and communicate the issues. Key elements of the story were cut so it could fit on the page?

After I listed several points that were missing from Mike Lee's article I described him as "The Fort Worth Star-Telegram pseudo reporter/Chesapeake Energy shill, Mike Lee."

I called him a Chesapeake shill because, though Mike Lee left out many key points, he did manage to include and his publisher deemed needed to be included, unlike the CARO rally info, the following 2 paragraphs...

"Under Texas law, companies that build natural-gas gathering lines have the same eminent-domain power as more traditional utility companies such as Atmos Energy. And they have more freedom than many government agencies in condemnation cases. For instance, cities have to hire two independent appraisers when condemning a piece of land for a road, and those appraisals must be shared with the landowner. Gas pipeline companies don't have to do that.

Technically, Chesapeake could have started building the pipeline in 2008, after a preliminary hearing in front of a group of court-appointed commissioners. Chesapeake's attorneys, John Baker and Michael Ma, appeared to be waiting for Sprinkle to ratify that award before proceeding."

Now, maybe a fair-minded person might not consider the above to be shill type propaganda. I thought that the point being made in the above 2 paragraphs seemed ridiculous. But what do I know about the law? Especially the way it's practiced in Texas.

And then on the blogging about my disdain for the way the Star-Telegram covered this story I got a comment verbalizing better than I the absurdity of the 2 paragraphs above that I had characterized as Chesapeake propaganda.

Here is what Anonymous had to say....

"I was there in the courtroom and Steve respectfully but clearly corrected the judge in several instances, as to the facts and the law itself. The most compelling one was when the judge claimed that CHK could have shoved the pipelines down under his little front yard since Nov. 2008, and which Steve quickly retorted that "you honor, if this giant billion dollar corporation could have done that, they would have so by now--it's certainly not out of their generous heart or humanity"--as he pointed to the state seal that's about 16-inches in diameter to let all present know how massive the pipelines really are. Common sense would indicate that the judge was trying to "spin" the facts to make CHK look good--OR ELSE WHY ARE THEY STILL TRYING TO GET THE LEGAL PAPERS TO TAKE HIS PROPERTY? Even I can answer that question: because they got caught by Steve lying, cheating, and deceiving and thus could not legally take possession and would have exposed CHK to a massive fiasco for trespassing if they were to run their pipelines under Steve's private property."

The emailer, who asked Mike Lee about the CARO Rally omission, opined that slings and arrows should be slung and shot at the publisher of the Star-Telegram, not at that newspaper's reporters. I don't agree, but that's okay.

I have done plenty of poking at the Star-Telegram. I believe the Star-Telegram's editorial slant is way off. It's perfectly normal and legit for a newspaper to have a slant to its point of view, leaning left, leaning right, leaning liberal, leaning conservative. Most try to be fair and balanced, but that is a tricky act. I guess.

Where the Star-Telegram goes askew is in its over the top, irresponsible, at times, civic boosterism, to the point of completely misrepresenting the facts. Have you visited the Sante Fe Market lately to get a taste of being at Seattle's Pike Place Market?

And then there's the way the Star-Telegram acts like a mouthpiece for the Ruling Oligarchy and the Good Ol' Boy Network that seems to run this company town.

Here is one example that shines a really bright spotlight on the fact that the Star-Telegram is not a real newspaper, not in the manner of the real newspapers that serve most American communities. The City of Fort Worth staged a raid on a Fort Worth Citizen after he refused to roll over and play dead for Chesapeake Energy.

The clearly inappropriate raid was staged to intimidate this citizen. If the Star-Telegram were a real newspaper they would have been all over this like Woodward and Bernstein being all over a minor break-in.

As in, who ordered the raid? Why was the raid ordered? Who knew about the raid being ordered?

Another way to look at how bad this newspaper is. Had the Star-Telegram been Washington, D.C.'s newspaper of record, Richard Nixon would have successfully completed his second term and the word "Watergate" would not have entered the world's vernacular.