
Al Franken can draw the United States from memory, but can he get a fair shake from the Strib? Photo: KC Ivey, Flickr
Does the Star Tribune have it in for U.S. Senate candidate Al Franken? A look at the paper’s coverage over the past few weeks might suggest as much. For example, today’s report on Franken’s attempt to delay vote certification in order to investigate absentee ballots — a request that was rejected — called the request “eleventh-hour maneuvering” by Franken. While the phrase “eleventh hour” was most famously uttered by Sen. Norm Coleman, who dubbed a Texas lawsuit filed by a GOP-affiliated CEO an “eleventh-hour attack” orchestrated by the Franken campaign, it’s the term “maneuvering” that seems more loaded. The campaign surely wanted to pick up a few more votes prior to today’s certification by the state Canvassing Board, but is concern for incomplete vote counts in 49 counties, as cited by Franken’s campaign, merely a political strategy?
And then there’s this case: On Nov. 16, the Strib ran an AP piece about Al Franken’s trip to Washington today, where he’s expected to meet with Democratic leaders and do some fundraising. It notes that Franken has said he won’t be attending an orientation for new senators because “it would be too presumptuous.” The state GOP adopted the word yesterday in a press conference by chair Ron Carey, but reporters there challenged that assumption, turning the tables on Carey. As video by The UpTake captures, one journalist asked him, “Aren’t you being presumptuous by saying that Norm Coleman has won this election twice? The state of Minnesota has not declared anyone a winner in this race.” (Today, WCCO’s Pat Kessler reportedly asked Secretary of State Mark Ritchie how Coleman’s campaign can make such claims. In an email to supporters today, the Coleman campaign stated that the state Canvassing Board, in certifying the Nov. 4 election results, “for the 3rd time” found “that Norm Coleman was re-elected to the United States Senate.”)
Yet “presumptuous” makes a repeat appearance in a Nov. 17 Star Tribune story by Bill McAuliffe. It’s included in a quote by Coleman spokesperson Mark Drake and again appears in the story’s headline: “Coleman camp calls Franken’s D.C. visit ‘presumptuous.’” The third usage in the story, which gets no headline treatment, is when a Franken spokesperson uses it to explain why Franken isn’t attending today’s Senate orientation.
A similar thing happened late last month. When a lawsuit surfaced that included mention of funds allegedly directed by wealthy donor Nasser Kazeminy to Coleman via his wife’s employer, the Star Tribune ran a story with a declarative head: “Suit alleges ally funneled $75,000 to the Colemans.” But when a second suit surfaced making the identical claim — which could easily be interpreted as a damaging development for Coleman — the paper soft-pedaled the real news under a headline that prized Coleman’s reaction over the newsworthy fact of the second suit: “Coleman calls on foes to ’stop attacking my family’.”
On October 26, the Strib endorsed Coleman for Senate, a reversal of its 2002 endorsement, which favored Walter Mondale, filling in for the late Sen. Paul Wellstone, over Coleman.
Photo: K.C. Ivey via Flickr



10 Comments »
Comment posted November 18, 2008 @ 4:18 pm
With sneaky corporate control of our newspapers, get used to only hearing what the corporations want you to hear.
Comment posted November 18, 2008 @ 4:43 pm
The editorials took a lurch right when Avista took over. I’m not so sure that’s true of the news. DJ Tice was already political editor. I do wonder what the effect was of laying off so many senior staff. Also, we have to be careful to differentiate between the articles and the headlines, which have different writers.
Comment posted November 18, 2008 @ 4:45 pm
This has been going on for many years.
Comment posted November 18, 2008 @ 5:23 pm
Do the right thing — cancel your Strib subscription & don’t buy single copies. Can you believe a major American newspaper giving a voice to a craven little cynical button-pusher like Katherine Kersten!!?? The Strib has decided to narrow-band target their Republican suburban readership (’Faith & Values’? are you shitting me? imagine the Times trying to pull that!). The paper has become ‘Tradin’ Times’ with AP news stories and syndicated op ed columns. Outrageous.
Comment posted November 18, 2008 @ 6:35 pm
It’s a continual source of embarrassment that a city once known for its smarts is represented in print by that bird cage liner.
Comment posted November 18, 2008 @ 6:37 pm
The comments over there are just filled with idiotic trolls. I wanted to find some good discussion about real issues, even minutia, and it’s just worth it. Mindless repetition of talking points, falsehoods, and name-calling. Sad, really.
Comment posted November 18, 2008 @ 6:37 pm
errrrr, just NOT worth it.
Comment posted November 18, 2008 @ 8:34 pm
From dissent to descent, the StarTrib ain’t your daddy’s beacon of journalism; since Avista takeover its sadly become a Corporate-Fascist-Propaganda -Mouth-Organ masquerading as “objective” news. Once the Senate race went into the general election, the mask came off. Online readers began howling for a semblance of fairness on the Strib’s own website, questioning their slanted language, weird story angles, and illogical editorial stances. The corruption of the paper was questioned until suddenly one day when it all came to a screeching halt. A new posting policy quietly appeared, and suddenly the posts tuned pablum. Arbitrarily, posts questioning the Strib’s coverage disappeared:
“Comments are subject to the site’s terms of use and do not necessarily reflect the opinion or approval of the Star Tribune. Readers whose comments violate the terms of use may have their comments removed or all of their content blocked from viewing by other users without notification.”
Comment posted November 19, 2008 @ 8:27 am
Is it somehow news that the Star Tribune isn’t a very good paper, and hasn’t been, for years? Nah. It’s not the Avista takeover; it sucked before.
What is news is that, for whatever reason, in this (rare) case the slant is unfavorable to the guy on the left. And, yeah, it has a conservative columnist. Wow.
As to its endorsement of Coleman being a “reversal,” well, not so much. The paper preferred Mondale over Coleman and Coleman over Franken.
Comment posted November 19, 2008 @ 6:05 pm
Can we ‘presume’ the Minnesota Independent prefers Fraken over Coleman?
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL
Leave a comment