Responsible Journalism.


The Senate Bill 489 Legislation has moved over to the House.

By any political analysis it faces a challenge. But the larger question here and a question that I think speaks of objectivity is the reporting of WMUR and more specifically of the first hearing for S.B. 489.

It appeared on the nightly news.

Of course the emphasis of the project economy piece has to be upon the hearing itself and sponsor of S.B. 489, Sen. Lou Dellasandro and his statement that “fifty five thousand people in New Hampshire need a job.” Actually I think the number is higher than this but this reality in New Hampshire is neither here nor there. What is here is what happens next. After the Sen. Dellasandro explanation showing the hearing which was clearly numbered by proponents of S.B. 489, the broadcast turns to my favorite anti-gaming spokesman, former Sen. Rubens who quickly stated to the effect that the casino interests are making “wildly exhortations” about what the passage of S.B. 489 could mean for New Hampshire.


And then the news 9 story closed out that was it.

No response from any of the gaming interests or their spokespersons or for that matter any of the supporters that appeared at the hearing. The former Senator and failed candidate for Governor never stated what these promises were and thanks to the gatekeeper role of the media the general public is probably thinking something negative has happened which has never been defined or even confirmed.   

Is this responsible journalism? Why did WMUR do it this way?  

I’m surprised that WMUR did this. Last summer the Manchester based station took the time and resources to travel to the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and report on the passage of gaming in that state. I think they should have visited Bethlehem and Chester, Pa. instead on the one location they covered but their reporting was still quality and that they took the time to consider the depth of this issue by going to Pennsylvania. So now I can think of only one reason why WMUR truncated information or at least a response about this important issue and legislation. And this reason is politics.

And politics isn't responsible journalism.