Stop the campaign to intimidate the local media

This paragraph should be repasted as necessary when one of these commenters makes a comment...

For more than a year, Westy, Dancingrudy, Greenshirt & KHoboken and several screen names they have come up with have been on a campaign to discredit the remaining independent media in Hoboken in order to bully them into only writing positive stories about City Hall in Hoboken and not writing any story that includes any hint of criticism or another side. It only becomes obvious if you look at their factually incorrect statements over more then 1 week. These are not opinions, these are intentional misrepresentations that they post over and over using the same language almost every week. They have tried to pretend they are individual reformers and that anyone mildly critical of town hall is part of a campaign to bring hoboken back to the dark ages of corruption but if you probe further you see that they are using the same types of tactics unfortunately. They rely on your natural suspicion of Hoboken politics and of media which you should definitely have, but they are part of a subtle attempt to guide people away from truth and independent thinking. The stories present the sides accurately and it is up for you as a reader to decide but they public blog entries and comments meant to make false claims about the stories.

These commenters have a hidden purpose: to get people to read one of the specific pro-City Hall blogs in town that were started to only print positive stories about the mayor and refuse to let anyone criticize Town Hall, blogs that in at least one case are also making money for the owner. These blogs have never raised a question about Town Hall even when the media have written stories about potential problems and they make threatening comments on any story in which the media asks questions or gives any other side, and a fleet of them including westy, dancingrudy and greensheets (who has been found to be one of the for-profit bloggers who goes by several other names) will always comment, try to cast any critic as a criminal and painting the press as corrupt. But he doesnt want you to read anything that conflicts with his only pro city hall reports. They will make up claims of bias that do not hold water if you know the rest of the story, as we will show below.

A small example: this past week, one blog claimed a bias in this newspaper [HR] by pointing out that a mayoral opponent had a letter first in the paper, not noting that the previous week it was the mayor's supporters who had the first letter! This blog does things like this constantly. Anyone who points out the truth is told that he or she must be corrupt.

A real media watchdog would look at the big picture but Westy and Rudy assume people will take their natural cynicism of Hoboken and the media and believe whatever they write, as they take advantage of those who do not have time to sift through their half truths and baldfaced lies. Everyone should always question everything and of course this and other newspapers and you can question my comment today too. But their criticisms never hold water if you know what is going on and don't automatically believe their negative spin. Most do not have time and believe what these people write on its face. it is easy to believe that the media or politicians are corrupt but not all of them are. Who speaks in response to these bloggers? No one because they are afraid of having their families and children criticized as these commenters have actually done on other sites.

Westy Rudy etc. leave multiple anonymous comments on any city hall story on Patch, here and at the Jersey Jornal and clearly have a vested interest and hidden agenda. Most people around here do but at least many are honest but this group is not. For an example see the comments on this story starting with the first one below and going up. Rudy purposely pretends not to know various stories were written showing both sides and only coplains about this one and pretends it is evidence of bias when in fact it is a followup to a story about the mayors side. He does this nearly every week, getting things purposely wrong. Some of their screen names (shellnation and khoboken) who post nasty comments against all of the independent media in town like Patch, the Jersey Journjal, and here at the HR will go as far as to accuse a young reporter of being "dumb" corrupt, incompetent or biased if they write a story they do not like. They have even done it to a channel 5 investigative reporter, claiming the reporter is a supporter of the prior administration because his report showed a problem with parking in Hoboken. They even printed that persons address on all the sites.

Here is bullying from the pro-mayor bloggers over a CHANNEL 5 NEWS investigative story on the city's parking problems: http://www.nj.com/hobokennow/index.ssf/2011/12/hoboken_councilwoman_mason_wei/1970/comments-newest-2.html

Notice the commenter Khoboken refers to the Jersey Journal reporter named Summer Dawn as "Summer Dumb." These blogs have made comments about people's families and children meant to scare someone into not being critical of the city. Can we imagine any newspaper acting this way?

Here is an example in which one of these bloggers threatens to do a story about someone making a criticism: http://www.nj.com/forums/hoboken/index.ssf?extlink?artid=121489 And

By the way they will claim that I and others below who have expressed similar criticism of their behaviour is coming from Coujncilwoman Mason who is a political opponent of the mayor. I am sure she does have her supporters making some comments but it doesn't change the fact that more of them, and more bullying and intimidation, are coming from the Westy crew against anyone who dares criticize, politician or no. I am among a growing number of reformers in town who are privately unhappy with this intimidation campaign and do not want these bloggers to appear to be speaking for me. hoboken needs to move out of the dark ages, they will now respond by painting me of being a supporter of Beth Mason or a political operative or member of the media, or a past official because that is part of their campaign. I do not work forgovernment official or Town Hall or someone with a monetary interest in saying this, but it would not matter if I am, everything I am stating here is the TRUTH and that's what matters. Someone had to speak up against this anti-media, anti-fairness campaign. They frequently post comments here saying that if the reporter doesn't do a certain story or quotes a certian person, it will prove that reporter [who is often yong and independent] is "biased:" call his 'credability' into question and derail his future career. They do it after every story critical of town hall. Enough with the intimidation. Honest constructive criticism with real facts over the weeks is never posted. I would like to see real media watchdogs, and also who is watching these blogs that have become a slave to self interest and don't ever criticize anything in Town Hall?

Do not believe anyone in town until you ask questions. Just because they say they are against corruption do not buy it right away. . I have seen reformers come and go and have been here watching it since Tom Vezzeti in '85. Many of them will do good. There are a few bad apples who get a taste of attention and become just as bad as those they are trying to reform: Intimidation, harassment lies, publishing comments against people's families and children (as they have done) etc. are not acceptable. Let's leave the dark ages and bullying and namecalling in the past. If you have a question about something ask the source and do not believe rumors no matter who they come from. Feel free to check out my links too. It is common knowledge that if someone hates the press this much, and tries to hide tries to hide a direct affiliation or monetary interest in city hall, there is something questionable going on. The latest comments from this group are trying to say that the HR biases its stories based on advertising from Mason, but the HR has actually done alot stories that Mason would not want, I would guess they should ask questions rather than guessing.

Don't believe anyone even if they claim to be representing reform or pointing a finger at others saying they are bribed or un credable or corrupt before you ask questions of those being accused or go back and look at the past. Not everyone is out for bad ends. No one will agree with everything but there is no reason to intimdiate. Some of us don't want Hoboken to stay in the dark ages but if the most vocal reformers scare everyone else off, as it has been said before by other commenters here, that is what will happen. We need more stories and shining a light on town like what is happening in the three remaining local press.

Quite the assortment of new screen names all echoing the same key message. I guess great minds think alike especially when they're all housed in the same body.

The HR, to its credit, permits criticism of it's editorial policies on its web site. Its revealing that the extraordinarily defensive response to the mild criticism offered here does not come from the HR itself which is certainly free to consider or ignore all criticism as it sees fit.

It comes instead from a plethora or brand new screen names that I'm guessing are associated with the individual(s) who have been actively pitching suspect information to the HR.

Overall, I think the HR has done an excellent job of weeding through the BS and it is extremely revealing that so much faux outrage is being expressed on their supposed behalf by those who fear that the HR might consider the criticism occasionally offered here and on the blogs and make an effort to ensure that it avoids both the appearance and reality of objectivity.

FYI - blogs like editorial pages of newspapers, are opinion based - they are not objective and do not pretend to be. Newspapers in their news coverage are supposed to try to be objective, though bias inevitably is injected through editorial choices like headlines, story placement, etc. Pointing out the bias when it appears helps keep newspapers honest. The NYT and WSJ for example would surely be more biased toward the left and right respectively if they were not called out by others when the bias becomes too flagrant.

Speaking about blogs: Hundson Mile Square View asks the question does the steady stream of ads placed in the Hoboken Reporter by Councilwoman Mason translate into favorable or directed stories ?

And yet Westy, everything he said appears to be true. Your friend Dancing Rudy wrote this: "Maybe someone can help me understand the HR's editorial choices here. The City Council passed an ordinance supported by the mayor 7-1. Yet the headline and the first 1/2 of the story is about the lone councilperson who voted no - Mike Russo..." The story next to this one, which says it was posted many hours earlier, is about the vote and about the majority who supported the measure, so why would Rudy purposely ignore the story right next to this one? I think that's what the others are saying. Even if that story hadn't been written it would still make sense to do a story on something provocative. find me a newspaper that wouldn't do a story on that angle? You could call it sensational but it is not biased and surely not outside journalism. Some of your other points may have merit but some of them are off the wall. THe story keeps dialogue going for one thing. So did Rudy not notice the other story right next to this one on the page, or did he choose to pretend it never existed when trying to discred the press? And if you and Rudy often do this, is your purpose to discredit any writing that fails to promote city hall? Seems that way. If this is damage control, it's a bad job because it doesn't defend any of the politicians just points out extraordinary and frequent hubris from people who you would think know better. It is reasonable to take issue with articles if you have a reasonable complaint. I'll have to go back and see if what he wrote about your comments about Smith is correct but i have no reason to doubt it.

An intresting attempt at damage political control.

Clearly and attempt to harass people who don't fall into lockstep with the information being disseminated by some political consultants.

Those of us who post reqularly on this sitet have seen political operatives come here under the pretense of being new and independent and then make the ususal attacks asociated with Councilwoman Mason's staff consultants.

Earlier this month, when a HR reporter was feed another Nazi scare story against a blogger by Mrs. Mason and her political consultants he seeminly set out to construct the story they wanted until the blogegers exposed the facts and it was killed.

The checks and balances of journalism.

When any journalist or publication is precived as being biased it is fair to make that opinion known.

I have to say something. Just for some background I lived in Hoboken many years, moved out a few years ago but still watch the "players" from a slight distance. Also worked in print media for a while but in Westchester. So these kinds of comments are familiar to me. I finally had to comment because this has gone on too long. A group of three political operatives have been leaving similar comments over a year that seem odd and indicate a lack of interest in real journalism and have some sort of ulterior motive which it took me a while complaining about a story regarding Michael Russo and asks why the HR did not write about the vote or the rest of the issue. :

Meanwhile the story just beside that one apparently was written a day earlier

right after the vote, and is mainly about the vote and the city's position. Rudy didn't notice the story right next to it on the page? Clearly this Russo story is a followup because the opposing viewpoint was not explained in the original story. Plus these are little web stories not the stories at the bottom whic are longer. How Rudy didn't bother to look below this story at the other one is truly bizarre if it wasn't part of a pattern meant to intimidate and harass any remaining non one sided media into writing stories their way. This happens so often that it might make sense to paste this response whenecer he or Westy do it next time.

All of the comments from Rudy and Westy (critical if the paper is not in absolute lockstep with city hall, or full of false praise if it's something they like) are clearly designed to harass and intimidate the newspaper into writing only good things about city hall, and to drive people to two pro-city hall blogs. These blogs have never once written anythinng critical of the mayor's administration, not even mildly, not even once in years. They will cover things up. I read them and sometimes agree with them but not when they are harassing any independent news sources left (and those I consider to be nj.com and patch.)

I appreciate the mayor and think she is head and tails above what we saw before but we still need to watch city hall and the newspapers are doing a fair sometimes good job. Theer are mistakes at times but they are still better then the rest. I used to get calls from operatives disguing themselves as citizens when I worked in journalism and the internet has brought it to a new level.

I remember some vile comments that were left here against Ray Smith when he was the reporter. Now the Graphics Avenger blog says she always had a 'good relationship' with Ray but the same things were written about him when he was here that are now written about the new reporter and she never said anything when they were savaging Smith.

Most of us have our eyes open. I have heard one of these freuqent commenters is the mayor's spouse but one never really knows. I hope we can be honest about what is written and stop the attempts to intimidate.

I'm sure that is much better than the free market way, isn't it. Who defines "public use"? Can the "public use" ever change? Today its a park. What if the Mayor or Council decides tomorrow that enticing a new Corporation to build their HQ in that location would bring jobs to Hoboken. Is that still considered "public use"? Where do you draw the line? I think we've seen in other places where the line is determined by the politicians currently in power in order to pad their pockets. Not a good policy.

The process for evaluating a fair price for property that is the subject of eminent domain is one that requires an independent third party to come to fair market value and then that is placed in front of a judge along with the elaluation of the property owners and the court decides what is a fair price.

Some of you guys are ridiculous with these inane comments. Looks to me that HR puts out a story on the 17th about this vote, and then puts out another story on the 18th talking about the lone dissenter. But evidently any story about the opposition must be a conspiracy to you dolts. May I suggest finding a hobby. Oh and by the way, putting your trust in the government to put a fair price on private property seems not only naive but downright ignorant.

Kudos to Mayor Zimmer and the majority of the City Council for using every legal means to service the best interest of the Hoboken.

The very reason these laws exist is to allow the purchase of property for public use at a fair price.

Consideing Councilman Russo's mother once earned a six figure salary from the developer URSA/Tarrgon it is understandable that he does not wish to do anything that might level the playing field with developers when it comes to purchasing new open space in Hoboken.

The "reporters" and "editors" at the HR turn over so often, the current ones have no sense of history at all in their reporting. And it also seems they are incapable of googling their own paper for previous information related to the current "story."

..Cause you know if Mike Russo says it...it must be true, no need to fact check.

Mike Russo whose daddy got nailed for corruption...but had no idea where daddy's extra money came from. Mike Russo who got an apartment in affordable housing skipping ahead of others. Mike Russo who lives in affordable housing, but can afford a "shore house." Mike Russo who hires an inordinate amount of campaign workers from his ward to sway the votes. Shall I continue?

I wonder how much money or how many favors Indian Way Car Service and The Triangle Car Wash are kick up to a certain council member. In order to keep their location. I was all of Hoboken could hear the noise they make all day and night. Not even mentioning the pollutants they are releasing into our breathing air and our sewers. I personally see them from my window. They rinse Antifreeze, Oil, Brake Fluids, Car Wax, etc down into our corner sewer grates daily.

Was completely baffled also when I saw a story devoted to the saintly Michael Russo on the topic of eminent domain. Then again he wasn't present at the previous City Council meeting and yet the Hudson Reporter sought out his comments on the meeting on the HHA appointment.

Never mentioning of course Russo's meeting with FBI informant Solomon Dwek and his comments about appointing people on the HHA.

This is a fascinating perspective worthy of journalism school case study or maybe a combined law enforcement study in tandem.

It's uncannily bad but I'm sure the Russo family is pleased and this gives kindred developers hope for the day when the City will once again wield eminent domain on behalf of favored friends and the Russo family.

Maybe someone can help me understand the HR's editorial choices here. The City Council passed an ordinance supported by the mayor 7-1.

Yet the headline and the first 1/2 of the story is about the lone councilperson who voted no - Mike Russo. Pretty odd editorial choice especially from the newspaper that has been busily working on a story about how the blogs are "biased."

The story also failed to note that Mike Russo voted yes for eminent domain when Mayor Roberts wanted to condemn a storage business and give the property to Ursa Tarragon to build condos. Russo abstained on second reading because his mother worked for URSA.

That omission is pretty surprising to since part of the HR blog story is the idea that newspapers actually research their stories making sure they're accurate as opposed to blogs that just write stuff.

Mike Russos father condemned property a bunch of times - Terry Castellano voted for it every time. I've heard they even evicted a nun so they could build a parking lot.

Maybe if Jimmy B slides you a file at the Malibu you'll include this in your story. Of course you could get the info from back issues of your own paper if you had the slightest interest in behaving like an actual newspaper.