Keeping you from voting?

[spup1122]

I've heard a couple of times that publishers and editors are telling employees that they can't caucus. Is this technically telling people they can't vote?

 

[MileHigh]

http://blogs.westword.com/latestword/2008/01/denver_post_editor_gives_some.php

http://blogs.westword.com/latestword/2008/01/john_temple_just_says_no_to_ca.php

 

[STLIrish]

I've heard a couple of times that publishers and editors are telling employees that they can't caucus. Is this technically telling people they can't vote?

Sure seems that way.

 

[Norman Stansfield]

I wish they'd tell me that for the sports polls I vote on.

 

[forever_town]

It does seem at first glance as though any journalist who wants to could file suit and probably would have a case if his employer barred him or her from attending a caucus. After all, the Constitution does not make an exception in its voting rights amendments that says "everyone but journalists may vote."

 

[STLIrish]

It does seem at first glance as though any journalist who wants to could file suit and probably would have a case if his employer barred him or her from attending a caucus. After all, the Constitution does not make an exception in its voting rights amendments that says "everyone but journalists may vote."

Yeah, sure, you can sue. But most people won't. Who wants to sue their boss? So it has the desired effect.
Those memos probably aren't legally binding or anything. But if a big employer we cover systematically discouraged its workers from voting, we'd be all over that ****.
Anyone know how papers in Iowa (where this must be an issue every four years) handle this?

 

[Some Guy]

Quick procedural question, for those of us who live in a caucus-free state: Are caucuses public? Meaning, if I caucus for Hillary Clinton, does everyone know I caucused for her?

It's not a private vote, is it?

 

[Stitch]

Generally it's not secret because you group together with fellow supporter of a particular candidate.

 

[SF_Express]

I'm doing this blind, not even reading the links above, but wasn't the point that the editor would PREFER that they don't caucus, but that he wouldn't absolutely stop them from doing so?

 

[Gold]

I could see why an editor would be concerned. And maybe I could see where somebody who covered politics maybe shouldn't participate in a public caucus.

However, somebody who is an assistant circulation manager or covers college sports or is an IT tech wouldn't have the coverage affected by their participation. And publishers certainly are involved in politics in a bigger way than any reporter would be.

 

[Some Guy]

I could see why an editor would be concerned. And maybe I could see where somebody who covered politics maybe shouldn't participate in a public caucus.

However, somebody who is an assistant circulation manager or covers college sports or is an IT tech wouldn't have the coverage affected by their participation. And publishers certainly are involved in politics in a bigger way than any reporter would be.

Even so, it could present the seed of impropriety in the minds of the public. Even if it's the assistant circulation manager.

I could definitely see where a publisher wouldn't want his staff involved in this. However, I don't know what the answer is. It's a tricky one, for sure.

 

[MileHigh]

I'm doing this blind, not even reading the links above, but wasn't the point that the editor would PREFER that they don't caucus, but that he wouldn't absolutely stop them from doing so?

Yes on the first link.
No on the second link.

 

[STLIrish]

Best part of the Denver Post memo: "All vacations are cancelled."

 

[fishwrapper]

It does seem at first glance as though any journalist who wants to could file suit and probably would have a case if his employer barred him or her from attending a caucus. After all, the Constitution does not make an exception in its voting rights amendments that says "everyone but journalists may vote."

You're mixing and confusing issues. Attending a caucus and voting are separate acts.
A caucus -- if not as a journalist or performing journalism -- is in support of a candidate and/or party.
Voting is your right as defined in the 8th and 15th Amendments.

So, filing a suit would be an exercise in futility. Infringement is the key judiciary term, and limiting or not allowing attendance to a political function doesn't meet the criteria. At least that's what we were told by a leading Civil Rights attorney/professor at a seminar on the subject.

 

[SF_Express]

Yes on the first link.
No on the second link.

Ah, yes, I see. Thank you.

 

[forever_town]

Thanks for the clarification, fishwrapper.

 

[Baron Scicluna]

Does the Post and the News endorse political candidates on its opinion pages? It would seem rather hypocritical that THEY can endorse a candidate, but heaven forbid that an employee does.

If editors are so concerned about perceived bias, then they shouldn't allow employees to attend sporting events either. After all, readers could recognize the employees at a game, and question the paper's committment to objectivity.

 

[fishwrapper]

Thanks for the clarification, fishwrapper.

Oh. You're welcome.
And, as Baron Scicluna points out, there is no right answer on this one.
I, personally, think it's ok for editorial entities to error on the side of better perception. I think it does the institution and consumer a greater good.
Yet, I can see fervent journalists having issues with such policies.

 

[forever_town]

Does the Post and the News endorse political candidates on its opinion pages?

My paper doesn't endorse political candidates; however, I don't live in a caucus state. They haven't tried to bar me from voting yet.

 

[fishwrapper]

Does the Post and the News endorse political candidates on its opinion pages? It would seem rather hypocritical that THEY can endorse a candidate, but heaven forbid that an employee does.

If editors are so concerned about perceived bias, then they shouldn't allow employees to attend sporting events either. After all, readers could recognize the employees at a game, and question the paper's committment to objectivity.

The rebuttal for this one is easy. Opinion pages usually don't endorse at this point. (And, if they do -- a la N.Y. Times last week -- they can endorse one from each side.) When the Editorial boards do endorse a single candidate, it's for the election. Coinciding with your right to vote.