When David Danforth founded the Aspen Daily News nearly three decades ago, he famously did so based on the notion that the real news was not getting out in a town dominated by the Aspen Times.
The rest is publishing history, but now Danforth’s flagship newspaper has made journalistic history of another sort by admitting overt bias in its news coverage in favor of the candidacy of Pitkin County Sheriff Bob Braudis in his race against challenger Rick Magnuson.
The idea that the Daily is biased toward the Sheriff will come as no surprise to most readers. In the past week, for example, the newspaper published a story written by editor Rick Carroll about Magnuson’s performance art–the M-word in the desert–that all but stopped the challenger in his tracks. But what is new and unprecedented is Carroll’s admission that the Rag favors the incumbent–and makes no bones about it.
“We make no apologies about being pro-Braudis,” Carroll wrote in an email to me. “It’s no secret that the New York Times is against the war in Iraq and that the Washington Times has conservative views, etc.”
In other words, Carroll considers bias in favor of a candidate standard operating procedure for not only the Aspen Daily News but for some of the most important newspapers in the country. One can only ask what other candidates the Daily overtly favors in its coverage–and why.
The questions raised are immediately pressing because Danforth and Carroll will be moderating and participating in “Squirm Night” Wdnesday evening at the Red Brick Center on GrassRoots TV. Magnuson and Braudis square off from 6:30-7:30 PM in the only scheduled debate in the campaign.
Newspapers, of course, have a right and even an obligation to endorse candidates in their editorial pages–editorials are the place where newspapers traditionally take a stand. But for a newspaper to take sides in news coverage–and then to make “no apologies” for it in a print communication with a reader–raises questions that should be answered before the Daily does any more damage in this race.
Magnuson has faced an uphill battle from other media as well. Like the Daily, the Aspen Times took the Sheriff’s unexplained six-week absence into a drug and alcohol rehabilitation center during the high summer season ”at face value.” And Bonnie Behrend, the news director at TV Aspen, wrote a letter to the editor extolling the virtues of the incumbent Pitkin County Sheriff, and thereby making her own objectivity in the race an open question.
Behrend’s letter, needless to say, was published in the Aspen Daily News under a headline that likened the Sheriff to the late actor John Wayne.
michael – that was not very illuminating. you can do alot better than that. sounds eerily like what you are always saying about other media. bfd.
the only one doing damage in this race is rick himself. he’s what i call a ‘foot shooter’. he’s done a great job of embarassing the apd. you won’t see him in town shaking hands and kissing babies like a good politician does. that’s what the post of sheriff in this town is. an ambassador, with a job to do.
the cbi representative had some interesting comments about the stats rick is bringing to the table. this dialogue can only make the sheriff dept operate more efficiently.
the debate tonite should be entertaining.
this whole ‘blog’ thing is just one rung above text messaging on the internet food chain. it’s a glorified chat room. it’s a viper pit with a compllimetary fruit and cheese tray. it’s like calling a timeshare ‘fractional ownership’.
in the future the word ‘blogger’ will be used to describe criminals of the lowliest variety. do yourself a favor and start distancing yourself now while noones looking……
can i see a show of hands of rick’s supporters?
the guy’s going to get slaughtered, but has brought some good ideas to the table.
he’s ruined masturbating for me though.
michael – that was not very illuminating. you can do alot better than that. sounds eerily like what you are always saying about other media. bfd.
the only one doing damage in this race is rick himself. he’s what i call a ‘foot shooter’. he’s done a great job of embarassing the apd. you won’t see him in town shaking hands and kissing babies like a good politician does. that’s what the post of sheriff in this town is. an ambassador, with a job to do.
the cbi representative had some interesting comments about the stats rick is bringing to the table. this dialogue can only make the sheriff dept operate more efficiently.
the debate tonite should be entertaining.
this whole ‘blog’ thing is just one rung above text messaging on the internet food chain. it’s a glorified chat room. it’s a viper pit with a compllimetary fruit and cheese tray. it’s like calling a timeshare ‘fractional ownership’.
in the future the word ‘blogger’ will be used to describe criminals of the lowliest variety. do yourself a favor and start distancing yourself now while noones looking……
can i see a show of hands of rick’s supporters?
the guy’s going to get slaughtered, but has brought some good ideas to the table.
he’s ruined masturbating for me though.
We’re done with this Michael. Whatever legitimate issues you have with Braudis’s enforcement and the Daily News “bias” are lost in your own bias and agenda. Do you claim to be a journalist? You are not one lately; you have become a hyper partisan pundit. And adopted some of the same rhetorical tricks and style we associate with that.
You have all descendend into whining and victimology. The refusal to acknoledge that masturbation films by Sheriff’s candidiates are not only newsworthy but viewed as unsavory by the mainstream is sad testament to this. That you do so while trying to wage a campaign about character and role models is simply bizarre.
You guys have become your own worst enemy. Descending now into a blame-the-meda whining, and insistently backing up Rick’s deceptive and disingenuous “data-based” smear campaing even as you claim he is a role model for law enforcement.
Too bad. This Aspen Post thing was of to a good start, but you’ve shot your wad and a healthy bit of your credibility backing a self-destructive oddball in this quioxic campaign.
Wanna know the funny part: I don’t even like Braudis that much, and think he does indeed need a healthy challenge. Rick’s challenge, however, has not been healthy. And he only has himself to blame.
We’re done with this Michael. Whatever legitimate issues you have with Braudis’s enforcement and the Daily News “bias” are lost in your own bias and agenda. Do you claim to be a journalist? You are not one lately; you have become a hyper partisan pundit. And adopted some of the same rhetorical tricks and style we associate with that.
You have all descendend into whining and victimology. The refusal to acknoledge that masturbation films by Sheriff’s candidiates are not only newsworthy but viewed as unsavory by the mainstream is sad testament to this. That you do so while trying to wage a campaign about character and role models is simply bizarre.
You guys have become your own worst enemy. Descending now into a blame-the-meda whining, and insistently backing up Rick’s deceptive and disingenuous “data-based” smear campaing even as you claim he is a role model for law enforcement.
Too bad. This Aspen Post thing was of to a good start, but you’ve shot your wad and a healthy bit of your credibility backing a self-destructive oddball in this quioxic campaign.
Wanna know the funny part: I don’t even like Braudis that much, and think he does indeed need a healthy challenge. Rick’s challenge, however, has not been healthy. And he only has himself to blame.
Dear Aspen Post readers,
Following this post is the full letter I wrote to Michael Conniff seven weeks ago, in response to his blog about Troy Hooper. Michael cherry picked one comment from this letter and turned it into a blog. This letter, printed in its entirety, should put Michael’s “idea” into its proper context.
Full dislosure: Michael was fired three times from the Daily News because of his incompetence as a journalist and writer.
Rick Carroll
Editor
Aspen Daily News
Michael,
I left you a message earlier this morning; you still have yet to return it. In any case, I hope you are doing well today. But based on your comments on aspenpost.net, as well as Con Games this morning, yesterday was really rough on you. It must be tough being Michael Conniff. I realize you have been in the field of journalism ever since the printing press was invented, but apparently you have yet to grasp what goes on in newsrooms every day of the year. So here’s how it goes: Editor gives reporter assignment. Reporter takes assignment. Reporter begins research. Sometimes research involves calling human subjects of stories. Many times a reporter will spend hours, if not days (and in some cases, years) researching a subject. Sometimes the story pans out, other times it doesn’t. And so the business goes.
Now that we have that little lesson out of the way, let’s flash back to yesterday. I gave Troy an assignment because I thought if this was true that Con Games was intentionally not running PSAs because they had Sheriff Braudis’ voice over, it would be an interesting story. It just so happened that you were part of the story. So Troy did his job and called you. Instead of being grateful that he took the time to contact you and another station official before running the story, you trashed the guy, and this newspaper, to no end on aspenpost.net, and who knows what else. Not that I should have been surprised.
Hence, that’s the difference between aspenpost.net and the Daily News. Our standard of providing information is pretty much the industry standard —— we research subjects before we fly off the handle with half-cocked theories. You, however, will print just about anything without doing any research. And actually taking the time to call someone, well, that would be too much work, and require at least one ball.
The irony is, Michael, is that you have a lot more in common with George W. Bush than you realize. Like the President, you launched a pre-emptive strike without absolutely no foundation. And like Bush, you look like a jack ass.
We make no apologies about being pro-Braudis. It’s no secret that the New York Times is against the war in Iraq and that the Washington Times has conservative views, etc.
But the Daily News, The New York Times and the Washington Times can’t stack up to aspenpost.net when it comes to having an axe to grind. You are more anti-Braudis than Troy or the Daily ever could be pro-Braudis, and you can’t resist laying into the Daily News whenever you can.
You can try as hard as you want to hurt the Daily News’ reputation as long as you are editor of aspenpost.net, but you will never come close to the damage you did to our image when you were on our payroll.
I fully expect a 6,000-word reply from you, and probably a post on aspenpost.net. Go ahead, have the last word. That’s the only way you know.
RC
Dear Aspen Post readers,
Following this post is the full letter I wrote to Michael Conniff seven weeks ago, in response to his blog about Troy Hooper. Michael cherry picked one comment from this letter and turned it into a blog. This letter, printed in its entirety, should put Michael’s “idea” into its proper context.
Full dislosure: Michael was fired three times from the Daily News because of his incompetence as a journalist and writer.
Rick Carroll
Editor
Aspen Daily News
Michael,
I left you a message earlier this morning; you still have yet to return it. In any case, I hope you are doing well today. But based on your comments on aspenpost.net, as well as Con Games this morning, yesterday was really rough on you. It must be tough being Michael Conniff. I realize you have been in the field of journalism ever since the printing press was invented, but apparently you have yet to grasp what goes on in newsrooms every day of the year. So here’s how it goes: Editor gives reporter assignment. Reporter takes assignment. Reporter begins research. Sometimes research involves calling human subjects of stories. Many times a reporter will spend hours, if not days (and in some cases, years) researching a subject. Sometimes the story pans out, other times it doesn’t. And so the business goes.
Now that we have that little lesson out of the way, let’s flash back to yesterday. I gave Troy an assignment because I thought if this was true that Con Games was intentionally not running PSAs because they had Sheriff Braudis’ voice over, it would be an interesting story. It just so happened that you were part of the story. So Troy did his job and called you. Instead of being grateful that he took the time to contact you and another station official before running the story, you trashed the guy, and this newspaper, to no end on aspenpost.net, and who knows what else. Not that I should have been surprised.
Hence, that’s the difference between aspenpost.net and the Daily News. Our standard of providing information is pretty much the industry standard —— we research subjects before we fly off the handle with half-cocked theories. You, however, will print just about anything without doing any research. And actually taking the time to call someone, well, that would be too much work, and require at least one ball.
The irony is, Michael, is that you have a lot more in common with George W. Bush than you realize. Like the President, you launched a pre-emptive strike without absolutely no foundation. And like Bush, you look like a jack ass.
We make no apologies about being pro-Braudis. It’s no secret that the New York Times is against the war in Iraq and that the Washington Times has conservative views, etc.
But the Daily News, The New York Times and the Washington Times can’t stack up to aspenpost.net when it comes to having an axe to grind. You are more anti-Braudis than Troy or the Daily ever could be pro-Braudis, and you can’t resist laying into the Daily News whenever you can.
You can try as hard as you want to hurt the Daily News’ reputation as long as you are editor of aspenpost.net, but you will never come close to the damage you did to our image when you were on our payroll.
I fully expect a 6,000-word reply from you, and probably a post on aspenpost.net. Go ahead, have the last word. That’s the only way you know.
RC
In my experience (decades in valley), both Aspen newspapers are incredibly biased, and whenever they report on anything I have personal knowledge of, I notice obvious glaring omissions and errors of fact. The incredibly defensive, long winded and pissy email from Rick Carroll is an example of the ethos of local upvalley newsprint, and very enlightening.
I’m a conservative but I like the Conman. I hope Michael gets national syndication and I think he’s moving closer to that. Rick, your email appears to be of the “knock-em-of-their-perch” type of sour grapes. More, perhaps you’re feeling the heat from the web and weblogs that are taking advertising money from your pocket?
Too bad Rick, Michael may be headed out of Aspen to national fame and fortune, while you’re probably hoping for the next opportunity for ribs with at the Hickory House with your favorite sheriff, and then being able to sell more real estate ads so you can afford those over priced vittles.
Your newspaper is extremely biased and full of poor reporting. We joke downvally that it’s basically the National Enquirer of the valley. Face it.
Lastly, if I was a blogger I’d consider it an honor to be fired sixteen times from your newspaper, let alone three. Kudos to Michael. Rick, blogging is opinion writing not newspaper reporting, so I guess Michael is qualified. Thanks for letting us know that.
In my experience (decades in valley), both Aspen newspapers are incredibly biased, and whenever they report on anything I have personal knowledge of, I notice obvious glaring omissions and errors of fact. The incredibly defensive, long winded and pissy email from Rick Carroll is an example of the ethos of local upvalley newsprint, and very enlightening.
I’m a conservative but I like the Conman. I hope Michael gets national syndication and I think he’s moving closer to that. Rick, your email appears to be of the “knock-em-of-their-perch” type of sour grapes. More, perhaps you’re feeling the heat from the web and weblogs that are taking advertising money from your pocket?
Too bad Rick, Michael may be headed out of Aspen to national fame and fortune, while you’re probably hoping for the next opportunity for ribs with at the Hickory House with your favorite sheriff, and then being able to sell more real estate ads so you can afford those over priced vittles.
Your newspaper is extremely biased and full of poor reporting. We joke downvally that it’s basically the National Enquirer of the valley. Face it.
Lastly, if I was a blogger I’d consider it an honor to be fired sixteen times from your newspaper, let alone three. Kudos to Michael. Rick, blogging is opinion writing not newspaper reporting, so I guess Michael is qualified. Thanks for letting us know that.
Big Chief:
For the record: on Con Games this morning I said the Magnuson masturbation was a legitimate news story though perhaps overplayed. I only ask that the local media pay equal attention to the very real consequences of the Sheriff’s no-enforcement policies.
Rick Magnuson is a flawed and inexperienced candidate, but I do give him credit for fighting the fight. The exposure, the debate, the blogs, the slurs, the slings and arrows, are all to his credit. Yes, he will lose and probably lose big–but sometimes those are exactly the kinds of fights worth fighting.
As for the Sheriff, there’s no place to hide any more.
Big Chief:
For the record: on Con Games this morning I said the Magnuson masturbation was a legitimate news story though perhaps overplayed. I only ask that the local media pay equal attention to the very real consequences of the Sheriff’s no-enforcement policies.
Rick Magnuson is a flawed and inexperienced candidate, but I do give him credit for fighting the fight. The exposure, the debate, the blogs, the slurs, the slings and arrows, are all to his credit. Yes, he will lose and probably lose big–but sometimes those are exactly the kinds of fights worth fighting.
As for the Sheriff, there’s no place to hide any more.
This is certainly one of the more interesting posts of late.
I have listened to Con Games sporadically until recently, where I have tried to become more consistent in my attention to the show. One of the things I had really enjoyed is the representation by Michael that, although he is a “liberal”, he tries to present both sides of an issue and allow a forum for the free flow and exchange of ideas. Michael is also very intelligent and well-rounded from a conversant knowledge standpoint. We should appreciate his contributions through the establishment of Con Games and aspenpost.net.
Ironically, I became motivated to post on the blog as a result of the Troy Hooper story. I was listening to Con Games, and Michael described the “exploding drama” on aspenpost, and the fact he was thankful he could respond to the falsehoods spread by the ADN. I immediately went to the blog, read the stories, and felt as though it was a misdiagnosed drama. From an outsider’s perspective, it appeared Michael had an axe to grind with the Daily News. From your comments, Rick, I can understand that based upon his prior relationship with the paper, Michael may have a difficult time treating ADN issues with a neutral mindset.
I then listened to the treatment of the Braudis/drug issue, and was prompted to post not just to contribute my own views on the subject, but to counteract what I perceived to be a bias in the treatment of the subject on Con Games and in the editing of aspenpost. Certain comments and perspectives are prioritized and statistics submitted from one side of the coin are characterized as the definitive empirical findings on a particular subject, for example.
My intention in this post is not to wax philosophic on the merits of these arguments, whether it is the sheriff’s race, issues related to drug abuse in Pitkin County, or bias in journalism. Rather, this exchange has allowed me to realize that perhaps not only is bias human nature, but perhaps we should embrace it and in fact celebrate it. I profess to ignorance when it comes to journalistic ethics and norms, but I do recognize that, in this day and age, I read nothing generated by the media without considering the source and the perspective from which it is derived.
The only thing that really burns me is when a journalist or organization self-represents as unbiased when they clearly have a perspective. The obvious example is the Fox News “fair and balanced” misrepresentation. Hit me with your best conservative perspective and go after the New York Times. Just don’t patronize me with deception and subterfuge. Self-labeling appeals to the lowest common denominator. The Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies–are you kidding me?
Rick, if the Daily News is pro-Braudis (which it clearly seems to be), that is fine with me as long as you don’t print stories which are represented as a neutral treatment of the candidates. I believe almost everyone correctly interprets the decision to run the Magnuson video story as a pro-Braudis maneuver.
And Michael, I love your show, but perhaps you need to embrace the fact that it is your show and represents your opinions and biases. You have an axe to grind with the Daily News, Braudis, and you have strong personal views on most subjects. Remember, you are not presenting universal truths or even nonpartisan solutions to problems–you are presenting perspectives though the filter of your own lens.
This is certainly one of the more interesting posts of late.
I have listened to Con Games sporadically until recently, where I have tried to become more consistent in my attention to the show. One of the things I had really enjoyed is the representation by Michael that, although he is a “liberal”, he tries to present both sides of an issue and allow a forum for the free flow and exchange of ideas. Michael is also very intelligent and well-rounded from a conversant knowledge standpoint. We should appreciate his contributions through the establishment of Con Games and aspenpost.net.
Ironically, I became motivated to post on the blog as a result of the Troy Hooper story. I was listening to Con Games, and Michael described the “exploding drama” on aspenpost, and the fact he was thankful he could respond to the falsehoods spread by the ADN. I immediately went to the blog, read the stories, and felt as though it was a misdiagnosed drama. From an outsider’s perspective, it appeared Michael had an axe to grind with the Daily News. From your comments, Rick, I can understand that based upon his prior relationship with the paper, Michael may have a difficult time treating ADN issues with a neutral mindset.
I then listened to the treatment of the Braudis/drug issue, and was prompted to post not just to contribute my own views on the subject, but to counteract what I perceived to be a bias in the treatment of the subject on Con Games and in the editing of aspenpost. Certain comments and perspectives are prioritized and statistics submitted from one side of the coin are characterized as the definitive empirical findings on a particular subject, for example.
My intention in this post is not to wax philosophic on the merits of these arguments, whether it is the sheriff’s race, issues related to drug abuse in Pitkin County, or bias in journalism. Rather, this exchange has allowed me to realize that perhaps not only is bias human nature, but perhaps we should embrace it and in fact celebrate it. I profess to ignorance when it comes to journalistic ethics and norms, but I do recognize that, in this day and age, I read nothing generated by the media without considering the source and the perspective from which it is derived.
The only thing that really burns me is when a journalist or organization self-represents as unbiased when they clearly have a perspective. The obvious example is the Fox News “fair and balanced” misrepresentation. Hit me with your best conservative perspective and go after the New York Times. Just don’t patronize me with deception and subterfuge. Self-labeling appeals to the lowest common denominator. The Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies–are you kidding me?
Rick, if the Daily News is pro-Braudis (which it clearly seems to be), that is fine with me as long as you don’t print stories which are represented as a neutral treatment of the candidates. I believe almost everyone correctly interprets the decision to run the Magnuson video story as a pro-Braudis maneuver.
And Michael, I love your show, but perhaps you need to embrace the fact that it is your show and represents your opinions and biases. You have an axe to grind with the Daily News, Braudis, and you have strong personal views on most subjects. Remember, you are not presenting universal truths or even nonpartisan solutions to problems–you are presenting perspectives though the filter of your own lens.
Chief,
“Wanna know the funny part: I don’t even like Braudis that much, and think he does indeed need a healthy challenge. Rick’s challenge, however, has not been healthy. And he only has himself to blame.” For once, we agree, nicely put.
As for RC, I notice that he not only tried to justify his papers bias and still refuses to publicly admit it, but then attempts to discredit Michael. In keeping with typical liberal media reporting, if you can’t refute the facts, attack the messenger. I don’t see it as being Anti-Braudis to hold a publicly elected official accountable and have to answer for their record and the “papers” shouldn’t either. I for one am glad that Conniff and the Aspenpost bloggers are holding the papers accountable for their reporting, it’s about time. Maybe in time, we can get some “fair and balanced” reporting in this valley.
Chief,
“Wanna know the funny part: I don’t even like Braudis that much, and think he does indeed need a healthy challenge. Rick’s challenge, however, has not been healthy. And he only has himself to blame.” For once, we agree, nicely put.
As for RC, I notice that he not only tried to justify his papers bias and still refuses to publicly admit it, but then attempts to discredit Michael. In keeping with typical liberal media reporting, if you can’t refute the facts, attack the messenger. I don’t see it as being Anti-Braudis to hold a publicly elected official accountable and have to answer for their record and the “papers” shouldn’t either. I for one am glad that Conniff and the Aspenpost bloggers are holding the papers accountable for their reporting, it’s about time. Maybe in time, we can get some “fair and balanced” reporting in this valley.
Alpha,
That’s exactly what I’m talking about. You are in essence accusing the Daily News of “typical liberal media reporting” and asking for, in the alternative, “fair and balanced reporting.” But really, you are looking for a counterbalance to the “typical liberal media reporting”; namely, “conservative media reporting.”
I respect your opinions, sourced in conservativism, even though we are at odds in terms of our core politics. If you can give me an example of the “fair and balanced reporting” you seek, I will stand corrected. Otherwise, I think you are just trying to substitute one bias for another.
Alpha,
That’s exactly what I’m talking about. You are in essence accusing the Daily News of “typical liberal media reporting” and asking for, in the alternative, “fair and balanced reporting.” But really, you are looking for a counterbalance to the “typical liberal media reporting”; namely, “conservative media reporting.”
I respect your opinions, sourced in conservativism, even though we are at odds in terms of our core politics. If you can give me an example of the “fair and balanced reporting” you seek, I will stand corrected. Otherwise, I think you are just trying to substitute one bias for another.
WR,
You may be right in your assertion that in order to tip the scales back to the middle you would need a conservative leaning. However, maybe what I meant to say was a more objective type of reporting that at least attempts to present the issues without a bias.
Example below.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/16/AR2006101601134.html
WR,
You may be right in your assertion that in order to tip the scales back to the middle you would need a conservative leaning. However, maybe what I meant to say was a more objective type of reporting that at least attempts to present the issues without a bias.
Example below.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/16/AR2006101601134.html
Alpha,
I think the Wash Post is more able to print an objective story in that Aspen is a blip on their radar screen and they are printing more of an entertainment story.
When I was in DC, my rule of thumb was to read the liberal Wash Post and read the conservative Wash Times and then think for myself. I venture to say valley residents should do the same with the Daily News, Times, Valley Journal, etc.
Then, if all else fails, go to Moab, watch a few desert sunsets, and write about it on aspenpost.net.
Alpha,
I think the Wash Post is more able to print an objective story in that Aspen is a blip on their radar screen and they are printing more of an entertainment story.
When I was in DC, my rule of thumb was to read the liberal Wash Post and read the conservative Wash Times and then think for myself. I venture to say valley residents should do the same with the Daily News, Times, Valley Journal, etc.
Then, if all else fails, go to Moab, watch a few desert sunsets, and write about it on aspenpost.net.
sorry to see things get ugly with the con man and rick.
moab sounds real nice right about now wharf rat……
me like the con man – hearing him attack bush and the farce i mean war in iraq and religous freaks righ down the road is entertaining. that’s why i’m perplexed by his jihad against braudis.
now on the other hand his axe grind festival with the daily news is a personal issue – get a room guys.
sorry to see things get ugly with the con man and rick.
moab sounds real nice right about now wharf rat……
me like the con man – hearing him attack bush and the farce i mean war in iraq and religous freaks righ down the road is entertaining. that’s why i’m perplexed by his jihad against braudis.
now on the other hand his axe grind festival with the daily news is a personal issue – get a room guys.
John Goodwin wrote a letter to the editor addressing this recently. If the Aspen Daily News is going to be pro-Braudis, the least they can do is admit it so it is quantified and then keep their opinions to the editorial page. They seem flat out unwilling to do that and make no apologies for it, which in my opinion brings them severe discredit. (Although to be honest, they discredited themselves a long time ago in my eyes.)
Like Goodwin said, what ever happened to the notion of Questioning Authority? Isnt that what an informed electorate is supposed to do? That is what would normally be expected up until the minute that the editors of the Daily News support a candidate. After that happens, any question, no matter how innocent, of their man is sacrilege.
I’ll watch the debate tonight, I dont expect it to even be remotely fair given the moderators and who is screening the questions. It will be slanted against the real issues and devolve into a debate of non-issues. And people wonder why no one has stepped up to challenge Braudis.
As for Rick Carroll, I havent seen your name on the Endorsements list of Braudis’ website yet. You should call him up and ensure that you get on there lickety split.
John Goodwin wrote a letter to the editor addressing this recently. If the Aspen Daily News is going to be pro-Braudis, the least they can do is admit it so it is quantified and then keep their opinions to the editorial page. They seem flat out unwilling to do that and make no apologies for it, which in my opinion brings them severe discredit. (Although to be honest, they discredited themselves a long time ago in my eyes.)
Like Goodwin said, what ever happened to the notion of Questioning Authority? Isnt that what an informed electorate is supposed to do? That is what would normally be expected up until the minute that the editors of the Daily News support a candidate. After that happens, any question, no matter how innocent, of their man is sacrilege.
I’ll watch the debate tonight, I dont expect it to even be remotely fair given the moderators and who is screening the questions. It will be slanted against the real issues and devolve into a debate of non-issues. And people wonder why no one has stepped up to challenge Braudis.
As for Rick Carroll, I havent seen your name on the Endorsements list of Braudis’ website yet. You should call him up and ensure that you get on there lickety split.
so now the debate is unfair before it even started?
shouldn’t be a problem for rick. he’s a master debater from what i understand. god that sounded bad. he can handle it if he’s got his ducks in a row, and his data solid, right.
sure it’ll be a pony show – but like ol uncle mick jagger once said it the song ‘hand of fate’ : “I shoulda’ known it was a one horse town….”
so now the debate is unfair before it even started?
shouldn’t be a problem for rick. he’s a master debater from what i understand. god that sounded bad. he can handle it if he’s got his ducks in a row, and his data solid, right.
sure it’ll be a pony show – but like ol uncle mick jagger once said it the song ‘hand of fate’ : “I shoulda’ known it was a one horse town….”
hey jeff – nice pot shot at the hickory house. that was cute.
how can someone be fired THREE times from the daily news? what’s the punchline there?
bumpersticker recently spotted on a sheriffs car -
‘question authority’
hey jeff – nice pot shot at the hickory house. that was cute.
how can someone be fired THREE times from the daily news? what’s the punchline there?
bumpersticker recently spotted on a sheriffs car -
‘question authority’
Yoy can be certain that the Squirm Night bias will be hardly noticeable compared to the one sided AspenPost comentary. A sorry example of a pitifully biased blog.
Yoy can be certain that the Squirm Night bias will be hardly noticeable compared to the one sided AspenPost comentary. A sorry example of a pitifully biased blog.
Can you be sued for libel for a blog posting? Is it print?
Anyway, Michael Conniff just repeated his on-air slander in a blog when he wrote the Sheriff has a “… no-enforcement policy.” A patent lie.
Again I ask The Con Man for unqualified proof, or admit he’s hallucinating.
Not, “one can infer from recent statements,” or, “it is generally recognized that… ,” but show beyond refute that the PCSD never, never, ever under Braudis enforced a single drug statute.
Can you be sued for libel for a blog posting? Is it print?
Anyway, Michael Conniff just repeated his on-air slander in a blog when he wrote the Sheriff has a “… no-enforcement policy.” A patent lie.
Again I ask The Con Man for unqualified proof, or admit he’s hallucinating.
Not, “one can infer from recent statements,” or, “it is generally recognized that… ,” but show beyond refute that the PCSD never, never, ever under Braudis enforced a single drug statute.
“Yoy (you) can be certain that the Squirm Night bias will be hardly noticeable compared to the one sided AspenPost comentary. A sorry example of a pitifully biased blog.”
Ummm…this is an open blog. If you want to write about your perspective, write and post it!
Personally, I’d love some more substantive posts that are pro-Braudis. The pro-Braudis comments (and few posts) are more attacks on Magnuson and “cult of personality” blurbs on Bob than objective, substantive pieces showcasing his successes.
It’s funny how little the debate is being centered on the statistics and performance Magnuson is publicizing. There were two articles today on this–again no surprise on which paper took which view–but in general the stats on DUI deaths, drug deaths, cost efficacy, and even arrest efficiency are holding up. Even a very supportive quote in the Times from PitCo’s records person highlighting Magnuson’s data and statistics quality.
Funny also that Magnuson is using Braudis’s own data (both directly and through CBI), which Braudis himself called a “toilet bowl”; and he was unable to give “better” data before 2004 because his records “disappeared.”
I’ll blog on this tomorrow.
It’s amazing to me that blue, libeal Pitkin County is more obsessed about a Rove-ean character-smear article (see even the ‘push poll’ in the Daily News today) and freedom-of-speech, year old art video than real issues.
Any sanctimonious liberal and Braudis supporter in Aspen (and I’m liberal and a Democrat, for the record) who bemoans how Bush was elected in ’00 and ’04 needs to look in the mirror.
“Yoy (you) can be certain that the Squirm Night bias will be hardly noticeable compared to the one sided AspenPost comentary. A sorry example of a pitifully biased blog.”
Ummm…this is an open blog. If you want to write about your perspective, write and post it!
Personally, I’d love some more substantive posts that are pro-Braudis. The pro-Braudis comments (and few posts) are more attacks on Magnuson and “cult of personality” blurbs on Bob than objective, substantive pieces showcasing his successes.
It’s funny how little the debate is being centered on the statistics and performance Magnuson is publicizing. There were two articles today on this–again no surprise on which paper took which view–but in general the stats on DUI deaths, drug deaths, cost efficacy, and even arrest efficiency are holding up. Even a very supportive quote in the Times from PitCo’s records person highlighting Magnuson’s data and statistics quality.
Funny also that Magnuson is using Braudis’s own data (both directly and through CBI), which Braudis himself called a “toilet bowl”; and he was unable to give “better” data before 2004 because his records “disappeared.”
I’ll blog on this tomorrow.
It’s amazing to me that blue, libeal Pitkin County is more obsessed about a Rove-ean character-smear article (see even the ‘push poll’ in the Daily News today) and freedom-of-speech, year old art video than real issues.
Any sanctimonious liberal and Braudis supporter in Aspen (and I’m liberal and a Democrat, for the record) who bemoans how Bush was elected in ’00 and ’04 needs to look in the mirror.
One other comment: “Descending now into a blame-the-meda whining, and insistently backing up Rick’s deceptive and disingenuous “data-based” smear campaing even as you claim he is a role model for law enforcement.”
How is Magnuson’s data “deceptive and disingenious”?
I still have not seen any credible answer to this.
Braudis, on the other hand and as he acknowledged in today’s Aspen Times, admitted he “misstated” a bit when overstating DUI arrests by *700* (1000+ instead of ~300) over the past five years.
Again, I’ll blog on the statistics tomorrow but the stats are the one thing that we can have a good, issues-based objective conversation over. Rick has been fully transparent on his sources and methodologies, and it would be good for people to look into that as opposed to writing them off and again focusing on the video.
For instance, I’d like to see how Braudis came up with a 58% “success rate” for solving sexual assault crimes since 2004, when he’s had one arrest according to the CBI (and all his explanations of how his stats differ have to do with the denominator–crimes–not arrests). The CBI itself records 1 arrest out of 11 reported cases. Particularly as well as Respnose in the article claimed 20 victims came to them last year (20>>11, counting for the fact that not all victims report to the police, and some cases fall in grey areas aka Kobe Bryant).
Even if several of them fell into the Aspen jurisdiction (which had more than one sexual assault arrests last year), there is no way it’s even close to 58%.
Can we PLEASE debate these MUCH more important issues than the video, slams on Conniff, etc.?
One other comment: “Descending now into a blame-the-meda whining, and insistently backing up Rick’s deceptive and disingenuous “data-based” smear campaing even as you claim he is a role model for law enforcement.”
How is Magnuson’s data “deceptive and disingenious”?
I still have not seen any credible answer to this.
Braudis, on the other hand and as he acknowledged in today’s Aspen Times, admitted he “misstated” a bit when overstating DUI arrests by *700* (1000+ instead of ~300) over the past five years.
Again, I’ll blog on the statistics tomorrow but the stats are the one thing that we can have a good, issues-based objective conversation over. Rick has been fully transparent on his sources and methodologies, and it would be good for people to look into that as opposed to writing them off and again focusing on the video.
For instance, I’d like to see how Braudis came up with a 58% “success rate” for solving sexual assault crimes since 2004, when he’s had one arrest according to the CBI (and all his explanations of how his stats differ have to do with the denominator–crimes–not arrests). The CBI itself records 1 arrest out of 11 reported cases. Particularly as well as Respnose in the article claimed 20 victims came to them last year (20>>11, counting for the fact that not all victims report to the police, and some cases fall in grey areas aka Kobe Bryant).
Even if several of them fell into the Aspen jurisdiction (which had more than one sexual assault arrests last year), there is no way it’s even close to 58%.
Can we PLEASE debate these MUCH more important issues than the video, slams on Conniff, etc.?
yeah – and what’s the deal with the gaps in both these guys teeths?!
where’s the hooters girl for sheriff canidate dammit.
was hoping for the brawl in the grassroots studio tonite to cap the media frenzy, but it was all hype. goofy debate. was more like a chat with a psychologist than a debate. anticlimactic to say the least.
the hippyman asking about the occupying space arrest? and the ‘what did you want to be when you grow up?’ question were, well, i’m not sure.
yeah – and what’s the deal with the gaps in both these guys teeths?!
where’s the hooters girl for sheriff canidate dammit.
was hoping for the brawl in the grassroots studio tonite to cap the media frenzy, but it was all hype. goofy debate. was more like a chat with a psychologist than a debate. anticlimactic to say the least.
the hippyman asking about the occupying space arrest? and the ‘what did you want to be when you grow up?’ question were, well, i’m not sure.
I was kinda bummed I didn’t get to see the debate, but after Sailors brief, I guess I didn’t miss much. Thanks for the update.
I was kinda bummed I didn’t get to see the debate, but after Sailors brief, I guess I didn’t miss much. Thanks for the update.
rick did a great job – missed the opportunity to talk about the greenig of the fleet with some hybrids. most controversial part was discussion about the lack of trust between sheriff/apd.
braudis ‘won’ the dabate for the most part. but it wasn’t really contentious.
rick ironically quoted hunter s, and the comedy was when both were asked if they have ever done illegal drugs while in office – they both said yes – in amsterdam. suuuuuuuuure ya did. rick was all pro reefer.
braudis came across as being the teacher, and rick the student.
don’t fret alfalfa, they’ll air it a bunch more – grassroots is real good like that.
rick did a great job – missed the opportunity to talk about the greenig of the fleet with some hybrids. most controversial part was discussion about the lack of trust between sheriff/apd.
braudis ‘won’ the dabate for the most part. but it wasn’t really contentious.
rick ironically quoted hunter s, and the comedy was when both were asked if they have ever done illegal drugs while in office – they both said yes – in amsterdam. suuuuuuuuure ya did. rick was all pro reefer.
braudis came across as being the teacher, and rick the student.
don’t fret alfalfa, they’ll air it a bunch more – grassroots is real good like that.
Michael. You clearly have an agenda (anti-Braudis), an axe to grind (anti-Daily News), and maybe some PTSD (personal experience with substance abuse). Fair enough. It shows. The problem lies in your self-righteous complaints about other people’s agendas and biases — which comes off as whining. So much drama. Thanks, but no thanks; we already have plenty of that. That approach works for the right; and so we get plenty of it from the right.
Being a liberal comes with a responsibility. You don’t stoop to the methods of the right. You build your coalitions through fair brokering and intellectual honesty. Being a liberal means doing it the hard way. The seductions (and sadly, recent effectiveness) of reactionary techniques is such that the left has been drawn into those methods too, as we all regress nationally back towards a dysfunctional childhood.
“The only society more frightful than one run by children, as in Golding’s Lord of the Flies, might be one run by childish adults.” – Paul Shepard
The high road is the only road. All good and lasting change comes naturally through channels of human dignity and decency. The dark side of the force is always out there, beckoning us to justify the means with the ends. The practitioners of the dark side taunt us by their apparent success – achieved through distortions and deceptions.
You might feel justified in celebrating the small victory of asking some tough questions of Braudis and getting it on the radar. Very well; pat yourself on the back. But at what cost? Does this feel good? Do you feel like we have a healthier dialog now? Do you feel like the community is a step closer to solving its problems in a lasting way that is harmonious with its values and democratically expressed self determination?
It feels to me like you have soiled yourself, and your blogging venture, in a personally-driven vendetta, one that was only marginally obscured by manufactured platitudes about bias and electoral dialog. The accomplishment was small, the benefit will fade, and the cost was high. That’s not liberal.
This is not to say that liberalism cannot have some fight in it, with some righteous indignation and iconoclasm thrown in. On the contrary, liberalism at its finest has all that. But it is built honestly and stays true to its principles first.
=====//====
As an aside, the notion of “unbiased” media is a chimera. Bias is human nature and an expected behavior among humans. Absent it, we don’t know what to do. There is no neutral in humans and there should not be. (Perhaps you’ve never listened to people talk about professional sports refereeing – it is an impossible expectation; and one that can never satisfy in its purported aim). In any journalism that’s worth a damn; someone’s ox is always gored.
What we really want is professionalism and disclosure. Professionalism means doing your homework, being honest and complete, being truthful and forthright, making the connections, and being accountable. Disclosure means making a good faith effort to disclose those views and relationships that your readers might reasonably view as a conflict of interest. After that; it’s caveat emptor.
You know things are seriously screwed up when the major media outlet most proudly claiming to be unbiased is in fact the most relentlessly openly biased one of all.
“The enemy isn’t liberalism. The enemy isn’t conservativism. The enemy is bullshit” — Lars-Erik Nelson.
=====//======
Back to the data campaign. The dishonesty comes in places like insisting on calling sexual assault “rape”, or in comparing rural county jursdictions to more dense city jurisdiction inconsistently: holding Braudis responsible for APD jurisdiction crime enforcement on the drug crime side, but then comparing him against APD stats on the arrest side. All very disingenuous. The CBI should have cleared that all up for Rick’s supporters, but it did not take. Rick’s supporters learned how repeat a meme until it becomes conventional wisdom regardless of the accuracy from Karl Rove himself. Very unbecoming of liberals.
In any event, this whole stats thing has an air of desperation about it. This is a small town; why do we need to discuss it in the third person? Show me all the debased women wandering the streets without any man to avenge their honor. Show me the rampant auto theft. The open air drug markets. The people afraid to walk the streets at night. The roving bands of teen gangs….. hell, I would be willing to bet that four out of five cars stolen in all of western colorado still have the keys in the frigging ignition.
By that I mean, the reality is; we are doing pretty good here. So you hide behind impersonal stats to create a perception of crisis. Which is why this effort of yours falls on mosty deaf ears. You are not Karl Rove; you cannot scare people stupid here with a trumped up fear campaign.
Braudis needs a kick in the pants; fine. He did not need a hysterical and disingenuous smear campaign by a bunch of bloggers alternating between hyperbole, cherry picking, and self-important self-referencing.
Which is why I predict this little exercize in performance art won’t amount to a load of goo in a hole.
Michael. You clearly have an agenda (anti-Braudis), an axe to grind (anti-Daily News), and maybe some PTSD (personal experience with substance abuse). Fair enough. It shows. The problem lies in your self-righteous complaints about other people’s agendas and biases — which comes off as whining. So much drama. Thanks, but no thanks; we already have plenty of that. That approach works for the right; and so we get plenty of it from the right.
Being a liberal comes with a responsibility. You don’t stoop to the methods of the right. You build your coalitions through fair brokering and intellectual honesty. Being a liberal means doing it the hard way. The seductions (and sadly, recent effectiveness) of reactionary techniques is such that the left has been drawn into those methods too, as we all regress nationally back towards a dysfunctional childhood.
“The only society more frightful than one run by children, as in Golding’s Lord of the Flies, might be one run by childish adults.” – Paul Shepard
The high road is the only road. All good and lasting change comes naturally through channels of human dignity and decency. The dark side of the force is always out there, beckoning us to justify the means with the ends. The practitioners of the dark side taunt us by their apparent success – achieved through distortions and deceptions.
You might feel justified in celebrating the small victory of asking some tough questions of Braudis and getting it on the radar. Very well; pat yourself on the back. But at what cost? Does this feel good? Do you feel like we have a healthier dialog now? Do you feel like the community is a step closer to solving its problems in a lasting way that is harmonious with its values and democratically expressed self determination?
It feels to me like you have soiled yourself, and your blogging venture, in a personally-driven vendetta, one that was only marginally obscured by manufactured platitudes about bias and electoral dialog. The accomplishment was small, the benefit will fade, and the cost was high. That’s not liberal.
This is not to say that liberalism cannot have some fight in it, with some righteous indignation and iconoclasm thrown in. On the contrary, liberalism at its finest has all that. But it is built honestly and stays true to its principles first.
=====//====
As an aside, the notion of “unbiased” media is a chimera. Bias is human nature and an expected behavior among humans. Absent it, we don’t know what to do. There is no neutral in humans and there should not be. (Perhaps you’ve never listened to people talk about professional sports refereeing – it is an impossible expectation; and one that can never satisfy in its purported aim). In any journalism that’s worth a damn; someone’s ox is always gored.
What we really want is professionalism and disclosure. Professionalism means doing your homework, being honest and complete, being truthful and forthright, making the connections, and being accountable. Disclosure means making a good faith effort to disclose those views and relationships that your readers might reasonably view as a conflict of interest. After that; it’s caveat emptor.
You know things are seriously screwed up when the major media outlet most proudly claiming to be unbiased is in fact the most relentlessly openly biased one of all.
“The enemy isn’t liberalism. The enemy isn’t conservativism. The enemy is bullshit” — Lars-Erik Nelson.
=====//======
Back to the data campaign. The dishonesty comes in places like insisting on calling sexual assault “rape”, or in comparing rural county jursdictions to more dense city jurisdiction inconsistently: holding Braudis responsible for APD jurisdiction crime enforcement on the drug crime side, but then comparing him against APD stats on the arrest side. All very disingenuous. The CBI should have cleared that all up for Rick’s supporters, but it did not take. Rick’s supporters learned how repeat a meme until it becomes conventional wisdom regardless of the accuracy from Karl Rove himself. Very unbecoming of liberals.
In any event, this whole stats thing has an air of desperation about it. This is a small town; why do we need to discuss it in the third person? Show me all the debased women wandering the streets without any man to avenge their honor. Show me the rampant auto theft. The open air drug markets. The people afraid to walk the streets at night. The roving bands of teen gangs….. hell, I would be willing to bet that four out of five cars stolen in all of western colorado still have the keys in the frigging ignition.
By that I mean, the reality is; we are doing pretty good here. So you hide behind impersonal stats to create a perception of crisis. Which is why this effort of yours falls on mosty deaf ears. You are not Karl Rove; you cannot scare people stupid here with a trumped up fear campaign.
Braudis needs a kick in the pants; fine. He did not need a hysterical and disingenuous smear campaign by a bunch of bloggers alternating between hyperbole, cherry picking, and self-important self-referencing.
Which is why I predict this little exercize in performance art won’t amount to a load of goo in a hole.
Chief,
I hope that from all this, changes are made in how the Sheriff’s department operates. But you have to admit that if it weren’t for this opportunity to blog about local issues, none of this would ever have been discussed and it would be business as usual in the PCSO.
I personally have not witnessed a smear campaign. I have witnessed a calling for accountability. Your attack on the people who post their opinions here, which you are free to do also is the height of disingenuous and hypocritical to say the least.
One last thing…good job on your use of quotes. Very nicely done.
Chief,
I hope that from all this, changes are made in how the Sheriff’s department operates. But you have to admit that if it weren’t for this opportunity to blog about local issues, none of this would ever have been discussed and it would be business as usual in the PCSO.
I personally have not witnessed a smear campaign. I have witnessed a calling for accountability. Your attack on the people who post their opinions here, which you are free to do also is the height of disingenuous and hypocritical to say the least.
One last thing…good job on your use of quotes. Very nicely done.
Big Chief:
Enjoy your analysis. As the primary messenger on Aspen Post, I have been killed a million times. But it’s not about me or the Daily News, is it? It’s about the Sheriff.
For the record: I don’t know anyone personally who’s died of drug abuse, though I have of course seen what it can do to a person’s life, as have you. As for Braudis, I don’t know him from a hole in the wall, but I have this thing about holding politicians to account. When they disappear without explanation, my shit detector goes off.
Truth can be a drug, too, more intoxicating than any other.
Big Chief:
Enjoy your analysis. As the primary messenger on Aspen Post, I have been killed a million times. But it’s not about me or the Daily News, is it? It’s about the Sheriff.
For the record: I don’t know anyone personally who’s died of drug abuse, though I have of course seen what it can do to a person’s life, as have you. As for Braudis, I don’t know him from a hole in the wall, but I have this thing about holding politicians to account. When they disappear without explanation, my shit detector goes off.
Truth can be a drug, too, more intoxicating than any other.
Michael B,
I have another question regarding your statistics, which you seem to believe are ironclad at this juncture.
Have you run your calculations by anyone with any degree of training in statistical analysis? My only experience in that field was derived from graduate courses in political science, so I am by no means a trained statistician, but it appears that your statistics may suffer from margin of error and minimum sample problems, as well as statistically inaccurate population size comparisons.
I have not been able to confirm your “drug-related death” numbers, and I am taking your word that they are accurate, although you have not disclosed what a “drug-related death” encompasses. In my mind, a drug-induced suicide is a drug-related death, yet you exclude that figure from the 30 metro area figures. If you include that figure, Pitkin County’s drug-related death count per population is comparatively lessened.
The CDPHE statistics I consulted indicate that for all years between 1999 and 2004, Pitkin County had between 0 and 4 drug-related deaths (only two years did the number of deaths exceed 2). The CDPHE indicates those numbers with an asterisk, stating “less than three incidents”. I believe that is done because less than three deaths for the population size is statistically insignificant.
This means that in any given year, Pitkin County can be viewed as the model drug abuse community (zero deaths) or, as you have described, a drug jungle which puts Marion Berry’s crack community to shame (four deaths). I believe there are also statistical errors in comparing a population of 16,000 with zero to four incidents and populations of 500,000 to 4,000,000 with a more substantial number of incidents. And, as I noted before, you only address victim deaths–one of myriad social costs related to drug use, abuse, and the criminal drug economy.
If you closely examine the results of the 30-metro-area study you cited, even with large population statistical analysis there is a wide variation in the drug-related death rate, and as such, blanket conclusions cannot be reached. For example, if you really believe that your rudimentary statistical analysis proves that Pitkin County has a more serious drug problem than Washington DC and Denver, then you have also proven that Ogden, Utah has a drug problem far worse than any of those three. I sincerely doubt a serious statistician would agree with that conclusion.
One example I found illuminating related to the drunk driving death statistics in Colorado. During one of the sample periods, I noticed that Rio Blanco County (our sheep-dog trials neighbor) led the state in drunk-driving deaths per population. Quite a surprise, until I realized that one death with a low population count puts them on top of the heap. If statistics don’t lie, then there should have been a recall of the Rio Blanco County Sheriff for lack of DUI enforcement.
I applaud your efforts, but I think we need to be careful about submitting amateur statistical calculations made by you, me, or Magnuson for that matter, and considering them as gospel.
I live in Garfield County, so I don’t have my finger on the pulse of Pitco, although I did live there for three years. Never saw a drug. Only place I can ever say that is the case. I know it goes on all the time up there, just like it does everywhere (as far as I know).
In my opinion, substance abuse is a problem that reaches every community, and it takes a much more sophisticated statistical analysis than we are contributing to say that one community is worse than another.
Michael B,
I have another question regarding your statistics, which you seem to believe are ironclad at this juncture.
Have you run your calculations by anyone with any degree of training in statistical analysis? My only experience in that field was derived from graduate courses in political science, so I am by no means a trained statistician, but it appears that your statistics may suffer from margin of error and minimum sample problems, as well as statistically inaccurate population size comparisons.
I have not been able to confirm your “drug-related death” numbers, and I am taking your word that they are accurate, although you have not disclosed what a “drug-related death” encompasses. In my mind, a drug-induced suicide is a drug-related death, yet you exclude that figure from the 30 metro area figures. If you include that figure, Pitkin County’s drug-related death count per population is comparatively lessened.
The CDPHE statistics I consulted indicate that for all years between 1999 and 2004, Pitkin County had between 0 and 4 drug-related deaths (only two years did the number of deaths exceed 2). The CDPHE indicates those numbers with an asterisk, stating “less than three incidents”. I believe that is done because less than three deaths for the population size is statistically insignificant.
This means that in any given year, Pitkin County can be viewed as the model drug abuse community (zero deaths) or, as you have described, a drug jungle which puts Marion Berry’s crack community to shame (four deaths). I believe there are also statistical errors in comparing a population of 16,000 with zero to four incidents and populations of 500,000 to 4,000,000 with a more substantial number of incidents. And, as I noted before, you only address victim deaths–one of myriad social costs related to drug use, abuse, and the criminal drug economy.
If you closely examine the results of the 30-metro-area study you cited, even with large population statistical analysis there is a wide variation in the drug-related death rate, and as such, blanket conclusions cannot be reached. For example, if you really believe that your rudimentary statistical analysis proves that Pitkin County has a more serious drug problem than Washington DC and Denver, then you have also proven that Ogden, Utah has a drug problem far worse than any of those three. I sincerely doubt a serious statistician would agree with that conclusion.
One example I found illuminating related to the drunk driving death statistics in Colorado. During one of the sample periods, I noticed that Rio Blanco County (our sheep-dog trials neighbor) led the state in drunk-driving deaths per population. Quite a surprise, until I realized that one death with a low population count puts them on top of the heap. If statistics don’t lie, then there should have been a recall of the Rio Blanco County Sheriff for lack of DUI enforcement.
I applaud your efforts, but I think we need to be careful about submitting amateur statistical calculations made by you, me, or Magnuson for that matter, and considering them as gospel.
I live in Garfield County, so I don’t have my finger on the pulse of Pitco, although I did live there for three years. Never saw a drug. Only place I can ever say that is the case. I know it goes on all the time up there, just like it does everywhere (as far as I know).
In my opinion, substance abuse is a problem that reaches every community, and it takes a much more sophisticated statistical analysis than we are contributing to say that one community is worse than another.
WR,
Even without looking at the statistics, right off the top of my head last year these people died in Pitkin on drug related incidents. There was Thompson, the nurse ODing on drugs right on Main, Flip Wright, and then the guy that hung himself and tried to burn down the apartment complex …and these are just the ones that actually made the news that I remember without even doing a search of the news.. That’s four, and if I actually took the time to look and went to the hospital to check, I am sure it would be higher.
I am not sure how things are reported to CBI, we have to assume they are accurate because they are the official numbers being reported to the state. Regardless, just from living in this town we know that our incidence of drug related deaths in Pitkin is far from Zero.
WR,
Even without looking at the statistics, right off the top of my head last year these people died in Pitkin on drug related incidents. There was Thompson, the nurse ODing on drugs right on Main, Flip Wright, and then the guy that hung himself and tried to burn down the apartment complex …and these are just the ones that actually made the news that I remember without even doing a search of the news.. That’s four, and if I actually took the time to look and went to the hospital to check, I am sure it would be higher.
I am not sure how things are reported to CBI, we have to assume they are accurate because they are the official numbers being reported to the state. Regardless, just from living in this town we know that our incidence of drug related deaths in Pitkin is far from Zero.
Link: http://www.cdphe.state.co.us/hs/vs/
2005 – 4
2004 – 3
2003 – * (1 or 2 events)
2002 – * (1 or 2 events)
2001 – 0
2000 – * (fewer than 3 events)
1999 – * (fewer than 3 events)
Link: http://www.cdphe.state.co.us/hs/vs/
2005 – 4
2004 – 3
2003 – * (1 or 2 events)
2002 – * (1 or 2 events)
2001 – 0
2000 – * (fewer than 3 events)
1999 – * (fewer than 3 events)
Alpha,
I don’t know who Flip Wright is, or what happened to him, but you identified two of the four as “drug-induced suicides.” Brylawski excludes those figures from the big city statistics but includes them in the Pitco statistics.
Statistics are helpful, but the “statistics don’t lie” statement made by Magnuson and Brylawski is a dangerous oversimplification.
Alpha,
I don’t know who Flip Wright is, or what happened to him, but you identified two of the four as “drug-induced suicides.” Brylawski excludes those figures from the big city statistics but includes them in the Pitco statistics.
Statistics are helpful, but the “statistics don’t lie” statement made by Magnuson and Brylawski is a dangerous oversimplification.
Like I said, these were just ones that I remembered off the top of my head. Kind of wanted to put out that it is more of a problem then anyone wants to admit. (or at least the Sheriff’s dept.)
At any rate, you are right, with statistics, you can manipulate them to fit just about any agenda you are trying to push…if you know what you are doing.
Like you I am no mathematician, so I won’t try and delve into the statistical analysis of these figures, but from a realistic standpoint…there are drug related deaths in Pitkin…and that’s just the deaths, no telling how many OD’s take place that don’t result in death.
Like I said, these were just ones that I remembered off the top of my head. Kind of wanted to put out that it is more of a problem then anyone wants to admit. (or at least the Sheriff’s dept.)
At any rate, you are right, with statistics, you can manipulate them to fit just about any agenda you are trying to push…if you know what you are doing.
Like you I am no mathematician, so I won’t try and delve into the statistical analysis of these figures, but from a realistic standpoint…there are drug related deaths in Pitkin…and that’s just the deaths, no telling how many OD’s take place that don’t result in death.
ALPHA6,
Thompson died from a shot to the head, The guy who tried to burn down the apartment died because he hung himself both suicides but not necessarily drug induced. Do they really keep those stats as drug related?
ALPHA6,
Thompson died from a shot to the head, The guy who tried to burn down the apartment died because he hung himself both suicides but not necessarily drug induced. Do they really keep those stats as drug related?
Thompson was using drugs at the time of his suicide, we would be able to prove this if the Sheriff had not covered it up by requesting an autopsy not be done. A very unusual thing in that it was a violent, unattended death. (but that’s another story.) The guy who hung himself was known to be dealing out of that apartment complex. So yes, I would say that these two deaths are drug related.
Thompson was using drugs at the time of his suicide, we would be able to prove this if the Sheriff had not covered it up by requesting an autopsy not be done. A very unusual thing in that it was a violent, unattended death. (but that’s another story.) The guy who hung himself was known to be dealing out of that apartment complex. So yes, I would say that these two deaths are drug related.
Please see my comments about WharfRat’s take on my analysis on the “CSI: Aspen” thread.
Peeling the onion, it looks like if you compare national data to Pitkins’, the figures stand, as all of the accusations on “margin of error”, “sample size”, etc. don’t apply. The sample IS the population size–we are comparing a rate with a rate.
The data, as long as it’s good, in other words can’t be manipulated. It’s dividing TOTAL dealths by TOTAL population. There is no room for “statistical” bias.
One can question the data, but 1) deaths in Pitkin come from the coroner’s office, and read my letter to the editor in tomorrow;s Aspen Times on that, 2) deaths in the US come from a CSDP.org (a pro-decriminalization website) and 3) population is pretty firm as well.
I don’t want to get any more into the city by city data (again, as I said, add the suicides in and it is about a 20% margin, e.g., Denver’s rate goes from 100 to 120), so I’m willing to throw all that out if you want to. The directionality of this data is pretty clear, and I’ll compare it to the US death rate from now on. But the US death rate, again, is much lower than the cities.
BTW, as I said there, I like this substantive discussion.
Please see my comments about WharfRat’s take on my analysis on the “CSI: Aspen” thread.
Peeling the onion, it looks like if you compare national data to Pitkins’, the figures stand, as all of the accusations on “margin of error”, “sample size”, etc. don’t apply. The sample IS the population size–we are comparing a rate with a rate.
The data, as long as it’s good, in other words can’t be manipulated. It’s dividing TOTAL dealths by TOTAL population. There is no room for “statistical” bias.
One can question the data, but 1) deaths in Pitkin come from the coroner’s office, and read my letter to the editor in tomorrow;s Aspen Times on that, 2) deaths in the US come from a CSDP.org (a pro-decriminalization website) and 3) population is pretty firm as well.
I don’t want to get any more into the city by city data (again, as I said, add the suicides in and it is about a 20% margin, e.g., Denver’s rate goes from 100 to 120), so I’m willing to throw all that out if you want to. The directionality of this data is pretty clear, and I’ll compare it to the US death rate from now on. But the US death rate, again, is much lower than the cities.
BTW, as I said there, I like this substantive discussion.