Grand Rapids Institute for Information Democracy

Analysis:

This Associated Press story was based on a Congressional vote of the most recent Iraq War funding legislation. The version that the Grand Rapids Press ran was considerably shorter than the original version – see omitted section. The omitted portion of the AP story has some of the details of the bill that was passed in the House, bill H.R.416. Why would the Press omit the text of the story that actually provided readers with what the legislation was proposing? The shortened version of the story gives the impression that this legislation is about “bringing troops home in coming weeks with a goal of ending combat by December 2008.” The only source cited in this story is that of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. There are numerous independent sources on this story that provide greater details on how local lawmakers voted as well as what H.R.4156 actually says about how US troops will be redeployed in Iraq and that as many as 30,000 US troops will remain in that country.

Story:

House Democrats pushed through a $50 billion bill for the Iraq war Wednesday night that would require President Bush to start bringing troops home in coming weeks with a goal of ending combat by December 2008.

The legislation, passed 218-203, was largely a symbolic jab at Bush, who already has begun reducing force levels but opposes a congressionally mandated timetable on the war. And while the measure was unlikely to pass in the Senate – let alone overcome a presidential veto – Democrats said they wanted voters to know they weren’t giving up. All West Michigan lawmakers voted against it.

“The fact is, we can no longer sustain the military deployment in Iraq,” said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif. “Staying there in the manner that we are there is no longer an option.”

The White House pledged to veto the bill, and Republicans said they would back the president.

Text from the original article ommitted from the Grand Rapids Press version:

“These votes, like the dozens of previous failed votes, put the interests of radical interest groups ahead of the needs of our military and their mission,” an administration statement said.

The bill represents about a quarter of the $196 billion Bush requested for combat operations in the 2008 budget year, which began Oct 1.

It would compel an unspecified number of troops to leave Iraq within 30 days, a requirement Bush is already on track to meet as he begins in coming weeks to reverse the 30,000 troop buildup he ordered earlier this year. It also sets a goal of ending combat by Dec. 15, 2008, and states that money included in the bill should be used to redeploy troops and “not to extend or prolong the war.”

The measure also would set government-wide standards on interrogation, effectively barring the CIA from using such harsh techniques as waterboarding, which simulates drowning.

The bill was on shaky ground this week, after some liberal Democrats said they were concerned it was too soft and would not force Bush to end the war. Conservative Democrats said they thought it went too far and would tie the hands of military commanders.

The bill’s prospects brightened somewhat after three leading anti-war Democrats announced they would support it. California Reps. Lynn Woolsey, Barbara Lee and Maxine Waters said they had agreed to swing behind it because the bill explicitly states the money should be used to bring troops home.

But still uncertain the bill would pass, Pelosi on Wednesday delayed a vote by several hours while she met with supporters and asked them to help her round up votes.

Fifteen Democrats broke ranks and joined 188 Republicans in opposing the measure. Four Republicans joined 214 Democrats in supporting it.

Republicans fought bitterly against the timetable in the bill, as well as the restrictions on interrogations. Rep. John Boehner, R-Ohio, his party’s leader, said the bill would lead to “nothing other than failure.”

Hours before the scheduled vote, the White House dispatched Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to Capitol Hill to brief lawmakers on Iraq.

In one closed-door meeting, Gates urged a group of senators not to support the bill. He said the same lawmakers who criticized Pentagon civilians for previously ignoring the advice of its uniformed generals were asking him to ignore them now, according to an official who attended the meeting. The official requested anonymity because the meeting was private.

Similar legislation has passed repeatedly along party lines in the House only to sink in the Senate, where Democrats hold a razor-thin majority and 60 votes are needed to overcome procedural hurdles.

It is expected that if the measure fails in the Senate, Democrats will not consider Bush’s war spending request until next year. Democrats say the military won’t need the money until then and the Pentagon can transfer money from less urgent accounts or from spending set aside for the last three months of this year.

The Pentagon says moving money around is a bureaucratic nightmare that costs more in the long run. And if taken to the extreme, the military would eventually have to freeze contracts or lay off civilian workers to ensure troops in combat have what they need.

In another provision that drew White House opposition, the House bill would require that all government interrogators rely on the Army Field Manual. The manual is based on Geneva Convention standards and was updated in 2006 to specifically prohibit the military from using aggressive interrogation techniques, such as waterboarding.

The White House said in its statement that the Geneva Conventions shouldn’t apply to “captured terrorists who openly flout that law.”

The bill also would require the president to certify to Congress 15 days in advance that a unit being sent into combat is “fully mission capable,” although Bush could waive that requirement if necessary.

Analysis:

This story is based upon a local case of a man who is trying to enlist in the military but is having difficulty do to “admission standards.” The story begins by telling the story of a man who has been denied entry into the military because of his criminal record, where he was charged with assaulting his girlfriend. This man is cited in the story and then the reporter claims that these standards might change because of low recruitment rates for the military. The story says nothing about why recrutiment rates are down, despite increased efforts from the Pentagon.

The story shifts from a specific case of domestic violence to a broader look at the increase in waivers for those seeking to enlist inthe military. An Army recruiter and an area Marine are cited in the story, but there are no dissenting or independent voices on this issue. Also, it is important to note that even though the story initially focuses on a domestic abuse case, the military spokespersons limit their comments to issues around substance abuse. Why was the issue of allowing men in the military who have a history of abusing women not pursued by the reporter? It seems like an important angle, since that is what prompted the story in the first place and because sexual assault of women in the US military is a serious problem.

Story:

For the past two years David Pace tried his best to join the Army. He worked with his recruiter and even wrote his local congressman. Repeatedly he was denied.

Back in 2000, Pace was convicted on a domestic violence charge for what he says was a verbal altercation with a former girlfriend. He served one year probation, but spent no time in jail.

Under current Army standards, Pace’s past discretion is considered severe enough to disqualify him for a waiver. His desire to serve ended there.

“I’m trying to serve my country and better myself and I couldn’t get the opportunity. It’s just not fair,” said Pace.

The standards may soon change.

Military recruitment numbers are falling fast.

It’s making it easier for some West Michigan residents with less-than-stellar criminal records to join up.

In order to boost recruiting numbers, the Pentagon is currently conducting a review to make it easier for people with minor criminal records to join.

The number of Army recruits needing waivers for things like minor drug use and petty theft rose from 15 percent in 2006 to 18 percent in 2007.

As it stands now, the waiver process is time consuming and paper work heavy.

While streamlining the process may make it easier to sign someone up, many recruiters prefer quality over larger numbers.

“You’ve got to have quality control. We can’t have people that are addicted to drugs and alcohol in our ranks,” said Army recruiter Sgt. First Class James Brandt.

The Pentagon would also like to make the waiver process more consistent between different branches of the service.

The Marine standard is the most strict. The Marines require a waiver for one-time marijuana use. Other services do not.

“Because ultimately my main goal is to make the Marine Corps stronger, not weaker,” said Staff Sgt. Mario Marin.

Both Army and Marine recruiters in Grand Rapids are meeting their recruitment goals.

As it stands now, about three in every ten recruits must get a waiver to join. Many of them are granted for medical reasons and not because of a criminal past.

Analysis:

This story is based upon President Bush’s Veteran’s Day speech in Waco, Texas. Bush addressed military veterans and military families. The only people cited in the story are Bush–who speaks to the loss of US soldiers–and White House spokesperson Gordon Johndroe. Johndroe states that Bush originally was going to attack the Democrats for not “approving the Veterans Affairs appropriation.” The article makes nomention of what the Veterans Affairs appropriation is, nor why the Democrats haven’t approved it. The partisan issue is what is highlighted in the headline, but does the story focus on that aspect? Why are there no veteran voices in this story and would have it been useful for readers to get an overview of what kind of support the Bush administration has been providing to veterans and their familes while in office?

Story:

In the simple hall — linoleum floor, white cinder-block walls — that is home to American Legion Post 121, President Bush on Sunday told the families of two soldiers and two Marines who died in Iraq that “their sacrifice will not be in vain.”

His brief message on Veterans Day was one that finds its way regularly into his speeches about the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and in his now-frequent private meetings with families of the wars’ casualties.

But on Sunday, his part in the ceremony, a six-minute speech, suggested an afterthought — after four mayors awkwardly read the stilted language of memorial resolutions, after the presentation of Lone Star flags that had flown over the Capitol in Austin, Texas, and after “gold star” banners were handed to mothers and widows.

Bush sat through it all — the recounting, one by one, of the lives and the losses — and by the time he was called to speak before about 200 people, he abandoned what had been planned as the political focus of his remarks: an attack on Democrats for not yet approving the Veterans Affairs appropriation.

“He felt it was more appropriate to shorten his remarks,” White House spokesman Gordon D. Johndroe said.

Bush was seated in the second row; parents and widows were in the first. He sat next to Janie Shanks, grandmother of Marine Gunnery Sgt. John David Fry, who was 28 when he died in Iraq on March 8, 2006.

On one mission, Fry, the father of three children, entered a home to disarm an improvised bomb strapped to a retarded child, said Democratic Rep. Chet Edwards, whose congressional district includes Waco.

Days before his tour was to end, Fry volunteered for another mission to defuse a bomb , Edwards said. That one killed him.

On Sunday, there was an elderly bugler in a yellow cap, white gloves grasping his horn as he blew taps. A local woman, Ann Harder, sang “God Bless America” a cappella and solo, until she paused, said, “Sing with me,” and 200 voices joined in.

The post commander, Clayton Hueske, admitted he was nervous and stumbled over his words; another speaker gave the audience permission to cry.

Some speakers, but not all, were dressed in jacket and tie. In the audience were leather motorcycle vests, a white shirt with an American flag, a red 2004 state high school football championship T-shirt — and, throughout, the quiet sound of sniffling.

“The young men we remember today did not live to be called veterans,” Bush said in his speech. “The valor and selfless devotion of these men fills their families with immeasurable pride. Yet this pride cannot fill the hole in their loved ones’ aching hearts, or relieve the burden of grief that will remain for a lifetime.

“In their sorrow,” he said, “these families need to know, and families all across the nation of the fallen need to know, that your loved ones served a cause that is good, and just, and noble.”

Analysis:

This brief piece from the Grand Rapids Press comes from the Press’ “Polpourri” section, an area of the Sunday paper described on the Grand Rapids Press’ website as containing “political tidbits.” These are most often paragraph long pieces written in a tone that tends to trivialize the issues at hand.

In this case, the Press mentions that Representative Vernon Ehlers is being targeted by an unnamed “liberal advocacy group” working to convince Ehlers not to support an invasion with Iran. Would it have been helpful if the group was identified? In the discussion of Ehlers and Americans Against Escalation in Iraq, the article is ambiguously worded and could be read to say that Ehlers was successfully pressured to “change his stance” although that did not happen and Ehlers has remained supportive of the war. Also, the Press does not include anything about Ehlers’ voting record on Iraq.

Story:

First, U.S. Rep. Vern Ehlers was targeted by an anti-war group called Americans Against Escalation in Iraq. They pressured Ehlers to change his stance on the war, part of a national campaign focused on select members of Congress. Now, another liberal advocacy group is dialing up residents and urging them to demand Ehlers stop the Bush administration from going to war with Iran. Ehlers said he can spare them the effort. “There is no way I want to go to war with Iran. There is probably nothing to be gained by us attacking Iran.”

Analysis:

This story briefly discusses Thursday’s opening of deer hunting season. The story cites some statistics from the Michigan Department of Natural Resources on deer population, but then talks about the latest hunting products. Is there any news value in this story or is it essentially just free advertising for hunting products?

Story:

Michigan’s Fire Arms Deer Season starts at sunrise on Thursday.

The state estimates 735,000 hunters will spend time in the woods this year. Those hunters are expected to spend $500-million in the state before and during the season.

Many of them will start their preparations this weekend going to sporting goods stores to search for the newest gear.

Dalen Tobey says when he started hunting 57 years ago all it took was a gun, ammunition and some patience.

Mike Byrnes only needed a simple lens cover to be completely ready for next week.

Gary Foster’s says at his store, most customers just need the little extras. However some hunters need to have a little bit more.

At the Jenison store, Nate Geents says digital game cameras are a hot item. They help a hunter know where to set up and wait.

The chance of killing a deer is now greater with the newest shotgun slugs.

A new personal vacuum pump keeps a phone, ammo, or snacks dry.

However, getting a deer will still require luck and that’s something you can’t get from a store.

The DNR says there are more than 1.6 million white-tailed deer statewide. Most southwest Michigan counties have above average deer populations. The DNR lists Kent, Barry, and Calhoun Counties as having “very high” numbers.

Hunters should kill around 450,000 deer statewide this season.

Analysis:

This article is based upon the recent announcement by TV Evangelist and media owner Pat Robertson, that he has endorsed GOP candidate Rudy Giuliani for President. The Grand Rapids Press version of the Associated Press story has as a sub-heading “Right-wing backing for socially liberal candidate comes out of left field.” What does the subheading mean by the term “socially liberal?” Does that mean that Giuliani favors a wage increase, providing a safety net for the poor, health care for low-income families and affirmative action? The use of the term “socially liberal” is only in reference to the issues of gay rights and abortion rights, which the article claims that Giuliani supports, but there is no information that would verify that claim. Guiliani’s campaign website only says that he is committed to reducing the number of abortions and will work to increase the amount of adoption. On the issue of gay rights there is nothing specific to gay rights other that the following paragraph under the heading of marriage, “Rudy Giuliani believes marriage is between a man and a woman. He does not—and has never—supported gay marriage. But he believes in equal rights under law for all Americans. That’s why he supports domestic partnerships that provide stability for committed partners in important legal and personal matters, while preserving the sanctity of marriage between a man and a woman.” Does that kind of statement support the notion that Giuliani supports gay rights?

The rest of the story has a comment from Robertson and reaction to the endorsement from McCain and Giuliani. None of the sources quoted provide any insight into the positions that Giuliani is taking as a candidate for president. There is also no mention of the kind of policies that Pat Robertson supports, despite the fact that he has been very public on issues of church and state and “the War on Terror.” Why is there no mention in this story that Robertson has taken a very strong stance on these issues, has called Muslims pigs and advocated that Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez be assassinated? The story does mention that Robertson and Giuliani met recently on a plane coming back from Israel, but doesn’t say where they were coming from.

Story:

Televangelist Pat Robertson, founder of the Christian Coalition, endorsed Republican presidential candidate Rudy Giuliani on Wednesday.

“It is my pleasure to announce my support for America’s Mayor, Rudy Giuliani, a proven leader who is not afraid of what lies ahead and who will cast a hopeful vision for all Americans,” Robertson said during a news conference with Giuliani in Washington.

The former New York mayor backs abortion rights and gay rights, positions that put him in conflict with conservative GOP orthodoxy, and has been trying to persuade evangelical conservatives like Robertson to overlook their differences on those issues.

Evangelicals have split in their support for the leading Republican candidates. Kansas Sen. Sam Brownback, a favorite of Christian conservatives who dropped out of the race last month, on Wednesday endorsed fellow Sen. John McCain of Arizona. Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney recently announced that Paul Weyrich and Bob Jones III were on board with his candidacy.

Asked about the Robertson endorsement, McCain, at a news conference with Brownback in Dubuque, Iowa, said: “Every once in a while, I’m left speechless. This is one of those times.”

Giuliani is best known for leading New York in the aftermath of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. Shortly after 9/11, Robertson released a statement in which he said the attacks occurred because Americans had insulted God and lost the protection of heaven by allowing abortion and “rampant Internet pornography.”

Robertson made no mention of his differences with Giuliani on social issues in Wednesday’s statement.

Giuliani said Wednesday he got to know Robertson well on a flight from Israel.

“I came away from it with a better understanding of Pat, what he’s all about, what he’s trying to accomplish,” he said. “And I think he came away with a different impression of me, as well. We see the world, in many ways, the same way. Doesn’t mean we agree on everything.”

Text from the original article ommitted from the Grand Rapids Press version:

“Rudy Giuliani took a city that was in decline and considered ungovernable and reduced its violent crime, revitalized its core, dramatically lowered its taxes, cut through a welter of bureaucratic regulations, and did so in the spirit of bipartisanship which is so urgently needed in Washington today,” Robertson said.

Robertson, who unsuccessfully ran for president in 1988, founded the Christian Broadcasting Network, the Christian Coalition and Regent University in Virginia Beach, Va.

Also Wednesday, Giuliani said he asked two GOP friends in Congress, Reps. Peter King of New York and Rep. Pete Sessions of Texas, to introduce bills to keep states from giving driver’s licenses or similar identification to illegal immigrants.

The Democratic front-runner, Hillary Rodham Clinton, was criticized after a televised debate last week when she hedged an answer on whether she supported New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer’s effort to grant licenses to illegal immigrants. Her aides say she generally supports the idea in the absence of comprehensive immigration reform.

Analysis:

This Associated Press story claims that anti-Chavez students were attacked by masked gunmen after protesting the Chavez government’s intent to make further constitutional changes. The second paragraph says “Officials said at least eight people were injured Wednesday, including one by gunfire, at the Central University of Venezuela, or UCV – the country’s largest university,” but the story never verifies who these “officials” are. Only two sources were cited in the story, Antonio Rivero with Venezuela’s Civil Defense Agency and Justice Minister Pedro Carreno who blamed students, university authorities, opposition parties and the media for the violence.” However, the reporter does not verify those claims even though there are several independent media reports that the violence was perpetrated by the anti-Chavez students against pro-Chavez student from the school of social work. The website Venezuelan Analysis says “Human Rights Lawyer, Eva Golinger also said the violence started when the opposition students surrounded and attacked the pro-government students in the School of Social Work.” This same website posted an article about how the Venezuelan government is blaming the US government for instigating the violence, as well as the US media for misrepresenting what is happening in a country that is currently the
target of a media propaganda campaign by the US.

Story:

Masked gunmen opened fire on students returning from a march in which tens of thousands of Venezuelans denounced President Hugo Chavez’s attempts to expand his power through constitutional changes.

Officials said at least eight people were injured Wednesday, including one by gunfire, at the Central University of Venezuela, or UCV – the country’s largest university.

Students protested in at least six other cities, and several turned violent with rock-throwing youths clashing with police shooting plastic bullets at demonstrators.

Photographers for The Associated Press saw at least four gunmen – their faces covered by ski masks or T-shirts – firing handguns at the anti-Chavez crowd at the UCV. Terrified students ran through the campus as ambulances arrived.

Antonio Rivero, director of Venezuela’s Civil Defense agency, told Union Radio that at least eight people were injured, including one by gunfire, and that no one had been killed. Earlier, Rivero said he had been informed that one person had died in the violence.

The violence broke out after an estimated 80,000 anti-Chavez demonstrators – led by university students – marched peacefully to the Supreme Court to protest constitutional changes that would greatly expand Chavez’s power if voters agree to the changes in December. Unrest, if it continues, could mar a Dec. 2 referendum on the controversial reforms.

Dozens of angry students surrounded a building where the gunmen were hiding, set fire to benches outside and knocked out windows with rocks. Later, armed men riding motorcycles arrived, scaring off students and standing at the doorway – one of them firing a handgun in the air – as people fled the building.

Justice Minister Pedro Carreno blamed students, university authorities, opposition parties and the media for the violence.

“We want to urge the media to reflect, to stop broadcasting biased news through media manipulation, filling a part of the population with hate,” Carreno said in a televised address.

He did not provide details about the number of injured or if any suspects were arrested.

University students also staged demonstrations in the cities of Merida, Maracaibo, Puerto La Cruz, San Cristobal, Barquisimeto and Valencia on Wednesday.

Text from the original article ommitted from the Grand Rapids Press version:

The amendments being protested would abolish presidential term limits, give the president control over the Central Bank and let him create new provinces governed by handpicked officials.

The protesters demand the referendum be suspended, saying the amendments would weaken civil liberties and give Chavez unprecedented power to declare states of emergency.

“Don’t allow Venezuela to go down a path that nobody wants to cross,” student leader Freddy Guevara told Globovision during the march to the Supreme Court.

Chavez, who was first elected in 1998, denies the reforms threaten freedom. He says they would instead move Venezuela toward what he calls “21st century socialism.”

In televised comments prior to the unrest, Chavez urged Venezuelans to turn out en masse to vote for the reforms. In reference to the opposition, he said: “Don’t go crazy.”

The Supreme Court is unlikely to act on the students’ demands, given that pro-Chavez lawmakers appointed all 32 of its justices.

Analysis:

This article from the front-page of the Grand Rapids Press focuses on an accident in which an SUV drove crashed through the wall of a home in Rockford, Michigan, just missing a sleeping five-month old baby. While the story–which involved drunken-driving–is tragic, does it really warrant the coverage that it received? Not only did it receive this 551-word story, but it also appeared on the front-page. The article was accompanied by two photos, one which took up a significant portion of the front-page with firefighters examining the SUV and another featuring the child and his mother.

Story:

By John Agar

KENT CITY — Nothing rattles 5-month-old Quinn Fox. Not the lights from the television and still cameras, nor the strangers with notepads who disturbed his afternoon nap.

“Our son is so happy right now,” said his mother, Kim Fox.

The infant’s first press conference Wednesday was nothing compared to his harrowing experience at 9:18 the night before, when an SUV blasted into the front of the family’s house on Fruit Ridge Avenue NW. It stopped, its wheels still spinning, a foot from his crib. Quinn was covered in debris but unhurt.

His mother, still shaken hours later, didn’t want to even think about what could have happened.

“It’s just a miracle, an absolute miracle,” she said.

She and her husband, Neven, had just put their kids, including 17-month-old Isabella, to bed when they heard a “big boom” on the baby monitor. Quinn’s cries followed.

The parents got out of bed and saw a panel covering a crawl space had fallen. They thought it odd, and figured that was the source of the noise. They weren’t overly concerned until they got downstairs.

In their son’s room, they saw pieces of drywall, window screens, glass and wood everywhere.

“There was all kind of debris, and dust was just flying all over the place,” Neven Fox said.

It covered the little boy and his crib. In her bare feet, the mother ran to her son, stepping on broken glass and metal, and got him out of his crib.

“My wife was saying, ‘My baby, my baby,'” the father said. “That was really frantic.”

He checked to see whether anything was in his son’s mouth, but it looked clear.

He didn’t have a scratch. They ran upstairs to check on their daughter. She was asleep.

Once the parents knew their children were OK, the father realized, “I’ve got three-quarters of a truck inside of our kid’s bedroom.”

As headlights shined into his house, he asked the driver if she was OK and told her to cut the engine. She was trapped, her SUV’s roof crushed. Firefighters soon got her out.

Kent County sheriff’s deputies arrested the 49-year-old Bailey woman for drunken driving after she was treated for minor injuries. She is to be arraigned Nov. 19 in Rockford District Court.

The driver told police she was heading north when she swerved to avoid a deer, veered across the road and drove across the Foxes’ front yard. A motorist told the Foxes the Bailey woman’s vehicle nearly crashed head-on into his.

The driver’s husband showed up and apologized.

The couple said they hold no ill will toward the driver.

“We’re just thankful our son is with us, and it wasn’t his time to go,” his mother said. “I just think that God didn’t want it to go that extra foot.”

Kim Fox, a kindergarten teacher at North Godwin Elementary School, figured she had a good excuse for missing conferences Wednesday. Her husband, a financial representative, stayed home, too.

They are staying with Kim’s sister’s family for now. Their house, including an office, has extensive damage.

That can be repaired, Kim Fox said.

Her son, nicknamed “Mr. Quinn,” has always been “such a good little one.”

She planned to save newspaper clippings, and tape news accounts, for her son when he’s older.

“It beats my scrapbook I’ve been working on.”

Analysis:

This story is based upon a recent issue of Parade Magazine, which features an annual story on what “Americans make” in terms of salary. The story opens with the statement “Pay is a personal issue, yet one we all wonder about – ‘How much does my neighbor make?’ is a question most people ask themselves.” Is this first sentence based on any verifiable data or study? Is there any source that is cited to support such a statement within this channel 13 story? If not, why say it? The reporter goes on to say “We, like most of America, enjoy reading Parade magazine inside our Sunday paper.” Again, if this true for most of America? What does the story mean by “most of America?” It is true that Parade Magazine appears in many Sunday newspaper editions (350 Sunday editions), but the story doesn’t say that it is also in the Grand Rapids Press and that the same company that owns the Grand Rapids Press owns Parade Magazine.

The story then shifts to the various levels of income between “the baker and the billionaire,” and even provides viewers with the web address on Parade Magazines website so you can compare your salary with other Americans. The story does not tell viewers that Salary.com is a corporate resource that “builds on-demand software around a deep domain knowledge in the area of compensation to help customers win the war for talent by simplifying the connections between people, pay and performance.” The story then goes on to source a local “compensation expert” who is the director of the Employer’s Association, which is another corporate entity that helps employers find people to work for them. The story then provides viewers with a few examples from local CEO salaries, a lawyer, an athlete, a clerk at Meijer, a fast food restaurant supervisor, and several others with smaller salaries. The layer is sourced in the story and the Employer’s Association director once again.

The story ends with the question “What is the most common, or median income around Grand Rapids?” The question is answered by providing data from the U.S. Department of Labor, but viewers should ask themselves what was the purpose of this story? Why didn’t the story get an non-business perspective on wages and salaries in the United States such as the perspective provided by the organization United for a Fair Economy, which provides a number of resources on income disparity and CEO pay versus worker pay.

Story:

Grand Rapids – Pay is a personal issue, yet one we all wonder about – ‘How much does my neighbor make?’ is a question most people ask themselves.

Our story idea is not original. We, like most of America, enjoy reading Parade magazine inside our Sunday paper. Every year, right about when taxes are due, Parade “parades” photos and pay levels of people from across the country. From the baker to the internet billionaire, it’s fascinating reading. You can learn more about What People Earn from Parade Magazine’s website.

It includes a salary wizard from http://www.salary.com. You can plug in your own data and see how your pay stacks up.

However, a compensation expert from Grand Rapids, cautions that salary dot com’s data tends to be inflated by 10 to 20%. David Smith, executive director of The Employer’s Association also says Grand Rapids pay levels, in general, “pays a bit less than the rest of the world.”

Some salaries are easy to find – if you work for a public company, or the government, they’re easily available. The highest salary in our report belongs to the C.E.O. of Steelcase, Inc. Jim Hackett. In the company’s last fiscal year, his salary was $840,000. Runnerup, sort of, was pro athlete Jimmy Howard. We says sort of since Howard’s income depends on the jersey he’s wearing. When he’s with the Detroit Red Wings, his pay rate is $733,000. When he’s in goal for the Griffins, it’s closer to $85,000.

Some people told us they don’t like to be judged on their pay level. One of them was the chief appellate attorney for the Kent County Prosecutor’s office, Tim McMurrow. He says “A lot of people will define you in terms of what your income is, and I think that’s really unfair.” McMurrow declined to tell us what his income his, but a Freedom of Information Act request revealed he’s paid $96,969 a year.

Dave Smith, of The Employer’s Association, said for most people pay “defines who they are in the perception of others.” For some of the people we encountered on the streets of Grand Rapids, it was no big deal to volunteer their pay.

Geoff Gentel, a sales clerk at Meijer, said his annual full-time income was about $10,000. Shannon Veenstra, a fast food restaurant supervisor, will bring home about $17,888 this year. Benson Garza, a laborer with a concrete company will earn $50,000.

Others making about $50,000 were mailman Dennis Kimberlin ($49,000), car salesman Dale Schaub ($45,000), and machinist Tom Slenker ($50,000).

What is the most common, or median income around Grand Rapids? According to the U.S. Department of Labor, the figure is $31,242. The average income in 2006 was $38,060. Both of those figures showed increases from the year before.