Grand Rapids Institute for Information Democracy

Analysis:

Even though the focus of the march is on House bill 4437, no details of the legislation were provided by channel 8. The Channel 8 reporter only referred to the legislation as “a bill to deal with illegal immigration and border security.” But the legislation is more complicated than those 2 issues and those issues are not addressed in the coverage.

Viewers do here from one of the marchers and one of the organizers on channel 8. The issues that are addressed are that families would be separated if the legislation went through and that people who have a relationship with undocumented migrants would also be at risk of arrest. The channel 8 story has Rep. Pete Hoekstra speaking first, since he supported the House bill, and his comments are focused on border security. What is interesting is that channel 8 doesn’t ask why so many people are willing to risk coming into the country without papers in the first place, nor the fact that many people took the day off from work to participate in the march. Another thing to think about is the fact that most people that were there are Spanish speaking, so the local news was limited in who they could speak to for perspective. How much more coverage could be provided if there were bi-lingual reporters or at least translators for the reporters?

Story:

WOOD 8 Newsreader – A lot of activity in the streets of Grand Rapids this afternoon. Thousands of people protesting proposed changes to immigration laws. 24 hour News 8 political reporter Rick Albin joining us live from Calder Plaza now, Rick.

Reporter – Well with the warm sun and the bright blue sky as a background, thousands of people started marching from Calder, er, rather from Garfield Park here to Calder Plaza. They were objecting to changes that many believe will take place in immigration laws, but despite what they believe, in Washington it’s much less clear. What Washington may ultimately do is far less certain than the objections that the big group expressed here today.

Reporter – With signs and flags and chants they hit the streets. The message is clear, no to house bill 4437. That’s a bill the lower chamber passed to deal with illegal immigration and border security.

Peter Hoekstra – What the house passed was we passed border security, put a tremendous number of additional resources on our southern and northern borders to ah provide us with a higher degree of assurance that we are only letting people into the country who were going to come here legally.

Reporter – But the house bill is more stringent than at least one in the senate and does not include a temporary or guest worker provision, something Hoekstra would like to see. The house bill would make being here illegally a criminal offence, and that concerns the organizer of today’s event.

Gloria Berdezco (Protest organizer) – Everybody who has relationships with undocumented people, they are going to be criminalized together with the undocumented people. That will mean separated families in the whole countries.

Reporter – 4437 would also provide penalties for employers who hire undocumented workers. But the question of what to do with an estimated ten to fifteen million people already here illegally creates a lot of passion.

Protester – A lot of people would have to back to their countries, and yeah, we’re not criminals so, we don’t want that because in the first place we came here because it’s a free country.

Reporter – Literally in the time that story was on the air, we have learned that the Senate judiciary committee has approved some type of immigration language. Now that’s just the judiciary committee, it’ll still have to go to the full Senate and very likely will have to go to a conference committee with that house bill that we mentioned. But that action did take place in the past five minutes or so, and 24 hour News eight will continue to stay on top of this story to bring you those details and tell you exactly what the outcome will be. Live on the Calder Plaza, Rick Albin, 24 hours News 8.

Total time: 2 minutes 31 seconds

Analysis:

This piece starts by asking the question of “imagine what it must be like for those folks who have to live amid all that chaos.” One would expect that after asking this question, the story would focus on the lives of ordinary Iraqis, possibly interviewing a few of them. Rather, the story proceeds by reporting that two public service announcements are running on Iraqi TV praising Iraqi police and condemning the “terrorists.” The reporter is unable to say who made the PSA’s, saying that they might be “the work of US contractors who have been commissioned to influence public opinion” but that “the Pentagon won’t say.” The story then jumps to a clip of Vice President Dick Cheney saying “If they’re (the Democrats) competent to fight this war then I ought to be singing on American Idol.” It should be pointed out that American Idol is a show on FOX 17, so this clip is essentially product placement for FOX 17 programming. The piece ends with a mention that Russia provided Iraq with intelligence before the US invasion. No context or details are provided on this point.

This piece is essentially three unrelated topics pertaining to Iraq thrown together in one news story. The only unifying factor is that non of these three topics address the question that the news story starts with,”what is life like for the people of Iraq?”

Story:

WXMI Newsreader – At least fifty more people have been reported killed in Iraq including two US soldiers. On a more positive note, Iraq’s president predicts a new unity government could be in place by the end of the month. FOX 17’s Grant Rampy is at the Pentagon tonight with the latest.

Reporter – Well lately we’ve heard a lot more bad news than good from that part of the world; imagine what it must be like for those folks who have to live amid all that chaos. Many Iraqis don’t have to wait for the evening news to see evidence of the war raging all around them, they need only step outside. But new public service announcements running on Iraqi TV try to cast the violence in a new light. In this PSA, a small boy speaks with pride about his father, a police officer.

PSA (Translated) – The other day he was caught between innocent Iraqis and the terrorists. He used all his bullets to finish all the criminals off.

Reporter – The ads closes, “our police officers are the knights of Iraq”, a second message salutes Iraq’s diversity warning “terrorist can’t divide us.” It’s unclear whether this is the work of US contractors who have been commissioned to influence public opinion, the Pentagon won’t say. Then there is this ad, which makes use of a child’s simple drawings, a young voice addresses insurgents asking…

PSA (translated) – Why do you hate your country? We have no electricity at school because you destroyed the power house. At home we have no heating because you bombed the oil pipelines. You’re greedy and selfish and don’t care about us children or our families.

Reporter – With no sign that the recent wave of violent attacks here is about to die down, the White House is firing back at critics. To democrats who accuse the administration of incompetence, the vice president jokes…

Cheney – If they’re competent to fight this war then I ought to be singing on American Idol.

Reporter – And a stunning disclosure today has officials here scratching their heads. A new report suggests, Russian spies gave US secrets to Saddam Hussein before the war began. It’s intelligence he reportedly ignored, still, questions abound. How did the Russians get the intel, and why did they pass it along? At the Pentagon, Grant Rampy, FOX 17 News at 10.

Total Time: 2 minutes 5 seconds

Analysis:

This story is about defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld’s press conference in which he criticizes media coverage of the violence in Iraq following the bombing of a Shiite Mosque. In the story, Rumsfeld’s voice is theonly one presented. The does the reporter present any critical look at Rumsfeld’s statement in piece. The defense secretary doesn’t just disagree with reports that Iraq is on the cusp of civil war, he says that these reports “give heart to terrorists and discourage those that hope for success in Iraq,” a statement which infers an anti-US agenda on the part of these reports. Rather than challenge that claim, the FOX 17 story essentially affirms it by following Rumfeld’s comment with “Its not just reporters.” No other voices are presented in the story and other than some poll numbers, no background information is presented as well.

Story:

FOX 17 Newsreader – Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said reporters are exaggerating the possibility of civil war in Iraq. Today he accused the media of overstating the seriousness of the current situation in Iraq. Following the terrorist attack on that Shiite Mosque and hundreds of retaliation killings that followed. He based his accusation on military reports that say the level isn’t growing.

Rumsfeld – A steady stream of errors all seem to be of a nature to inflame the situation and to give heart to the terrorists and to discourage those that hope for success in Iraq.

Newsreader – But it’s not just reporters; Iraqi officials and the US ambassador to Iraq have all gone on record saying conditions are ripe for civil war. And according to a new poll released today by the Washington Post, 80 percent of Americans now believe that civil war is likely, that’s across partisan lines.

Total Time: 48 seconds

Analysis:

The story is based on an Associated Press request to get government documents declassified on the identity of the prisoners being held at Guantanamo Bay since the later part of 2001. Hundreds of pages of documents were released on who was being held in the prison under the category of “enemy combatant,” which the US administration says deprives the prisoners of Geneva Convention prisoner of war protections. A US military spokesperson said that “personal information on detainees was withheld solely to protect detainee privacy and their own security.” No one else was cited in this story, just an excerpt from a testimony from one of the prisoners.

As you can see more than half of the original AP story was omitted from the Press version. The major points of that content were that more details on some of the detainees and more commentary from the US military on why they wanted to keep the names classified. There is one sentence in the original AP story that reads “Human-rights monitors say keeping identities of prisoners secret can lead to abuses and deprive their families of information about their fate.” According to the Center for Constitutional Rights, a group that has been providing legal counsel to detainees “The evidence shows the government’s despicable torture of detainees has produced worthless information. Since the majority of detainees are not even affiliated with Al Qaeda, it is no wonder that they have few relevant facts to provide. After four years of illegal detentions and abuse, the government has failed to prove a legal, moral or security rationale for these actions. The new revelations confirm this failure, and it is time for comprehensive scrutiny and accountability of the Guantánamo detentions.” Readers should ask themselves why the issue of prisoner abuse was omitted from the story, especially when the US military claims were to “protect the prisoner privacy and security.”

Story:

Detainee information released
By MIRANDA LEITSINGER and BEN FOX

GUANTÁNAMO BAY NAVAL BASE, Cuba — The Pentagon says he had a rocket-propelled grenade launcher in his house.
Zahir Shah says he had only a rifle — for protection against a cousin in a family feud — and the only time he shot anything was when he hunted with a BB gun.

“What are we going to do with RPGs?” he asks, adding: “The only thing I did in Afghanistan was farming. … We grew wheat, corn, vegetables and watermelons.”

Shah’s is one of hundreds of stories contained in thousands of pages of transcripts released Friday by the Pentagon after four years of secrecy about exactly who it was holding in the U.S. military prison at Guantánamo Bay. A Freedom of Information Act lawsuit by The Associated Press forced the Pentagon to release the documents, which contain the names, hometowns and other information about detainees that the Bush administration had previously not made public.

A federal judge rejected administration arguments that releasing the identities would violate detainees’ privacy and could endanger them and their families.

The names were scattered throughout 5,000 pages of hearings transcripts, but no complete list was given and it was unclear how many names the documents contained. In most of the transcripts, the person speaking is identified only as “detainee.” Names appear only when court officials or detainees refer to people by name.

The men were mostly captured during the 2001 U.S.-led war that drove the Taliban from power in Afghanistan and sent Osama bin Laden deeper into hiding, and the newly released documents shed light on some of the detainees’ explanations.

Most of the Guantánamo Bay hearings were held to determine whether the detainees were “enemy combatants.”
That classification, Bush administration lawyers say, deprives the detainees of Geneva Conventions prisoner-of-war protections and allows them to be held indefinitely without charges.

“Personal information on detainees was withheld solely to protect detainee privacy and for their own security,” said Lt. Cmdr. Chito Peppler.

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

Human-rights monitors say keeping identities of prisoners secret can lead to abuses and deprive their families of information about their fate. About 490 prisoners are being held at Guantánamo Bay; only 10 have been charged with a crime.

In some cases, even having the name didn’t clarify the identity. In one document, the tribunal president asks a detainee if his name is Jumma Jan. The detainee responds that no, his name is Zain Ul Abedin.

In another document, a detainee identified as Abdul Hakim Bukhary denies he is a member of al-Qaida but acknowledges he traveled from his native Saudi Arabia to Afghanistan to fight U.S. forces and says he met bin Laden about 15 years ago while fighting Russians in Afghanistan.

He praises his captors for running a good prison. “Prisoners here are in paradise,” he says. “American people are very good. Really. They give us three meals. Fruit juice and everything!” Still, he says, he wants to return to his family.

It was not clear whether Shah and Bukhary are still being held. The documents do not name all current and former Guantánamo Bay detainees. And even when detainees are named, the documents do not make clear whether they have since been released.

The documents contain the names of some former prisoners, such as Moazzam Begg and Feroz Ali Abbasi, both British citizens. A handwritten note shows Abbasi pleading for prisoner-of-war status.

Documents released last year — also because of an Associated Press Freedom of Information Act lawsuit — included transcripts of 317 hearings, but had the detainees’ names and nationalities blacked out. The current documents are the same ones; this time, uncensored.

A U.S. military spokesman at Guantánamo Bay said the Pentagon was uneasy about handing over the transcripts.

He said the Defense Department remains concerned that the disclosure “could result in retribution or harm to the detainees or their families.”

Buz Eisenberg, a lawyer for a detainee, said he hopes the uncensored documents can help clear his client. “We have been trying to litigate a case without ever knowing what the allegations were that the government claimed justified his continued detention,” Eisenberg said.

Eisenberg did not want to name his client because he had not asked the man for permission. The documents could shed light on the scope of an insurgency still battling U.S. troops in Afghanistan, in part by detailing how Muslims from many countries wound up fighting alongside the Taliban there.

Abdul Gappher, an ethnic Uighur, says he traveled from China to Afghanistan, passing through Pakistan and Kyrgyzstan, in June 2001 to “get some training to fight back against the Chinese government.” But he denied doing anything against the United States. He was captured in Pakistan and said Pakistani police officers “sold us to the U.S. government.”

U.S. District Judge Jed Rakoff of New York ruled in favor of the AP last week, a major development in a protracted legal battle. In the ongoing litigation, the AP has also asked the Pentagon to release a complete list of all detainees ever held at the prison on a U.S. Navy base in eastern Cuba.

Some of the testimony seemed bound to embarrass the military. Abbasi complains that on two occasions, military police officers had sex in front of him, while others tried to feed him “a hot plate of pork,” food banned by the Islamic faith.

Some, he said, misled him into praying north toward the United States rather than toward Mecca as Muslims are required to do. Like the other detainees, Abbasi wasn’t allowed to see classified evidence against him. He repeatedly cited international law in arguing that he was unfairly classified as an enemy combatant.

An Air Force colonel whose identity remains blacked out would have none of it. “Mr. Abbasi, your conduct is unacceptable and this is your absolute final warning. I do not care about international law. I do not want to hear the words international law again. We are not concerned about international law,” the colonel says. Then he has Abbasi removed from the courtroom.

Last year, Judge Rakoff ordered the government to ask each detainee whether he or she wanted personal identifying information to be turned over to the AP as part of the lawsuit.

Of 317 detainees who received the form, 63 said yes, 17 said no, 35 returned the form without answering and 202 declined to return the form.

Analysis:

In this story, three people are talked to by the reporter, a representative of Charter Cable Company, a cable industry analyst, and a cable TV subscriber. Of these three voices, the consumer is for the a la carte plan while both the cable company executive and the analyst are opposed. That the representative from Charter Cable is critical of this proposal is not surprising, cable companies have been uniformly opposed to a la Carte programming nationwide. Nor is it surprising that the analyst, Steve Effros, is opposed, as he is the former head of the Cable Telecommunications Association, which represents cable companies. This background information is not presented in the story, rather, Effros is framed as an unbiased source. The only person shown speaking in favor of this proposal is a random cable subscriber interviewed on the street. No voices from the FCC or from any consumer advocacy groups that support the a la carte proposal are presented in the story. The reporter does mention that according to an FCC study, consumers could save up to 13% on there cable bills. The viewer is not told the name of the study, nor how it can be found. The Cable industry analyst makes claims that “virtually every analysis of a la carte says the customer winds up paying more, and getting less.” The reporter does not provide any verification on this claim. Nor does the reporter ask any follow up questions when the spokesperson from Charter Cable states that “We should continue to provide those video services offerings under a free enterprise system rather than having mandates dictated to us from Washington DC.” Given that cable companies have franchise agreements with municipalities that guarantee them with a local monopoly on cable service, it would seem reasonable for a reporter to ask how the current cable system represents a model of “free enterprise.”

Story:

Newsreader #1 – It’s a debate that started on Capital Hill and could end in your living room, a la Carte cable.

Newsreader #2 – It’s an idea being pushed by the Federal Communications Commission to help cut the costs of cable. Fox 17’s Mike Avery has more on this hot button issue in tonight’s consumer hard drive.

Unidentified voice – You have HBO, then you have Cinemax Reporter – A la carte, a system that prices each item separately, it’s that idea that’s being applied to the cable television industry by the federal government, allowing consumers a choice in which programming they want, and paying for just that.

Troy Hayes (cable customer) – For instance I’m going to go in the store here and I’m going to have a choice of options of what I’m going to buy, from no brand cheese to Craft cheese, you know I get what I pay for, I think its a great idea.

Reporter – But the cable industry doesn’t like the a la carte idea, citing losses in advertising revenues, and higher subscription fees for consumers.

Dan Spoelman (Charter Communications) – We should continue to provide those video services offerings under a free enterprise system rather than having mandates dictated to us from Washington DC.

Reporter – Industry analyst Steve Effros agrees. Steve Effros – Having been here for over thirty years in Washington, I’m pretty safe in saying that when the government gets its hand in just about anything, the unintended consequences usually out weigh what they were trying to do.

Reporter – A la carte is being driven by the FCC, Senator John McCain has even drafted legislation trying to reduce consumers cable bills. In fact, a recent report by the FCC says consumers could save up to 13% on their bill through a la carte. Effros says it’s misleading.

Effros – This is why virtually every analysis of a la carte says the customer winds up paying more, and getting less. They get fewer channels and it costs them more. Spoelman – Effectively in an eighty channel package that you have today, you would pay the same amount for about four channels.

Reporter – But one consumer we talked to today says being able to pick your own channels is worth it. Hayes – And i think it’s the same thing with cable, that as long as I’m getting what I paid for, then I shouldn’t complain about how much it costs, I’m getting what I paid for.

Reporter – But at what cost? According to Effros, there’s plenty to be lost.

Effros – If you did it the other way, if you said alright, only the programs I want to buy, are the ones that are going to come into my home, you would probably destroy the ability of smaller channels to survive. And so diversity gets lost in the process. And we think that’s a very bad idea.

Reporter – That depends on who you ask. In Grand Rapids, Mike Avery, Fox 17 News at ten.

Analysis:

Most of the visuals used during this story are still photos of early cereal ads or video footage of commercials since the 60s that were obtained via a PR website called PR Newswire. The actual link for the media release from Kellogg’s shows that the channel 17 newsreader is just repeating what was sent out by the PR firm. This is another example of what could be considered a Video News Release.

Story:

WXMI 17 News readers – Battle Creek celebrating a birthday tonight. Kellogg’s turns 100 this week. The first cornflake was made back in 1906 at the Battle Creek Toasted Cornflake company. Since then Kellogg’s has roled out new brands every decade. In 1928 Rice Krispies and Frosted Flakes in 1952 and Apple Jacks, Fruit Loops and Special K in the 60’s. To celebrate the centennial they are selling vintage merchandize with designs by Norman Rockwell.

Total Time: 28 seconds

Analysis:

The headline you read is from the Press is accurate in that there were hundreds who came together in opposition to the proposed federal immigration legislation. The story had a picture of the crowded church as well, but if anyone reads the article you get a very different picture. The story begins by quoting a woman named Gloria who came to the US 14 years ago as an undocumented immigrant, but quickly the article shifts to provide the perspectives of 2nd Congressional District Pete Hoekstra, who voted for this legislation in the House, 3rd Congressional District Rep. Ehlers, who also voted in favor of this bill, and Jared Rodriquez, from the local Chamber of Commerce. At the very end of the article Gloria’s son is quoted talking about his memory of crossing into the US at age 7. He’s now a 21 and says that he can’t get a student loan as he is undocumented.

The event had several speakers. First, Grand Rapids School Board member Luis Pena spoke against the legislation, plus several immigration lawyers that could discuss the specifics of the House bill 4437 and Grand Rapids Mayor, George Heartwell, who not only spoke against the legislation, but said he planned on introducing a resolution at the next City Commission meeting against said legislation. The event speakers stressed the need to lobby Senators Stabenow and Levin, since the Senate will be taking up this issue in the coming weeks. Readers should ask themselves why the Grand Rapids Press would omit this information and spend most of the article talking to people who weren’t even at the event?

Story:

Hundreds gather in opposition to federal immigration legislation
By Ted Roelofs
GRAND RAPIDS — Row after row, they filled the pews on a bitterly cold afternoon. A woman named Gloria explained why she was drawn to this rally for the shadow world of West Michigan: The estimated 40,000 undocumented residents who live and work among us.

“I am still a human being,” she said. “We come into this world and leave the same way as you do.” Like many of the estimated 500 people who jammed United Methodist Hispanic Church on Saturday, Gloria entered this country illegally.
The mother of three, who crossed the border at Tijuana, Mexico, at night 14 years ago, only wants the chance to make a better life for her and her family.

“We ask the same rights as every citizen,” she said. But the emotions on the other side are just as raw. Advocates of tough immigration measures say it is time to seal the borders and crack down on undocumented workers and companies who employ them.

With an estimated 10 million undocumented residents in the United States, growing fears about the borders and a national election this year, the debate seems likely to heat up. A banner at the front of the sanctuary decried one of its flash points — a get-tough House bill that passed in December, with the support of U.S. Reps. Vernon Ehlers, R-Grand Rapids, and Peter Hoekstra, R-Holland.

The issue is expected to land in the Senate next month, where a rival measure from John McCain, R-Ariz., and Ted Kennedy, D-Mass., is drawing support from moderates in both parties. The McCain-Kennedy bill would broaden rights of undocumented workers, allowing employers to hire foreigners under a temporary visa program if they can prove they are unable to hire American workers for the same job. Undocumented workers ultimately could apply for citizenship after paying a fine and back taxes.

President Bush has proposed a similar guest-worker measure but does not offer a road to citizenship to illegal residents. The House bill is much harsher. It calls for criminalizing illegal migrants, compelling employers to verify whether an employee is here legally, raising penalties for noncompliant employers and build more fences along the Mexican border.

Hoekstra calls the issue “complicated.” But, as chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, he asserts it is time the nation gets serious about securing its borders. Moreover, Hoekstra said it is time to hold undocumented immigrants and uncooperative companies accountable for their actions.

“It’s a tough law, yes. But we have been negligent over the last number of years for not enforcing the law,” he said. “We should not be rewarding people who come into this country illegally.” But Ehlers and Hoekstra say the House measure alone is not enough, since it does not address the need for a guest worker program. “It was not a comprehensive bill,” Ehlers said.

His misgivings hint at deeper divisions within the GOP on the issue. At the meeting of the Conservative Political Action Committee this month in Washington, D.C., proponents of an immigration crackdown assailed everyone from Bush to the restaurant industry to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce for taking what they consider a soft approach.

The Grand Rapids Area of Commerce has taken no formal position. But Jared Rodriguez, vice president of government affairs for the chamber, noted the U.S. Chamber backs the McCain-Kennedy approach. “What would be the mandates on business that would come from this?” he said measures like the House version. “What would it mean in dollars and cents to our members?”

Rodgriguez did not mention just how integral this community has become to West Michigan. They work construction, put up drywall and do piecework in noisy factories. They pick the blueberries in Ottawa County, wash dishes in the back of restaurants and scrub toilets in hotels. Hundreds of their children go to schools across the region.

Their life here depends on their willingness to work. They cannot collect welfare or food stamps. Gloria’s son, Gonzalo, has vivid memories of the night they crossed the border 14 years ago. He was just 7. “I remember hiding under a bush. There was a big helicopter shining a spotlight on us. I remember being picked up and thrown over the fence. I was literally thrown into America.”

Now 21, he speaks impeccable English and is a graduate of Grand Rapids City High School. He supports his mother as a manager in a retail store, but would like to go to college someday. But since he cannot get a student loan as an undocumented resident and cannot apply for citizenship, he has trouble believing it will come to pass. “To me, the future is day-to-day. I can’t set any long-term goals,” he said.

Analysis:

People should ask themselves what did they learn about Candidate Bowen? Readers learn that Bowen was a former Grand Rapids City Commissioner and district judge in Wyoming. This means that he has a voting record and a record of making legal decisions, none of which is discussed in the article. Readers are told that he played linebacker for MSU and is a Catholic Central graduate. The only information that could be considered part of his platform appears in the second to last paragraph when Bowen says “I will prosecute consumer protection violations, something he’s not done; I’ll prosecute environmental violations, something he’s not done. I will basically return the office to the people.”

Bowen also makes claims about current Michigan Attorney General Cox such as “failing to ‘fight for consumers,’ saying Cox was driven, instead, by ‘his friends in big business.'” These claims could be verified by looking at the State website on what Cox has accomplished as Attorney General. The last paragraph also mentions that Cox responded to the “attacks” from Bowen by releasing “a list of accomplishments last week that showed he out-collected former attorney general and now Gov. Jennifer Granholm in recoveries for consumers, $9.2 million in three years to $8.3 million in four years for Granholm.” Again, there is no verification of these claims and as of this posting there was nothing on Cox’s re-election website about this list of accomplishments. What the article spends most of the time doing is talking about how Bowen is “getting noticed by the GOP.”

Story:

GRAND RAPIDS — Scott Bowen’s entry into the race for attorney general last spring was met with a resounding, ‘Who?’ outside Kent County.

The former Grand Rapids city commissioner who had served less than two years as a district judge in Wyoming wasn’t exactly a household name.

As he officially kicked off his candidacy today from a boxing ring at Martin Luther King Jr. Park — to show he is a fighter, as his spokesman, Chris DeWitt, said — Bowen has a way to go before he breaks the pane of public consciousness.

But, he has gotten the attention of Republicans, who have paid him the ultimate tribute by responding to salvos he has shot their way.

Bowen continued his attack on Attorney General Mike Cox for failing to “fight for consumers,” saying Cox was driven, instead, by “his friends in big business.”

Republicans have tried to paint him as “Fieger-like,” after he mentioned Cox’s infidelity troubles. They accused him of breaking the code of judicial canon by meeting and greeting political leaders at the Mackinac Island Detroit Economic conference last spring, even as he still was on the bench. And they mocked the $110,000 he’s raised, compared to Cox’s $1 million war chest.

“They’re worried about a guy who’s a relatively obscure, 41-year-old ex-judge from the West Side of the state. That says something,” said Bowen, a Catholic Central grad who went on to play two seasons as a linebacker for Michigan State University.

“They’re breathlessly trying to keep me in hot water. I think they realize he can be beaten by me.” The strategy to take on Cox early paid dividends Bowen and his campaign team weren’t expecting, DeWitt said. “Did we know how Republicans were going to react to him? No,” DeWitt said.

“But their reaction has helped raise his profile. Certainly, they’ve been wrong in their attacks, but, helping to raise his profile, they’ve aided in that effort.”

Republicans welcome the battle, said Sarah Anderson, spokeswoman for the state GOP.

“If he is the nominee, it will provide a great contrast between a guy who made his money defending telemarketing scam artists and other questionable characters and Mike Cox, who, as prosecutor, spent his time putting those people behind bars,” Anderson said.

Democratic delegates, who will be determining their party’s ticket in August, are getting the message Bowen will take it to the GOP incumbent, DeWitt said. State Rep. Alexander Lipsey, D-Kalamazoo, and Wayne County Sheriff Warren Evans are two other possible candidates.

“We’re getting the word out there that he will be aggressive in the fall,” he said. “Scott certainly won’t be shy. Democrats will see Scott as someone who can bring the campaign to the Republicans in an aggressive way.” Bowen, who will make his case Saturday at a state Democratic Party issues convention in Lansing, lashed out at Cox for what he calls a lack of integrity in the office.

“I will restore the office to the days of integrity and professionalism under Frank Kelly,” Bowen said Tuesday. “I will prosecute consumer protection violations, something he’s not done; I’ll prosecute environmental violations, something he’s not done. I will basically return the office to the people.”

Cox released a list of accomplishments last week that showed he out-collected former attorney general and now Gov. Jennifer Granholm in recoveries for consumers, $9.2 million in three years to $8.3 million in four years for Granholm.