Comments on: ‘Change is hard’ http://www.newstips.org/2012/02/change-is-hard/ Chicago Community Stories Thu, 03 Apr 2014 01:18:42 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=4.4.12 By: Chris http://www.newstips.org/2012/02/change-is-hard/comment-page-1/#comment-8456 Mon, 27 Feb 2012 00:21:13 +0000 http://www.newstips.org/?p=5835#comment-8456 It is in unions’ interest to negotiate publicly — not just leak details, as Rahm does. That’s why the CTU brings whole groups of rank-and-file members to negotiations. It would be nice if the press actually reported the teachers’ and parents’ views and facts, as some papers have started to do. Thanks, Curtis. The CTU here
http://www.ctunet.com/blog/text/SCSD_Report-02-16-2012-1.pdf
puts forward a vision that is NOT simply about firing teachers and dismantling public education.

]]>
By: Curtis http://www.newstips.org/2012/02/change-is-hard/comment-page-1/#comment-8455 Mon, 27 Feb 2012 00:08:40 +0000 http://www.newstips.org/?p=5835#comment-8455 Eric Zorn responds here:

http://blogs.chicagotribune.com/news_columnists_ezorn/2012/02/on-tactics.html

]]>
By: Curtis http://www.newstips.org/2012/02/change-is-hard/comment-page-1/#comment-8437 Thu, 23 Feb 2012 19:30:53 +0000 http://www.newstips.org/?p=5835#comment-8437 I agree that anonymous sources are overused (though do check the AUSL whistleblowers in the Occupied Chicago Tribune interview) and that more openness in general would be a boon to democracy.

The point of the contrast is that no legislature currently existing is going to open up these other meetings, and the reason they’re opening up labor contract negotiations in Idaho is probably to make them harder – and if someone’s advocating openness in one area and not the rest, it’s reasonable to ask if openness is their real concern.

]]>
By: pelham http://www.newstips.org/2012/02/change-is-hard/comment-page-1/#comment-8436 Thu, 23 Feb 2012 17:58:31 +0000 http://www.newstips.org/?p=5835#comment-8436 Excellent points throughout and a fine analysis. Thanks much.

As a humble citizen and former journalist, however, while I agree that there are some cases in which anonymity for sources is justified (the guiding principle should a judgment as to whether or not they’re whistleblowing), in most cases anonymity is used to illegitimately lend credence to a government policy or, often, an outright lie.

As for open meetings, I agree that labor negotiations and the like should be closed. But there is no reason in the world that any meeting between a public official and lobbyists or campaign donors of any sort shouldn’t be recorded and televised. These public officials are mere servants, the schlubs that we, the public, employ. They are 100% answerable to us. Collectively, we are the CEO and the board of directors wrapped into one.

]]>