The two-term incumbent faces a General Election challenge from Republican Joe Giustozzi, but Sherwood says her record shows a willingness to listen and to fight for rural interests.
Hi Brett, I put an incredible amount of work and thought into what I publish here. Can you please identify what about this story makes it seem like “electioneering material” to you? I am interested in reporting and believe this story does that. I honestly do not see what you are seeing
Don't gaslight. You spent a total of seven short, blasé paragraphs, some of them a single sentence, on Giustozzi, and then pages and pages praising Sherwood to the skies and attempting to sell her not only to Democrats but to Republican voters. And make no mention of her serious conflicts of interest or political extremism. It's a puff piece for Sherwood. You are no journalist.
Thank you for the examples, but I disagree and I am not trying to gaslight you.
Seven paragraphs is a lot for a candidate who won't talk to the media, won't show up to nonpartisan forums and has posted very little on his own campaign site and social media. I am not obligated to give them equal time or space. It's the candidate's responsibility to communicate their ideas with potential voters, not mine. It would have been acceptable — legally, professionally and ethically — to note that he would not comment and then move on to exclusively highlight the candidate who actually opened herself up for an interview, who allowed me to ask her tough questions and hit her with follow-ups when I felt her first answer didn't fully address the topic. But I was actually interested to explore what Giustozzi thinks and what he might have planned for Wyoming/Albany County and would have loved to ask him directly. He ignored that offer but still ended up with his own section and 10% of this entire story. I'm comfortable with that.
I am not trying to sell Republican voters on the idea of Sherwood. I am reporting on the reality that many Republicans are very excited about Sherwood. "Republicans for Sherwood" is not an invention of the Laramie Reporter. It's a real thing you can see by looking at election returns, IRL campaign signs, quotes in this very story from a Republican rancher, and the candidate's social media where these voters express their support in comments and videos.
I am not sure what "political extremism" you are referring to.
This story attempted to interview both candidates. Failing that, it explored the very interesting angle of red voters supporting a blue candidate in a heavily polarized U.S. and then it analyzed an elected official's voting record and policy positions.
Asking a Democrat running in a Republican district for her views on abortion, trans healthcare and climate change is not me lobbing softball questions.
It's not a puff piece. I am a journalist. I understand my writing frustrates you, but these are honestly inappropriate accusations. Do you think I'm a mustache-twirling villain? Or do you think it's more likely that I'm a community member just like you who happens to have different ideas about how to best serve my community?
I understand the frustration. That's fine. I don't need you to like me. But I think you could tone down the rhetoric while still expressing your disapproval.
No, Jeff. You ARE obliged to give at least approximately equal time... if you are actually a fair and ethical reporter. But you're not. Nor are you a "mustache-twirling villain." That would be too amusing... and giving you too much credit. You're just a partisan blogger, electioneering for Sherwood and other candidates. It's sad that a few people in town seem to mistake your biased blogging for "news." But most -- including the folks who called you out at the recent meeting of the Albany County Republican Party -- know exactly what it is: propaganda. And the long winded puff piece above is the most egregious example yet.
I am not obliged to give equal time. I am obliged to give both the same opportunity, which I did.
Think about how what you’re suggesting would actually work.
I don’t have an obligation to launch a deep dive investigation into a man who doesn’t seem to be interested in sharing much with the public. Nor am I obligated to write less about his opponent just because he refuses to talk and therefore I have less about him.
You're obliged to be fair, and you are not fulfilling that obligation. You are demonstrating that he was right not to waste time on you; you were not going to give him a fair shake. And, as you heard at that meeting, others don't think you are fair either. Admit it, Jeff, to yourself and others: You aren't a reporter. You're a biased, opinionated blogger. You spew hate toward landlords (even the best ones) and toward the opponents of anyone you want to see elected. And this article is one of the most telling examples I've seen yet. Don't just take my word for it; show it to any minimally critical reader who doesn't share your extreme biases. Maybe you'll come back a bit more humble.
This blog post is not reporting. It's electioneering material and should be identified as such.
Hi Brett, I put an incredible amount of work and thought into what I publish here. Can you please identify what about this story makes it seem like “electioneering material” to you? I am interested in reporting and believe this story does that. I honestly do not see what you are seeing
Don't gaslight. You spent a total of seven short, blasé paragraphs, some of them a single sentence, on Giustozzi, and then pages and pages praising Sherwood to the skies and attempting to sell her not only to Democrats but to Republican voters. And make no mention of her serious conflicts of interest or political extremism. It's a puff piece for Sherwood. You are no journalist.
Thank you for the examples, but I disagree and I am not trying to gaslight you.
Seven paragraphs is a lot for a candidate who won't talk to the media, won't show up to nonpartisan forums and has posted very little on his own campaign site and social media. I am not obligated to give them equal time or space. It's the candidate's responsibility to communicate their ideas with potential voters, not mine. It would have been acceptable — legally, professionally and ethically — to note that he would not comment and then move on to exclusively highlight the candidate who actually opened herself up for an interview, who allowed me to ask her tough questions and hit her with follow-ups when I felt her first answer didn't fully address the topic. But I was actually interested to explore what Giustozzi thinks and what he might have planned for Wyoming/Albany County and would have loved to ask him directly. He ignored that offer but still ended up with his own section and 10% of this entire story. I'm comfortable with that.
I am not trying to sell Republican voters on the idea of Sherwood. I am reporting on the reality that many Republicans are very excited about Sherwood. "Republicans for Sherwood" is not an invention of the Laramie Reporter. It's a real thing you can see by looking at election returns, IRL campaign signs, quotes in this very story from a Republican rancher, and the candidate's social media where these voters express their support in comments and videos.
I am not sure what "political extremism" you are referring to.
This story attempted to interview both candidates. Failing that, it explored the very interesting angle of red voters supporting a blue candidate in a heavily polarized U.S. and then it analyzed an elected official's voting record and policy positions.
Asking a Democrat running in a Republican district for her views on abortion, trans healthcare and climate change is not me lobbing softball questions.
It's not a puff piece. I am a journalist. I understand my writing frustrates you, but these are honestly inappropriate accusations. Do you think I'm a mustache-twirling villain? Or do you think it's more likely that I'm a community member just like you who happens to have different ideas about how to best serve my community?
I understand the frustration. That's fine. I don't need you to like me. But I think you could tone down the rhetoric while still expressing your disapproval.
No, Jeff. You ARE obliged to give at least approximately equal time... if you are actually a fair and ethical reporter. But you're not. Nor are you a "mustache-twirling villain." That would be too amusing... and giving you too much credit. You're just a partisan blogger, electioneering for Sherwood and other candidates. It's sad that a few people in town seem to mistake your biased blogging for "news." But most -- including the folks who called you out at the recent meeting of the Albany County Republican Party -- know exactly what it is: propaganda. And the long winded puff piece above is the most egregious example yet.
I am not obliged to give equal time. I am obliged to give both the same opportunity, which I did.
Think about how what you’re suggesting would actually work.
I don’t have an obligation to launch a deep dive investigation into a man who doesn’t seem to be interested in sharing much with the public. Nor am I obligated to write less about his opponent just because he refuses to talk and therefore I have less about him.
You're obliged to be fair, and you are not fulfilling that obligation. You are demonstrating that he was right not to waste time on you; you were not going to give him a fair shake. And, as you heard at that meeting, others don't think you are fair either. Admit it, Jeff, to yourself and others: You aren't a reporter. You're a biased, opinionated blogger. You spew hate toward landlords (even the best ones) and toward the opponents of anyone you want to see elected. And this article is one of the most telling examples I've seen yet. Don't just take my word for it; show it to any minimally critical reader who doesn't share your extreme biases. Maybe you'll come back a bit more humble.