Another Empire State Democrat appears ensnared in a juicy political scandal involving misappropriated money and political patronage.
An article in the April 3 New York Post reports that New York City Council Speaker Christine Quinn’s office has been hoarding millions of dollars in taxpayer money. The money was allocated to fake organizations so that it could be saved and used later for political favors.
The Post noted that the money constituted what essentially turned out to be a “slush fund” for the Speaker as it was later used at Quinn's discretion whether it be to reward loyal groups or to provide funding for projects of favored council members.
The Post's Frankie Edozien should be congratulated for the exclusive, but one thing is missing from the story: Quinn’s political party affiliation. Although the newspaper reported that this “bogus bookkeeping” is subject to federal as well as city investigations, not once did the New York Post note that Quinn is a Democrat. NewsBusters appreciates good investigative reporting, but it is important to be consistent in labeling political party affiliation.
Quinn's official City Council biography trumpets her commitment to a reform agenda including putting forth “landmark campaign finance reform legislation” and increasing transparency in government.
NewsBusters has noted other New York Democrats whose political affiliation was glossed over in media coverage. The MRC’s Brent Baker documented that the big three broadcast networks (ABC, CBS and NBC) continually failed to identify former New York Governor Eliot Spitzer as a Democrat, and Seton Motley wrote an essay on the lack of Spitzer’s political affiliation in mainstream media reports.
(h/t e-mail tipster Andy)















Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Lyndsi, Correct me if I'm
April 3, 2008 - 17:52 ET by LeonLyndsi,
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the NY Post a notoriously anti-liberal, highly conservative Newspaper (er, gossip mag)?
Given their history of unabashed conservative support, I find it hard to believe the omission of the party affiliation is a result of a liberal bias.
As stated in the post,
April 3, 2008 - 18:09 ET by Lyndsi ThomasAs stated in the post, NewsBusters believes it is important to be consistent in identifying political affiliation.
But your mission statement
April 3, 2008 - 18:11 ET by LeonBut your mission statement is combating Liberal Bias exclusively.
So it's not really very consistent with your mission statement.
My guess is that you didn't know the NY Post was a conservative propaganda rag.
You are missing the point in two directions at once.
April 3, 2008 - 20:24 ET by Seton Motley1) Regardless of the rather Conservative nature of the New York Post, the fact that Frankie Edozien here fails to identify the Party affiliation of a liberal Democrat in hot water serves thereby to protect the liberal Democrat, and therefore places this example well within our mission statement wheelhouse.
2) It is Journalism 101 to always, ALWAYS identify the Party affiliation of any pol about whom you write. Those allegedly practicing the craft never fail to do so when it is an Elephant in trouble, but repeatedly and it appears now consistently fail to do so when it is Democrats going under. Again, right down the middle of our mission statement fairway.
Other than that, excellent assessment well stated.
Seton Motley
Director of Communications
Media Research Center
Another gloss over in Mo Town 'ho sting
April 4, 2008 - 09:18 ET by Rackiehttp://www.detnews.c...