Rocky Mountain News, October 11, 2008, Saturday

Rocky Mountain News

October 11, 2008, Saturday

Rocky Mountain News

'Right to work' a biased tag; Media's label for Amendment 47 is anti-union propaganda

By Jason Salzman, Rocky Mountain News (Contact)

I hate it when journalists report spin as if it were neutral language.

That's what reporters at the dailies are doing by describing Amendment 47 as a "right-to-work" measure.

The phase "right to work" has been promoted since the 1940s by union opponents who back laws, like Amendment 47, that - they say - give workers the "right to work" without joining a union or paying union dues, according to professor Richard Hurd, of the School of Industrial and Labor Relations at Cornell University. "The phrase was adopted to make their side sound good," said Hurd.

Labor supporters say workers have the "right to work" whether laws like Amendment 47 are on the books or not.

They argue that "right to work" makes good PR for the anti-union crowd, but it's the wrong description of Amendment 47, which would ban union shops that require workers to pay for union representation. (Disclosure: A client works for unions.)

The labor movement uses "right-to-work-for-less" to describe measures like Amendment 47 because in states that have such laws, wages are lower, even controlling for other factors, than in states without them, according to Hurd. But labor's phraseology hasn't stuck, he said.

And so it goes in Denver. In 29 of 33 articles over the past month, the dailies have used the phrase "right to work" as a shorthand description of Amendment 47.

To its credit, the Rocky Mountain News always puts "right to work" in quotation marks or refers to it as the "so-called right-to-work" amendment, while The Denver Post did so in only five of 18 articles.

Still, whether it's in quotation marks or not, the effect is the same: "Right to work" promotes the anti-union position on Amendment 47.

Reporters at the dailies said they use the phrase mostly because it's common language.

"That's what it's always been referred to nationally and historically," the Post's Andy Vuong told me. "In the 22 states that do have these laws, they are called right-to-work laws."

He agreed that the phrase isn't neutral, but he doesn't think it's particularly slanted either.

No? Would you rather vote for a "right-to-work" amendment or a "right-to-work-for-less" amendment?

Rocky reporter Joanne Kelley told me she and others have been "really careful to describe how the laws work and what it all means." That's true. But labels matter, and Kelley and Vuong said I was raising a valid issue.

Kelley puts "right to work" in quotation marks to "signal it's been dubbed with that label by others." Kelley points out that she's even seen a union use the term.

So what? The goal should be the pursuit of fairness, and I suggested to Kelley that, to be fairer, she should alternate between using "right to work" and "right to work for less" as descriptions for Amendment 47.

Overhearing my conversation with Kelley, Rocky business editor Rob Reutemann rejected my suggestion because "one is an editorial comment [right to work for less], and one is not [right to work]."

To me, both "right to work" and "right to work for less" are editorial comments, particularly because "right to work" isn't even part of the Amendment 47's actual ballot language.

Journalists would be more fair and accurate to use both of them alternately or drop "right to work" completely, unless it's attributed to a partisan.

Fluffy profiles. The Rocky's short candidate profiles are sort of like everything-was-great obituaries.

And I reluctantly admit I've enjoyed them.

Managing editor Deb Goeken's explanation for this approach makes sense.

She wrote that a "shorter, more-accessible format" is better because "in the changing world our readers can easily find every story we've written about the candidates during this campaign and through the years." She added that Rocky resources were better used to cover candidates on the campaign trail.

Not shaky. The Rocky Truth Patrol explains whether election-related statements are "Rock Solid," "Shaky" or "Just Wrong."

What does "shaky" mean anyway? Closer to true or closer to false?

The Truth Patrol would be more effective if it added "Probably Right" and "Probably Wrong" and got rid of "Shaky."

The Truth Patrol is supposed to clear up uncertainty, not create more with unclear labels.

Jason Salzman, president of Effect Communications, is the author of Making the News: A Guide for Activists and Nonprofits. Reach him at salzmanj@RockyMountainNews.com.
Subscribe to the Rocky Mountain News