Dig, WaPo, Dig! You’re Halfway to China!

by James A. Bacon

It’s fascinating to watch The Washington Post try to dig itself out of the pit it created for itself with its coverage of a Virginia Association of School Superintendents (VASS) letter that was critical of the Youngkin administration. The WaPo news team appears to have forgotten the First Law of Holes: “When you find yourself in a hole, stop digging.”

VASS Executive Director Howard Kiser said in the text of the March 10 letter that he was communicating “on behalf of” the state’s 133 public school superintendents in urging Governor Glenn Youngkin to stop his campaign against the teaching of divisive concepts in schools. The lede in the WaPo story interpreted that to mean that “all 133 Virginia public school division superintendents” supported the letter.

Follow-up reporting by other media revealed a very different story. Kiser clarified that the letter was “crafted and adopted” by VASS’ 12-member board and “doesn’t necessarily reflect a consensus among all its members.” WJLA television found two superintendents willing to say off the record that they had not seen the letter before it was sent out. Meanwhile, in Campbell County, a school superintendent submitted a resolution supporting Youngkin’s campaign against inherently divisive concepts relating to race (without mentioning the letter). In response to a reporter’s question, Youngkin opined that the letter was a “gross misrepresentation of what superintendents believe, I believe.”

So, yesterday the WaPo published the following headline: “Youngkin says superintendents back him but offers little evidence.” States the summary paragraph: “Little evidence has emerged to support the administration’s claim that there is widespread dissatisfaction among superintendents with the letter.”

Nice trick. Rather than concede that it had misconstrued the letter, the WaPo is trying to make Youngkin’s statement the issue and is shifting the burden of proof to the Governor to back his claim.

The centerpiece of the Post’s article today is an assertion that it had “asked all of Virginia’s 133 superintendents for their views on the letter Tuesday.” And, “as of Wednesday afternoon, none said they disagreed with the overall message of the document.”

The article does not elaborate upon how it issued that request. Did the two reporters —  Hannah Natanson and Gregory S. Schneider — personally place phone calls to all 133 superintendents? Did they send out blanket emails? How much time did they give the superintendents to respond? Most crucially, how did they word the request for a response?

If the requests were issued Tuesday and the article published Wednesday, it appears that the Post gave the superintendents 24 hours, give or take, to respond. Little surprise that all but 20 declined to comment. Rather than interpreting the non-response as a lack of evidence for its formulation of the story — that all 133 superintendents backed the letter — the reporters took it as a lack of evidence for Youngkin’s formulation.

It never occurs to the Post that the newspaper has zero credibility with a large swath of Virginia’s population, that many people, including some school superintendents, have seen the hatchet job the Post has done on the Virginia Military Institute, alleging widespread racism there. People understand that the newspaper is “all in” on one side of the Culture Wars and never veers from its narrative of systemic racism. Likewise, they can see that the newspaper is driven by an ideological bias to oppose Youngkin’s effort to root out “inherently divisive” concepts — such as viewing the country as divided between White oppressors and Black victims — from public schools.

Let’s start our critical analysis by examining how the Post frames the issue in the body of the article as the Youngkin administration claiming that “there is widespread dissatisfaction among superintendents with the letter,” and in the headline as claiming outright that “superintendents back him.” The text is misleading; the headline is a total fabrication.

Here’s what Youngkin actually said in his public comment: The association “mischaracterized the support they had for that letter.”

While the Post reported that superintendents’ opposition to Youngkin was unanimous, Youngkin and GOP spokesperson Garren Shipley noted that numerous superintendents had communicated that they did not agree with it.

It is indisputable that some of the 133 superintendents, in fact, did have issues with the letter. Shipley presented a list of dissident superintendents from Campbell, Hanover, Scott, Shenandoah and Washington Counties. None responded to the WaPo’s emails or calls for comment. The Post plugs Shipley’s claim into the story, and then, because the reporters failed to verify it in a one-day news cycle, wrote it off.

Similarly, Youngkin spokesperson Macaulay Porter set up interviews with two superintendents who she said disagreed with the letter. Both spoke anonymously due to the “sensitivity” of the topic. Both criticized VASS for publishing the letter without consulting them. They agreed with parts of the letter and disagreed with other parts. The Post quotes one of them as saying, “I certainly can’t speak to the entire commonwealth, but I can speak to what happens in our school division, and we certainly do not have divisive concepts here.”

The quote is a non-sequitur. The Youngkin administration has never contended that divisive concepts are found in every school system.

Of the 133 superintendents, 20 responded to the Post’s query. Sixteen said they fully supported the letter; four declined to comment. Obviously, some superintendents did support the letter, or it never would have been written. Many of Virginia’s school districts — urban and suburban mostly — are aggressively applying “social justice” principles and rhetoric. These include most districts in Northern Virginia, including Fairfax County, where the effort was led by Superintendent Scott Braband … who happens to be a past president of VASS, and will become its executive director in July. 

That some school districts oppose Youngkin has never been in question. The question is whether Youngkin’s policies and actions are so out of touch that every single one of Virginia’s school superintendents opposes them.

Of the 20 superintendents who responded, the Post cites several from far Southwest Virginia where, it pointedly notes, Youngkin won the 2020 election with a large majority of the vote.

Carroll County Public Schools Superintendent Mark Burnette said he agrees with the letter’s assertion that “superintendents across the state need to be involved in any kind of report that is generated on behalf of public education that affects our students or school policies.”

Greg Mullins, superintendent of Wise County Public Schools said, “I agree with the tone and tenor of the letter…. Any time there is a change in leadership in Richmond there is a period of adjustment, no question — but what we had been accustomed to was being able to have conversations, interact, ask questions and be part of the process. … And the general sense is that that has not happened, has not taken place.”

Nothing about “divisive concepts.”

If some superintendents say the Youngkin administration should have consulted with them before acting aggressively to counter policies and guidelines inspired by social-justice theory, that’s a legitimate story about a disagreement over procedure. But that’s not the story The Washington Post originally wrote! The Post (and innumerable outlets that followed its lead) framed the original story as 133 superintendents unanimously opposing Youngkin’s tip line and campaign against divisive concepts.

The Post has dug itself a deeper hole with this article, advertising its tendentious reporting in big, blinking Times Square lights. While its reporters appear to be reasonably scrupulous about quoting people accurately and getting  facts correct, it is fundamentally dishonest in the way it frames its stories, and in how it ignores critical context and facts that don’t fit the narrative.

Update: Superintendent for Martinsville City Public Schools Dr. Zebedee Talley, president of VASS, appeared on The John Reid Show this morning. Addressing the controversy, he said the letter represented the sentiments of “a majority” of the board. “It’s not all 133 superintendents who feel this way.” Moreover, he downplayed the disagreement with the Youngkin administration over divisive concepts. “The purpose of the letter is just to sit and talk,” Talley said.

Jillian Balow, state superintendent of public instruction, had not reached out to VASS or other school superintendents before issuing her 30-day report about divisive concepts in public schools, said Talley. “All we want is a seat at the table and be able to talk. That’s it!”


Share this article



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)


Comments

44 responses to “Dig, WaPo, Dig! You’re Halfway to China!”

  1. Kathleen Smith Avatar
    Kathleen Smith

    Let’s get over this quickly. Go to Survey Monkey, do a free survey, Do you as a superintendent agree with the VASS letter? Yes or No. Send out survey using the VDOE website of superintendents. Analyze the results. End of problem. You could ask the State Sup to send out in a sups email – but why move to more questions of impartiality.

    1. Stephen Haner Avatar
      Stephen Haner

      Wouldn’t change the fact that the early stories claiming 133 supes were in agreement were false. The lie started with the VASS leadership, but a competent reporter would have questioned the claimed unanimity. It fit the bias and they went with it.

      1. James McCarthy Avatar
        James McCarthy

        Point made, noted, filed. Score 1-0 on this.

        1. Matt Adams Avatar
          Matt Adams

          And yet you down-voted his statement like the partisan troll you are.

        2. Nancy Naive Avatar
          Nancy Naive

          … with a degree of difficulty rating of 0.000001.

          For those following, the final score for any event is determined by multiplying the judge’s score by the degree of difficulty.

      2. From 133 to 12 [the board], to this, “[The]president of VASS, appeared on The John Reid Show this morning [and] said, the letter represented the
        sentiments of “a majority” of the board.

        So it’s seven?

        1. James McCarthy Avatar
          James McCarthy

          Could be 11!!!

  2. James McCarthy Avatar
    James McCarthy

    OK, OK, Okay!!! A tiny (tinny?) win for the anti-wokeists. Expressing too much glee at the reporting shortfall should be beneath extensive commentary. LSM (not ASM) overstated the position of the superintendents. All now know this. Smile, take a breath, pat on the back.

    BR is also keeping the story alive. The horse has been beaten to death.

    1. tmtfairfax Avatar
      tmtfairfax

      Just out of curiosity, I looked on the Post’s Virginia news page. Schneider’s article stressing unanimity from March 15 is still online. In the old days, papers periodically listed corrections or retractions when they made mistakes. But recall the Post and Janet Cooke.

      The MSM functions about the same level as Joseph Goebbels did decades ago.

  3. VaNavVet Avatar

    Team Youngkin might want to take the advice that when you have dug yourselves into a hole on divisive concepts it is really time to quit digging. Surely, there are many other divisive issues to focus on for the base or maybe just effective governing for a change of pace.

  4. The Washington Post tells a demonstrable falsehood. I (and others) rebut the lie. The Washington Post doubles down on the falsehood. I rebut them again.

    And I’m the one who’s contributing to polarization?

    Got it.

    1. Virginia Project Avatar
      Virginia Project

      at certain point logic must compel the conclusion that the pack of regular losers who plague the message boards of the Virginia GOP political scene are here with the specific intent to destroy reasonable and rational discussion

      When you ban them good people will come back to talk instead

    2. James McCarthy Avatar
      James McCarthy

      I think the messaging to you is about overkill. I don’t think anyone seriously advocates the reporting error/mistake. “Falsehood?” Not so sure about that characterization.

      Take the victory walk or stroll on the issue. Your wokeism is intact.

    3. Nancy Naive Avatar
      Nancy Naive

      No James, you’re not contributing to polarization. Nobody cares.

      BTW, Matt Adams’ comments are being blocked somehow, and I am not blocking him. If you’ve done something to block his comments, thank you, thank you, thank you.

      1. Randy Huffman Avatar
        Randy Huffman

        I care. It is my view that the Washington Post, Richmond Time’s Dispatch (while I don’t subscribe to either, I do subscribe to a sister paper, the Charlottesville Daily Progress, which runs stories from both) are not to be trusted in a lot of the news they distribute. When blatant dishonesty is found, they need to be called out.

        1. walter smith Avatar
          walter smith

          Hey…Hunter Biden laptop really was Hunter’s laptop says NYT today. But if you don’t trust us, you’re a (pick all that apply) – racist, conspiracy theorist, insurrectionist, ant-vaxxer…

        2. James McCarthy Avatar
          James McCarthy

          Cool!! You have made your election of media to protect your views. The people in media are people, not perfect and some make mistakes, commit errors. Frankly, the one at issue here is not earth-shaking in the proportion of material carried daily.

          WAPO has been called out. OK. Done.

          1. Randy Huffman Avatar
            Randy Huffman

            Perhaps Bacon is “beating a dead horse”, but it’s illustrative of what fair minded people see regularly in much of the media.

            Of course people makes mistakes and are human, but the issues here go much deeper, it has to do with trust.

          2. tmtfairfax Avatar
            tmtfairfax

            Most people in the MSM are not ordinary people who make mistakes from time to time. The media people who fit that bill are dead or long retired. Today, we have wild-eyed ideologues.

            Keep in mind that the Post spent big bucks covering an Alabama Senate race when it missed Northam’s blackface conduct not just in one four-year election cycle but in two. And it’s the same paper that allowed the editorial board to ignore company policy of strict separation between the editorial and news sides when the editorial board pressured a reporter not to write anything critical of Tim Kaine.

            And let’s not forget the New York Times’ “It’s not Hunter Biden’s laptop until it is Hunter Biden’s laptop.”

      2. RE: Blocked Comments.

        I have not taken action to block anyone’s comments, but is “Content Unavailable” the indication that a comment has been blocked by my account? I’m asking because in the last couple days I’ve been seeing that message in quite a few places in the comment section (although I can see Matt Adams’ comments).

        I think I know who is being blocked, because I have not seen anything recently from a particular person who is typically a very active commenter on this site.

        Mr. Bacon, if you are reading this: Please look into this issue and fix it/get it fixed if you can (or instruct me on how I can fix it).

        I would like to see everyone’s comments.

        1. Hi, Wayne, I’m not sure what’s going on. I can tell you this: Disqus has intrdouced a new feature called “bi-directional blocking.”

          “The new blocking experience not only removes a blocked user’s comments and profile page from your view, but also removes your comments and profile page from their view as well—i.e., users who choose to use the block option can do so to effectively end interaction between them and users they block. Our intention is to provide users with greater control over their safety experience. …

          “Previously, if User A blocked User B, User A couldn’t see User B’s comments, but User B could still see and interact with User A’s comments. With the new update, User A and User B both won’t be able to view or interact with each other’s comments or profile pages. ”

          I haven’t figured out how to block or unblock. Disqus does not do a very good job of explaining it.

          1. That’s too bad.

            A particular person blocked me a while back (I don’t remember why). That was his/her decision to take, of course, but up until now I have been able to see this other person’s comments, and I have even read some of them.

            While I never got along very well with this person, he/she has on occasion posted a comment which gave me a different insight into an issue which resulted in me reassessing my opinion. Isn’t that one of the reasons you created this site in the first place?

            I do not know how to block someone, either. Of course, that does not matter to me because I have no desire to block anyone no matter how disagreeable they are.

        2. Nancy Naive Avatar
          Nancy Naive

          I’m suspecting tha DisQuick has implemented a “both-way” block. If 6 months ago, you blocked someone, it made their comments become “content unavailable.” This did not prevent them fro reading and commenting on yours however.

          With a two-way block, if you block someone, it would hide theirs from you and yours from them. This is what I suspect has occurred — a vast improvement. It prevents the inanity of deep engagements with “Little Miss Can’t-Be-Wrong” and we all have seen his entire stadium move, not just goal posts.

          1. I understand that some might view “reciprocal blocking” as an improvement, but I do not see it that way.

            If someone blocks my comments that is their choice. Their decision should not affect my ability to read each and every comment in a thread. It should be my choice whether or not I read a particular comment by a particular person.

            Besides, I try not to be petty or hold grudges so I am usually willing to let bygones be bygones. I can have a perfectly pleasant and civil discussion today with someone I was trading insults with yesterday. I consider it all part of the fun. And I’ve got too many other important things to spend my limited brain power on than trying to keep track of who called me a bad name last week or which of the reprobates who post to this site insulted my favorite dog breed a month-and-a-half ago.

          2. Nancy Naive Avatar
            Nancy Naive

            Respite. Would be a shame to leave it as “all men (WLBGTQ+) are my teachers that I may learn from them.”
            https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=-gsDBuHwqbM

  5. LarrytheG Avatar
    LarrytheG

    Why heckfire! Any Sup that disagrees can and should report-in to Youngkin on that “TIP” line. Right? Then Youngkin could “report”!

    Youngkin should do a press release asking for responses1

  6. Stephen Haner Avatar
    Stephen Haner

    https://www.virginiamercury.com/blog-va/few-superintendents-have-come-forward-to-support-youngkin-ed-policies-and-more-va-headlines/

    The Virginia Mercury trying to keep the story alive, too. What falsehood? I must admit I don’t blame superintendents for being unwilling to dispute the VASS position publicly and being subjected to the ridicule that will come their way. The false “America Sucks and You Know Who are the Oppressors” narrative is vital to keep the next generation in the Left’s political camp.

    It is a classic no win for them to speak up publicly now. After all, that’s not what is being taught so what’s the problem with removing those references/directives from DOE’s documents? Right?

    1. Kathleen Smith Avatar
      Kathleen Smith

      Next year they can choose not to join the association. This is really not looking at the real problem: 1. the letter said that sups would like to be brought to the table more – nothing wrong with that. 2. the letter said they would rather look at outcomes for equity, not just opportunity. Nothing wrong with that.

      Bi-partisan politics needs to stop and we need to help stop it by NOT continuing to focus on us vs them. Dwelling causes more us vs them. Ridiculous argument.

      Has anyone ever heard of constructive criticism?????????????

    2. VaNavVet Avatar

      Perhaps they just are tired of telling the Youngkin admin that is not what is being taught, and have given up bucking the Team Youngkin political narrative.

      1. Matt Adams Avatar
        Matt Adams

        Says the poster peddling a political narrative. You and Jimmy need to find mirrors.

    3. Kathleen Smith Avatar
      Kathleen Smith

      Next year they can choose not to join the association. This is really not looking at the real problem: 1. the letter said that sups would like to be brought to the table more – nothing wrong with that. 2. the letter said they would rather look at outcomes for equity, not just opportunity. Nothing wrong with that.

      Bi-partisan politics needs to stop and we need to help stop it by NOT continuing to focus on us vs them. Dwelling causes more us vs them. Ridiculous argument.

      Has anyone ever heard of constructive criticism?????????????

      1. VaNavVet Avatar

        Both sides need an enemy to mobilize their base as it has all become about “base politics” as the rest of the country just tunes out. Just take a look at the part BR plays in it.

        1. Matt Adams Avatar
          Matt Adams

          Blue Virginia called and they’d like you to realize that condemnation goes both way, there wanna be sailor.

          1. VaNavVet Avatar

            I did say “both” sides.

          2. Matt Adams Avatar
            Matt Adams

            You employed bothsiderism and than went one to trash BR alone.

            Do better.

      2. Matt Adams Avatar
        Matt Adams

        “Bi-partisan politics needs to stop and we need to help stop it by NOT continuing to focus on us vs them. Dwelling causes more us vs them. Ridiculous argument.”

        Umm bi-partisan political is needed, it’s defined as common ground to achieve one goal. Partisan politics is what is not needed, but the only people who talk about that are the ones not in power. Once they return to power, their desire to stop it goes away again.

        1. Kathleen Smith Avatar
          Kathleen Smith

          Sorry. You are correct. Partisan politic needs to stop!!!!!!!

    4. Kathleen Smith Avatar
      Kathleen Smith

      Do you realize how many hoops of opinion sups in this state have to jump through every day? First, their local school board, now the hotline, the governor, the newspapers, the republicans, the democrats the state board, the state superintendent, the VDOE staff, the teachers, the parents. They spend their time BUFFERING to ensure learning instead of BRIDGING to ensure learning. I wouldn’t want their job. I could write a very long book on why not to become a superintendent.

      1. Virginia Project Avatar
        Virginia Project

        it would be a ton easier if education were not as politicized as Democrats insist it must be

  7. Nancy Naive Avatar
    Nancy Naive

    Uh oh… Didn’t England just drop quarantine requirements? Haven’t they really loosened up? Aren’t we following suit…

    https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/#category=nations&map=rate

  8. LarrytheG Avatar
    LarrytheG

    Well, I think WaPo IS guilty as sin! Now, how does that compare to typical right-wing media “reporting”? NO CONTEST!

    they all are biased but some much, much more than others.

    And you KNOW the proof? JAB and like-minded STILL quote WaPO on other issues – as factual reporting – especially when it supports their narrative.

    right?

    So one day, they roundly condemn left-wing media and the next day, it’s the truth from on high when it supports their views!

    😉

    1. walter smith Avatar
      walter smith

      As usual…
      Sometimes, perhaps by accident, the ComPost gets it right.
      Usually, if there is a narrative that must be supported, a wise person (hint, hint) might wonder if there are ulterior motives.
      Hey, Lar – did you hear that the NYT admitted the Hunter Biden laptop is real? 17 months after denying it? And the FBI had it 10 months before that…but all just happened…
      Cuz the “50 former intelligence officials” wasn’t manufactured news…like this story!
      OK now Larry – put up or shut up – start naming right wing media reporting that is “wackadoodle.”
      This was a manipulated story in service of Democrats. When it comes to politics, nearly every story is manipulated by the mainstream media. Since the national media is overwhelmingly to the Left, the bias is overwhelming to the Left. Fox is actually the closest to fair. But you do your echo chamber and hope we all forget your parroting the Left-wing narrative du jour…

    2. Nancy Naive Avatar
      Nancy Naive

      To keep in line with Right wing media, you’re supposed to throw out the obligatory “just asking.”

  9. Donald Smith Avatar
    Donald Smith

    “The Post (and innumerable outlets that followed its lead) framed the original story as 133 superintendents unanimously opposing Youngkin’s tip line and campaign against divisive concepts.”

    I’m confident the Post doesn’t care that it got the story wrong. Bari Weiss and Peter Robinson (the latter of the Hoover Institution’s Uncommon Knowledge podcast) have both pointed out that, with the decline of print advertising, newspapers now rely on their subscribers for income. The Post has apparently decided to chase that segment of the news-reading market that disdains Glenn Youngkin and adores Louise Lucas.

    This could simply be a business decision on the part of the Post. Give the customer what he/she wants.

Leave a Reply