This is the second survey of the Local-o-meter Credibility Index.

The Credibility Index measures the number nostalgic columns and local advertisements, as a percentage of all ads in the paper.

(Nostalgic columns, such as “Remember when…” are counted as ads to give the paper the benefit of the greatest number of local ads.) The first survey derived from the April 9th issue of the Register.

The combination of local ads (for honest-to-goodness Whitewater merchants) and nostalgic columns are considered against the presence of out-of-town ads, those asking for consumers to shop outside Whitewater. The higher the percentage of local ads of all ads in the Whitewater Register, the greater the credibility of the paper as a local paper. The greater, too, the credibility of local-talking politicians who have weekly columns in the paper.

This survey included the first section of the paper, a free-standing furniture store insert, a free-standing Culver’s insert, a free-standing Homes & Design insert, and an insert called “Out Town,” specifically about Whitewater, Wisconsin.

The Whitewater-specific insert should, in theory, boost the percentage of local ads considerably.

Did it?

Prepare to be shocked, Shocked, SHOCKED…

Amazing — even with the “Our Town” insert, still only 41.9% local ads. I was generous, too, counting ads with Whitewater and Out-of-Town merchants combined as Whitewater-only ads.

Last week had only a 30.7% level of local credibility — it’s better this week, with the Our Town insert, but still a minority of all ads are local!

We’ll have to see how April 23rd’s measurement reveals…

NOTES & DISCLAIMERS:

1. Keep in mind — I think you should shop anywhere you want. The point I want to make is that when politicians talk ‘local,’ they should write for publications that have lots and lots of local advertisers.
2. Ads counted do not consider that many out-of-town ads are larger than local ads.
3. All counting was done while drinking Spotted Cow.

Here’s my update on Whitewater, Wisconsin’s local newspaper, the Register, a declining weekly. Not so much in decline, though, that Editor Matt Schwenke can’t find a telling quotation, now and then, from a local politician. This issue of the paper offers what might be, if only someone cared to try more often.

Lede Story. The lede story, “State of the county lays out good news despite tough times,” from Maureen Mayrand, reports on County Executive David Bretl’s remarks on Walworth County fiscal policy. There’s so much in the story that’s unexplored, unquestioned, left unconsidered. Bretl delivered his state of the county remarks at an event that the Republican Party of Walworth County hosted. Odd, no? Walworth County’s a Republican county, but wouldn’t someone think that a non-partisan host would make more sense for remarks billed as detailing the ‘state of the county.’ Neither federal nor state addresses of this kind are delivered with a political party as host; why would Walworth County be different?

I don’t know. Mayrand interviews no one, to ask: What do you think about this? Was there no one who had an opinion on a practice different from equivalent state or federal addresses? Not a single Democrat, independent, libertarian, etc.? Mayrand mentions the hosting organization, but leaves the story there. That’s too bad, because it might have been an interesting topic all its own.

Typical of the Register and its sister papers in the Southern Lakes chain, Bretl’s principal remarks are set out, without any additional reporting. Is his perspective the only one for Walworth County? I don’t know, and from reading the Register, I wouldn’t know. I can guess that there’s an opposing view out there somewhere — it’s just not in the Register.

The story mentions that Bretl’s address was delivered on April 2, “according to a press release.” Was Mayrand in attendance, or did she report the story only through submitted information? (The photo accompanying the story is, as stated, a ‘photo submitted’ to the paper.) She may have been there, and also reviewed a press release, or may have written the story only through secondary sources, including a press release.

I can’t tell. Either might be true. Only one, though, deserves to be a headliner in the paper — one would at least hope for someone to attend, ask a few questions, etc. (It’s damning, though, that one can read the story and not tell if the reporter was in attendance; isn’t that the least one should expect from this headline story?)

Common Council Elections. Here’s the front page story where one finds Editor Matt Schwenke’s telling quotation. Much as I’ve criticized the Register, the paper almost deserves another year for its reported remarks from City Council at-large representative Marilyn Kienbaum.

Here’s what Kienbaum had to say, after her re-election to Common Council:

This race has been absolutely insane,” said Kienbaum. I think that the housing issue was brought up to drum up competition against me.”

“If you’re going to represent the entire community, you’d better know what the people think,” Kienbaum said. “I do care about the city, and people are used to me.”

“I know what’s going on.”

Oh my. So much, in so few words. Is there anyone, other than perhaps Marilyn Kienbaum, who thinks that the housing issue was brought up to create competition against her? No one who’s serious believes this. No one. I have been as critical of Dr. Nosek’s crusade on this issue as anyone, but I don’t think that those many people who have attended neighborhood meetings on the issue have done so to create competition against Kienbaum.

As readers can guess, I believe in strong, not weak, private property rights. I’ve written before that those property owners who’ve had their property damaged, or have been the subject of abuse merely for caring for their homes, deserve sympathy.

(I am convinced, though, that government in Whitewater offers nothing useful for those who have been injured; Dr. Nosek’s campaign for tighter regulations will prove unavailing.)

Does anyone — any sensible person — truly believe that those homeowners who are aggrieved, or even those students who have been maligned, have found themselves in that position so someone could create an issue against Marilyn Kienbaum? When City Manager Kevin Brunner called housing the biggest issue facing our city, does anyone think he did so to foil Kienbaum’s candidacy?

That’s absurd. She’s been inconsequential in this matter, offering only vague, shopworn remarks about everyone getting along. (Rodney King doesn’t live in Whitewater, and even if he did, I wouldn’t ask him about his views on local housing issues.) This topic’s not about her; she’s been inconsequential to it.

I could try to think of a self-centered, arrogant remark to attribute to someone, but I candidly admit that I could do no better than Kienbaum’s own reflections on her candidacy, importance to the city, etc..

Kienbaum won a closer race than most expected, and she should have the humility to see as much.

One last remark, to Kienbaum’s friends, the people who talk to her, etc.: You did this officeholder no favors when you encouraged her to run again. She’s been re-elected, but the office was supposed to be more than a retirement gift. Two years is a long time, with considerable issues before the city. Whitewater deserved a more focused, detail-ready representative. These public gatherings will demand much of those in attendance. These next two years may prove especially long, arduous, and demanding of detail and industry.