The position will have a great deal of independence, but the main focus will be investigative reports and human interest stories centering around what might be called the free market and small government beat.

Truly independent professional journalists need not apply. You are looking for stories that fit your preconceived ideological bent. Where's the funding coming from?

Don't be jealous, Phil. Justin is attempting to actually create a job by hiring someone, which could potentially decrease the high unemployment rate of this miserable state. This is in contrast to the fake employees at your "company," which help the local economy only in your mind as you go to work each day as a public school teacher or union organizer, or whatever it is that you really do.

How about Bob Plain - heard he's looking...

Dan, I noticed you blogged at 5:48pm. YOU must be the public school teacher or union orgainzer. Those of us who work in the real world are not out of work that early.

Phil - What a silly comment. It doesn't even make sense. Stop trolling and posting under multiple names.

Justin

As administrator at AR why don't you step in here as these comments from "Dan" are false and set the record straight. Whatever disagreement you and I have has nothing to do with the falsehoods stated on your blog by this one commenter. You should take some corrective action. Phil

Gee whiz, Phil. It was on my to-do list... only my priorities are not the same as yours.

None of the IP addresses repeat in this comment thread (except when the names match, of course).

------------

As to Phil's initial comment: I suppose you'd hire a radical animal-rights advocate to cover the local fishing industry? A classical snob (like me) to cover the local club scene?

There are stories on a particular range of topics that we think need to be told, and we suspect that most folks interested in telling them will share our beliefs about them. It'd be interesting, though, to have some candidates who wish to write about those topics even though they find them as distasteful as tearing those poor defenseless clams from their native habitats.

Phil lecturing about "falsehoods" - now that's a good one! I could point out that I have immediate access to no less than 4 IP addresses, but whatever, it's not really relevant to anything. The comments speak for themselves.

I did get a big laugh out of Phil trolling up this thread by insulting Justin and demanding to know where the funding comes from (what business is it of his?) only to then request a favor of Justin in the same thread!

Justin

As the largest newspapers undergo a difficult transition I fear that the journalistic standards that were in place may slip badly. Journalists for hire by any special interest group paid to produce stories promoting that client's interest to me does not meet those traditional standards. We may in time be subjected to only taking in news that is bought and paid for. It seems to me to be a much more European model than what the US has experienced.
Thank you for stepping up. Phil

Well, look, I've been saying for years that the best way to fund political news (even ideological news) is through a large number of small dollar donations or advertising contributions.

But I will insist that there's a difference between news that begins with certain premises and news that promotes "a client's interest." For the record, I do not know whom the specific "clients" are for the Current. I do know that we share some basic principles, and that there is a range of topics (or beats) that they want to cover. (Long reports on social issues, for example, are not within my scope.)

Liberals like Phil wanting fairness in journalism???? ABC,NBC,CBS,MSNBC,BET,PBS,CNN,....fairness.....yeah right. Go turn on the freakin' TV Phil or better yet pick up a copy of the NY Slimes,Wash. Post,or any other major daily. There's your objectivity ...concerned about them Phil? Course not.

Thanks for sharing the Dan Burden, Phil, I was getting tired.

Michael - The only burden you have is the burden of responding to simple questions I have asked. Questions like, "Why is my interpretation of the COLA data wrong?" and "What is your evidence for claiming that the percentage of firefighter retirees that have been receiving 5-6% COLAs is nowhere near half?"

A person with integrity would have no trouble responding to these simple, straightforward questions, even if the answers are, "I don't know." But you have no integrity (besides when it is convenient to have it in your union-heavy social circles), so being honest in these discussions is a "burden" to you, and you take juvenile pot shots at me instead.

Please just don't pretend like you are part of the solution on your blog or elsewhere - "fighting the good fight," as it were. You are squarely part of the problem.

I though "you read the graph wrong" was a crystal clear answer.

It's not at all because you haven't explained why you believe my interpretation of the data is incorrect. You intentionally left everyone guessing, presumably because you had no basis for the assertion in the first place.

Just another of many instances of intellectual dishonesty from you. It's gotten to the point where literally almost every statement you make is economy with the truth and deliberately gives the reader a false impression. I know you like to make it out like I'm some outrageous exaggerator or antagonist or something, but anyone can see it for themselves simply by reading your statements. You don't argue in good faith, and it really is that simple.

ANTHONY

I do read the NY Times. Sunday delivery. I don't watch news on television except for local sometimes. I occasionally watch the PBS news hour but mostly watch only sports on TV. I don't think that fairness is a requirement, but objectivity is, for true independent journalism. But where do you find it? The news consumer needs to evaluate each and every article and question the objectivity of the reporter and the publication. To not do so would be like hearing only a plaintiff's case and not that of the defendant's. You would come away with some facts but only those that would support their case. Does that make sense?

Michael

Nice to hear from you. Good luck and stay safe.

Justin

Good luck to you too at Ocean State Current.

Justin

I suppose you'd hire a radical animal-rights advocate to cover the local fishing industry?

No. But the Pew Foundation does put out an endless stream of information that supports their contention that the oceans are overfished. I think that their opinions leak into some of the reporting on local fisheries and has an adverse affect on commercial fishing large and small.

Justin

Please hire a "journalist" who wears a slouch hat, hangs out in sleazy bars, and introduces himself as a "reporter".

The Cianci trial wore me out with RI "Journalists" who were "shocked" to find that police tow operators paid off and that police department promotions were for sale. Where had they been?