Monday, April 2, 2012
The JT Fails Readers Again
But that doesn't mean they have to suck either.
In this morning's Journal Times, instead of printing their regular editorial they pasted in one from the Philadelphia Inquirer...something all papers do from time to time.
The Philly editorial excoriates the growing phenomenon in which prospective employers request the Facebook passwords from prospective employees. This trend also includes "friending" bosses so they can keep tabs on any Facebook content that might pose a liability to their company.
In a time of significant unemployment and scarcity of good jobs - applicants could easily feel obligated to cooperate in what is probably an illegal request. Lawmakers like Charles Schumer have acted to update employment discrimination laws by saying employers can't do this sort of thing.
(More frightening perhaps, Facebook is warning employers to stop asking for this information. In duel between Federal law and Facebook - the wrath of Facebook scares the Siren a lot more.)
We completely agree and applaud the JT for including this clear condemnation in the paper today...and here is where they failed readers again - proving they really kinda suck:
On Tuesday, March 27th the U.S. Congress voted down the same kind of law that would allow the FCC to restrict employer from asking or accessing a employees Facebook account. The vote was 184 to 236 with only one Republican voting for it - and it wasn't Paul Ryan.
Paul Ryan voted to let employers ask for your password to your Facebook account.
The JT went out of it's way to weigh in on this measure but failed to inform their readers on how their Congressman voted. They pussied out by printing some other paper's editorial and leaving out relevant news of their own.
(Maybe they are still in the doghouse over that Paul Ryan dumpster picture they printed.)
Sins of omission are just as serious...ask any Catholic.
BTW: The Siren hears the Journal Times is sitting on another story they have had since last week about a local elected official - if true and revealed could be damaging to them on election day tomorrow. If so, is not printing the story just as damaging to voters who should have the right to know?
The news is a tricky business.