Eric Paulsen: UMC Apologist

The newscaster's continued, slanted defense of the UMC and Governor Jindal - without adequate skepticism - is unfortunate.

He buys the biomedical panacea hook, line, and sinker (around 15:40).  And laces it with a dose of Houston- and Birmingham-envy.  

He also cites the Cancer Center as a good sign...but says nothing about the $15 million deficit that is preventing the facility from being completed (so he's either selectively informed...or uninformed on this item).

He also defends the withdrawal of the HUD mortgage insurance pre-app, repeating over and over, quite adamantly, that HUD didn't actually reject the application (which is exactly what the state and the UMC Board want the public to think, and, as Senator Vitter pointed out, it was almost certainly withdrawn to avoid the ignominy of outright rejection).

Finally, he also says the state has over $100 million coming from FEMA for contents of Charity...saying that they have about $900 million.  They don't have it - they might have it, but that's an important distinction.

AP gets its slant on

Take a look at this AP report on the fate of HCR-59...and note just how slanted the reporter's take was:

Legislative hurdle for new teaching hospital killed


BATON ROUGE — An attempt to add legislative roadblocks to construction of a new public medical center in New Orleans failed to gain passage in the House, killing the proposal for the session.

Why exactly was the measure a "hurdle" - ?  That connotes an impediment.  The reporter could have just as easily chosen to characterize the measure as "Legislative safeguard"...but very clearly chose not to for some reason.

Proceeding into the opening paragraph, the measure's provision requiring full legislative approval is characterized pejoratively as "legislative roadblocks"...when they could just as easily have been called "accountability measures" or "greater fiscal oversight."  Again, the slanted preference of the reporter comes through as clear as day.

While the piece does briefly reference the way in which supporters presented the measure, the damage is already done - readers see the measure as a hostile attempt to kill the UMC hospital because of the improper way the issue is framed with the language employed.