Bill Church Lies Again - Salem-News.Com

(SALEM, Ore.) - In his recent little blog Bill Church, high muckeymuck of the Salem Statesman-Journal, decided to evidence his dishonesty and dishonor once again.

In response to his prideful posts of censoring users of the SJ Forums, (using extremely inconsistent moderation as I have pointed out before), I sent him an email. He chose to print it (no problem there, I appreciate his printing it) in his blog. What I did not appreciate is his lies he posted with it.

He accused me of attacking his intelligence. Where in the email he printed did I attack his intelligence? Nowhere.

In no way did he answer, much less disprove, any of the claims I made in the email. Big surprise.

All he did was perpetuate the myths and lies. All he did was participate in factless character assassination. My how shocking! Well, maybe not so shocking considering the clearly sagging standards at the SJ. It is no wonder why the old guard newspapers are going the way of the dinosaurs.

Self-serving seems to be his hallmark, even if extremely shortsighted and narrow minded.

For all his claims about my being 'infamous' it is strange how so many of the regular posters still are far more offensive and in violation of the posted rules than I ever was yet they are not censored... while Bill Church goes around crowing how he censors others (who likely got on the bad side of the 'protected class'. His big claim against my posts were they were (to use his word) 'vitriolic'. I would disagree. The definition of vitriolic includes the term scathing. I will cop to my posts being at times scathing. Thing is there is nothing wrong with that if justified as mine were. But the term vitriolic means a lot more that, in fact, did not apply to my posts. More dishonesty on the part of Bill Church.

Bill Church refuses to answer about that or the 'protected class'. One has to wonder why that is, Is it possible that he is one of those protected violator posters on SJ Forums? The evidence does seem to suggest it, as does the apparent immaturity and lack of professionalism he displayed in his blog comments cited above.

There was once a day and age where newspaper editors had class, had professional ethics, valued honesty, facts and reason.

Clearly, at least in regards to the Salem statesman-Journal, if not all of Gannett, those days have passed away.

Salem-News.com Top Stories

2025: Hope for the Best, Prepare for the Worst

Two Wars with No Way Out

No One Owns the Future

The Ugly Origins of Trump's America First Policy

A One-State Solution Could Transform the World

Comments Leave a comment on this story.

All comments and messages are approved by people and self promotional links or unacceptable comments are denied.

Jefferson January 17, 2008 5:43 pm (Pacific time)

People, the far left will not care about your opinion. Spend anytime in the blogosphere and it’s clear that the two sides of the political galaxy are not created equal. One side burns effigies of American soldiers and craps on the American flag. The other does not. One side wraps itself in assassination chic. The other does not. One side indulges in vicious Sambo photoshops, rank religious bigotry, death wishes, gloating over the illnesses of public figures, and fill-in-the-blank derangement syndrome. The other does not. You cannot have a reasonable debate with the irrational, you just cannot...

Neal Feldman January 16, 2008 12:16 pm (Pacific time)

Jefferson - It doesn't matter to anyone but obsessed wingnuts like yourself. And if Jerry Springer was the most profitable TV there was would, in your view, make that right and good? You have some very screwed up values that is certain. I think it is pretty clear those venues you point to are more profitable as they appeal to the lowest common denominator.. emphasis on lowest. I suggest you watch the movie "Idiocracy" to see where the roads you wish lead. Ah well...

Jefferson January 15, 2008 6:11 pm (Pacific time)

So the papers that are expanding, are they liberal or conservative? How about cable television and talk radio, which ones are showing the highest audiences and profits? Liberal or consevative? If someone out there considers the SJ as anything other than far left, well you need your head examined...

Neal Feldman January 15, 2008 12:57 pm (Pacific time)

Jefferson - And since when do I worry about far left taliking points? I am an independent and determine each topic on its own merits. On some subjects I side with the left, some with the right some with the middle. But I guess as far right wing of a wingnut you clearly are everything in the universe must seem 'far left'. Ah well...

Neal Feldman January 15, 2008 12:51 pm (Pacific time)

Jefferson - So you admit at least one paper that you named has increased circulation... and you admit that most are decreasing. So you admit I am right so what, exactly, is the point of your idiotic rantings here? Or are you as completely pointless as you clearly appear? Sure seems that way. Ah well...

Neal Feldman January 15, 2008 12:47 pm (Pacific time)

Jefferson - OMG you are feeble and pathetic... I point out for months your penchant for delusional projection and finally in desperation you, factlessly as usual, try and turn it around? You are the one demonstrating delusional aspects here not I. You are hilarious! Nice to see you feel my statements are so effective against you that you felt you needed to try them yourself even if it makes you look utterly foolish to do so. You see, my little neocon nitwit, for the statement I make to be as effective as they are they have to be true and based on fact... two concepts clearly alien to you. Ah well...

Jefferson January 15, 2008 10:45 am (Pacific time)

Jenn the below is why feldman cannot respond to his statement, because it does not fit the far left talking points: Deal with it feldman... The conservative Washington Times is one of the few major newspapers whose circulation is growing, according to the most recent survey of readership trends. Times circulation climbs to buck trend (Washington Times) The Washington Times celebrated its 25th anniversary yesterday with cake and champagne served to its employees at a midafternoon assembly, as its executives announced a substantial gain in audited circulation in the face of a national trend of declining U.S. newspaper numbers. An increase of nearly 3 percent over the similar period last year, according to Fas-Fax, the Audit Bureau of Circulations (ABC) report of publishers’ estimates. “We’re scoring important exclusive after exclusive,” says Wesley Pruden, editor in chief of The Times. “I think Washington, official and otherwise, is realizing that The Times is the lively newspaper in town, packing a terrific punch as the indispensable source of news, and we’re enormously pleased that this is so. Newspapers, like humans, can suffer hardening of the arteries, and we’re determined not to let that happen to us as we approach the completion of our first quarter of a century as an important part of the life of the nation.” Many U.S. newspapers, in fact, have struggled in recent years to hold readers. The Washington Post, for example, reported losing 20,682 subscribers, a 2.7 percent decline in its weekday circulation, from 772,553 to 751,871 compared to the first six months of 2004. While part of this growth is explainable by the same trends that have Fox News and other comparatively conservative outlets thriving in the current marketplace, Pruden is right to say that his paper breaks a lot of stories. This is especially true on the intelligence and foreign policy fronts. Rowan Scarborough and John McCaslin, especially, are must-reads.

Jefferson January 15, 2008 10:14 am (Pacific time)

So I assume, feldman, that you take notes during your daily therapy sessions and you are simply calling me what your therapist calls you? Talk about projection. Rather Feldmanian on your part. And Jenn, once again this small tiny little whatever, cannot respond to the original question. He makes a statement, then can't back it up, so everyone else has to prove him wrong. He learn this method in grad school? LOL! Usually this is the type of whatever back in childhood who would blame his incompetence on those mean big kids...he has been blaming others his whole life for his meaningless existence...but I mean that in a positive way. He has no doubt created considerable employment for those in the mental health field.

Neal Feldman January 15, 2008 12:39 am (Pacific time)

Jefferson - The only one seen here whose practices are accurately described as "simply makes up incredible lies but cannot back them up, nor does he worry about any consequences from his intentional lies" is YOU. But again projection is just one of the sad aspects of the delusional state that you so clearly suffer from based on your posts. The only ones here believing the scat you throw is yourself and the one or two other ignorant and impotent neocon cowards that have done feeble fly-bys. Ah well...

Neal Feldman January 15, 2008 12:35 am (Pacific time)

Jefferson - I did not say how intelligent (although it is considerable) just that I AM intelligent (clearly unlike the likes of you). Your plaintive wailing about 'which papers' is again, irrelevant (as usual for pretty much every post you make it seems). I simply stated the truth that some few are increasing but that the SJ is not. Can you show where the SJ has reversed its trend of shrinking readership? Can you prove that not a single paper anywhere has increased its readership? Unless you can meet a legitimate burden of proof for BOTH of those then my statement stands unchallenged in any credible and legitimate way. So continue your delusional ravings. You do more to discredit the neocon movement than anything I or Henry could ever do. LOL! Wallow in your cowardice and impotence. Ah well...

Jefferson January 14, 2008 6:32 pm (Pacific time)

Henry/SFI you and numerous readers on this website know you are lying, and that people is why I refer SFI as being "judgement-proof", for he simply makes up incredible lies but cannot back them up, nor does he worry about any consequences from his intentional lies, so far. Okay Henry/SFI show my postings that said I had some kind of "impalement stakes" and that I, a 6th generation Oregonian with property that's been in the family in the Bend area for even before (long before) your daddy was born in Russia, that I was coming to your hovel. I put the challenge to you! Well people as I have said before, the SFI is about "bait and switch", "smoke and mirrors", or whatever else he can do to avoid discussing real issues rationally. Though those on the far left will rally to you, we know that's why they have the moniker "useful idiots". Profit making organizations are becoming more aware everyday that reasoned debate is profitable, but you don't want that do you SFI. You appear, along with your other tag team member, to be very embittered individuals, very embittered. Those PTSD combat veterans that you have been using for your lefty tripe is getting legs, and I will see that it starts to sprint around to all veterans in this state and those in the northwest via appropriate channels. Show me where I have lied about anything in the above regard...you cannot, nor can you respond to my above challenge. Grow up!

Henry Ruark January 14, 2008 3:55 pm (Pacific time)

To all: Both statements made here by N-N are flatout lies-in-his teeth, re values-held and re Gannetteers "all left". Would you call SJ far left ? Many others are still farther to right than SJ; major push by Gannett over years has always been in that direction, sometimes hard enough to raise eyebrows and hard-discussion among pundits on journalism. But so what else is new, from him ? WOnder if he's still carrying that impalement-stake he mentioned recently, with a close association to his visit over here, and with his buddybunch, too !! Ain't nobody showed up, and I poured out that Senseo I had ready for them, and sent my six own large buddies home.

Jefferson January 14, 2008 3:48 pm (Pacific time)

Well people, feldman still cannot respond to "which" papers are increasing in circulation, but he can tell us how intelligent he is...ummm. It seems feldman that a person who endorses the lethal torture of prisoners and the murder of American's via omission and trivalizing is out of touch of just what values are. What is your definition?

Neal Feldman January 14, 2008 12:49 pm (Pacific time)

Jefferson - As usual your ignorance is only exceeded by your arrogance. Conservatives are the only ones with American values, huh? Oh you must mean the values of intolerance, bigotry, greed, avarice, dishonesty, hypocrisy, etc. Notice intelligence is not listed because it is absent from your side. Your side's poster kids are the likes of yourself and the ignorant hate-mongering cadaverous shrew Ann Coulter and the smarmy Sean Hannity. But do keep impotently spewing your neocon wingnut propaganda. Those of us who are intelligent, educated and have the ability of independent thought do find you eminently qualified to play the fool. Ah well...

Jefferson January 14, 2008 12:02 pm (Pacific time)

Jenn, feldman cannot respond to which papers/publications are expanding their circulations because the only organizations in the media that are doing the best $$, are those that reflect American values, i.e. , conservative organizations. It's a fact! What is amusing is many of the below posters here are those on the far left dissing a far left publication (all of Gannett's spawn, by the way, are far left). It reminds me of the growing animus between the clintoon and obama camps. Fun to observe. Thank you!

Neal Feldman January 14, 2008 9:30 am (Pacific time)

JJ - How dare you?! You owe a deep apology to rags the world over for your great insult to them! LOL. Ah well...

Henry Ruark January 14, 2008 6:57 am (Pacific time)

To all: For comprehensive story on the assassination of its rival competitor paper in Salem, see: The Chain Gang: One Newspaper Versus the Gannett Empire;by Richard McCord (Paperback - Oct 2001), still available at Amazon Books. I can vouch for its account and also for "the rest of the story" re Gannett's continuing national regime re daily-paper management, from previous experience elsewhere. Monopoly is as monopoly will always do, and any capital city so cursed pays a high premium for that situation, in many complex ways far beyond dollar cost alone.

isuggest January 14, 2008 6:31 am (Pacific time)

Neal - you are correct. The SJ never answered my polite request for clarification of their policy. My options are now to either accept abuse from other posters without being able to respond in kind, to be extremely careful with what I say to as not to offend anyone, or to simply stop participating.

Henry Ruark January 14, 2008 5:15 am (Pacific time)

To all: "Newspapers are dead or dying" is recent them for neocon noise machine, the same one we hear right here. Many suffer from complacent myopia on rapid world changes affecting them, forced by heavy pressure on stock value and "bottom line" as for any corporation today. BUT their role is still so strong that some few leaders are still expanding services, deliveries, circulation and even staff. Recent developments on the realities involved coming soon in Op Ed(s) here, as in past two years. BUT don't swallow that newer neocon line "dailies are dead" which will never happen as many still prefer print to Internet and prove it every month by payment. Do you really think Murdoch risking billions to distort and pervert WSJ on wild whim ?

JJ January 13, 2008 10:15 pm (Pacific time)

We were involved in a school boundary change battle awhile back and an article was printed which was full of blatant lies and half truths. I contacted the Statesman and was informed that their reporter would not lie..give me a break, I was reading the lies in black and white. The Statesman is nothing more than a rag!

Neal Feldman January 13, 2008 9:35 pm (Pacific time)

Jenn and anon - I do not know specific names just that while few and far between some are while most are not. Certainly the SJ (and most Gannett rags) are not expanding. I just did not wish to say none were because that would be untrue. Sorry if I confused anyone. Ah well...

Jenn January 13, 2008 6:45 pm (Pacific time)

The only papers I've noticed doing anything but a nose dive are weeklies/monthlies/specialty mags. Everything else is...ONLINE. What do you need to line the bird cage for anyhow? Do you even have a bird?

Anonymous January 13, 2008 9:46 am (Pacific time)

Neal which papers are expanding?

Neal Feldman January 13, 2008 2:24 am (Pacific time)

Glen - Their biases have been clear, tis true. They are also enormous cheerleaders for Gestapo CPS that, apparently in their eyes, can do no wrong no matter what. I tried to point this out many times to no avail. They have no intention of listening to anything that disagrees with them. Ah well...

Neal Feldman January 13, 2008 1:59 am (Pacific time)

isuggest - Do not hold your breath waiting for them to answer your questions. They also do not consider themselves bound by their own statements or rules anyway. If you have been warned then you have offended one or more of the protected class and your days are numbered unless you so censor yourself that you might as well be banned. Beware as the protected class dislikes having their stupidity pointed out. My banning was due to my accurate use of the words 'idiot, idiocy, stupid, stupidity, moron, and moronic' regardless of the accuracy. Not only was such not listed in the TOS as violations but most if not all of the protected class have quite often used those very words without being banned. They also tend to use profanity which I never do in posts which WAS and still IS a violation of the TOS. Yet as pointed out the protected class remains, well, protected from the rules they get to ignore at will. To me it was bad enough to censor honest, true and accurate statements but to do so in such a hypocritical and ridiculously inconsistent manner is even more offensive. It is no wonder with such policies at the SJ that their readership is failing. SOME papers are maintaining or even expanding circulation... but not the SJ and this is but one reason. They remain far too blinded by their own arrogance to see it. So be it, they were warned. On their heads be it. Ah well...

isuggest January 12, 2008 8:05 pm (Pacific time)

I have yet to receive a response so it seems that enforcement is arbitrary and that actions are taken based on content. As Neal says, there are several regulars who constantly violate what seems to be the standards - without any application of sanctions. Bill Church is a coward - he recently stated that he was afraid to be downtown because of the kids that hang out - I can hardly imagine how he would react in a large city like Los Angeles or Chicago.

isuggest January 12, 2008 6:50 pm (Pacific time)

I was warned today about a post (2 warnings and you can be 86'd) and am still trying to find out which post was offensive. The TOS are somewhat vague so I tried to get a better idea. I called a couple people stupid and others I called racists - but both descriptions were clearly accurate.

Glen January 12, 2008 4:33 pm (Pacific time)

The Statesman Journal has a long history of publishing what they want and ignoring what they want hidden. During the 90's they began a series of teacher bashing articles claiming that teacher standards were too low. When I spend a day or two picking out their grammatical errors, malapropisms and so on, pointing out their low standards, they point blank refused to publish the letter. S-J are too lazy to actually go out and find stories anyway. They prefer sitting around the office and creating stories out of pocket lint and their weak imaginations.

[Return to Top]