Saturday, January 3, 2009

Professor at Army college calls out Rhonda Chriss Lokeman

Buffoonery inside a Rhonda Chriss Lokeman column provoked a response from Michael Weaver, an assistant professor at an army college in Kansas. Weaver fired off a letter in response to to a recent Lokeman column where she listed some gifts she hoped news makers would get in 2009. Weaver objected to this particular nonsense by Lokeman:

To U.S. troops: finally all the body and vehicular armor they were promised to carry out their missions in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Lokeman's statement is simply moronic. Does she think Obama will open the secret warehouse where Bush/Cheney have hidden the body armor from the troops? Most people would have trouble making up a statement so devoid of reality. But it comes easily for Lokeman and others who swing from the hip without having to bother with facts. Indeed, Lokeman had no grasp of the pertinent facts and Weaver knew it. His letter:


I generally enjoy reading syndicated columnist Rhonda Chriss Lokeman because I can always use her writing to point out to my students how the use of fallacy weakens an argument...

Ms. Lokeman is plain wrong. The facts are, the U.S. military has had the best armor available for the last several years. Through expedited development, testing, procurement and fielding (flying vehicles on aircraft versus using slower and less expensive sealift), the MRAP (mine-resistant ambush-protected) vehicle was in the hands of soldiers and Marines in record time.

The results of such efforts — a significant reduction in casualties. Through Rapid Equipment Fielding and Rapid Fielding Initiative, the Army identifies unit and individual requirements to meet capability gaps, procuring and issuing life-saving equipment in record time. Other services have equally successful rapid procurement programs.

I invite Ms. Lokeman to meet my students at Fort Leavenworth. Perhaps the facts, from those who use the equipment, will change her opinion.

Michael E. Weaver
Assistant professor, Combined Arms Center, U.S.
Army Command & General Staff College

Fort Leavenworth


Good for assistant Professor Weaver. The facts are on his side. The facts may not be on Rhonda Lokeman's side, but her husband, KC Star publisher Mark Ziemen, is. Which means nepotism, not facts, have the upper hand at the KC Star.

Previous:
Follow at Twitter
.
.
.

14 comments:

Archer05 said...

Re: “I invite Ms. Lokeman to meet my students at Fort Leavenworth. Perhaps the facts, from those who use the equipment, will change her opinion.”
--------------
Dear Sir:
'Cast not your pearls before swine.'

For the McClatchy boys in the backroom, that means don’t bother offering words of quality to those who aren't cultured enough to appreciate them.

McClatchy Watch said...

I spent a few minutes today doing Google research to find out if any other newspapers carried Rhonda Lokeman's columns in December.


The search came up empty. I'm betting only the KC Star publishes Lokeman's column.

It's a heck of a stretch to say he is "nationally" syndicated.

Archer05 said...

McC. W.,
I would like to know if the inflated circulation numbers have anything to do with the fee charged per column. If that is the case, then there are ramifications beyond the Z-man and nepotism IMO.

Anonymous said...

MW: I'm debating whether or not to abandon your site. I like it when you stay focused on McClatchy as a business, and don't like it when you sound high on Bill O'Reilly, NewsMax, and redstate.com

You posted recently that your site traffic has gone way up, so maybe it's working out well for you.

Please keep in mind that some of us are liberal-minded people who actually like the prospect of an Obama presidency, but are still interested in following news about McClatchy as a troubled corporation in a troubled industry.

Some of us have an extreme dislike of Bush (to put it mildly), but still want to follow MNI.

Recently, MW has started to get a "Fox News" feel about it. It seems to be helping your traffic, but IMNSHO you are straying from your mission, or what I thought was your mission.

Just some constructive feedback.

McClatchy Watch said...

8:38 -- I have hundreds of McClatchy employees who come here every day.

Probably most of them are left-leaning. Not all: I get alot of emails from McClatchy employees who are conservative.

Most McClatchy employees come here for the business news. I usually post 3 or more items a day on MNI shares, newspaper/media trends, layoff info, etc. that is "non-partisan."

But because I am conservative this blog will lean conservative. That's how it is, and I'm not going to change that. I'm still glad to have you as a reader and I hope you feel free to give me more feedback.

Anonymous said...

8:38... the very fact that so many McClatchy people are, like you Bush hating, Obama worshiping liberals is one of the main reasons McClatchy, along with the rest of the biased media is going broke.

Your biases are a big part of the story and any analysis of McClatchy or the news media in general must include the role of liberalism and liberal bias.

The kneepad treatment of Obama and the blind hatred of Bush is a primary and important factor in the destruction of a once proud profession.

You say you might abandon this site because the conservative slant bothers you. News flash... your liberal slant has caused many conservatives to abandon your product. Big difference is this site is not defendant on your readership while yours is defendant on ours.

This site has never hidden their conservative leanings while yours talks up un-biased reporting while dancing to the left. That is just plain dishonest and it pisses off over half of your potential customers. That is why you are going the way of the dinosaurs.

Archer05 said...

Let’s just stop and look at the ‘second’ line of this blog’s intro.

“But I also post about current events, the Iraq war, politics, and things that interest me. Take a look around this blog,”

I am telling you, thinking the McClatchy boys in the backroom can read and discern unbiased journalism, is thinking way above their pay grade.

There is plenty of jetsam and flotsam out there for the leftists to read already. I for one, am glad to know we are in a safe harbor. The McClatchy ship out there with Pruitt’s hand at the helm, is reason enough for us to stay in our own channel.

Anonymous said...

The idea that liberal bias is what is driving down circulation is a bit off base. For instance, we can generalize and say far more people 30 years old and younger supported Obama verses those Gen X’ers that lean conservative. (Hang around a bunch of 25 year olds if you want immersion in the entitlement mentality ).

Yet only 28 percent of the under 30’s read newspapers for their news. The seniors are turning to cable TV news, for 24/7 coverage.

If the logic that liberal newspapers are are driving off readers due to bias; where is the inverse that liberals should flock to their preferred news provider?

What about the handful of ‘conservative’ newspapers -- that are dropping dead faster than the big chains.

Conservatives love to champion the idea that bias kills circulation. But the truth is left or right, newspapers are irrelevant, due to societal changes in technology and lifestyle.

Young tech people lead fast paced lives, where personal time is a commodity. Newspapers can change content and style all they want. go right or try for centrist.. -- it won't matter.

They can’t give people more time in their digital day with yesterday's news delivered, late tomorrow.

Anonymous said...

12:02 your denial is delightful. Be sure to bring that up with your job counselor when you are applying of unemployment insurance.

It is wonderful that you arrogant assholes just can't bring yourselves to recognize the very poison that is killing you. I love it!

What is really fun is that liberals, as a group, have this amazing ability to feel guilty about so many things which they and absolutely nothing to do with, while at the same time failing to recognize their role in those disasters for which they are directly responsibility.

Anonymous said...

Anyway, it is probably time to return this thread to an examination of that classically trained professional journalist with the highest ethical standards Rhonda Chriss Lokeman. A shining beacon in the land of hope and change. A truly inspiring story of speaking truth to power and marrying the later.

Carry on.....

Anonymous said...

-12:41

I left McClatchy last year to work for for an information company doing online marketing, targeting former newspaper advertisers.

I took the mistakes made by RJ, Drunk Bob, and Wunderkind Christian, and and applied those lessons in a new business model.

Your post reflects how polarization within within or external to newspapers clouds issues regarding media change.

News execs believe that bias does not exist, and media critics believe that a society without a liberal media will somehow be better.

Politicians on both sides use that polarized populace to mask their grab even greater power.

All liberal media could die tomorrow and it won't change the fact we have fostered a generation of irresponsible kids and corporate crooks.

Those irresponsible adult children -- who will vote your future -- already don't care about newspapers.

In fact, they consume less corporate own media, every year.

They watch viral videos on the tube sites, which can be produced for a fraction of the energy it takes to run a multi-tower Goss metroliner.

So bash Corporate Media all you like, while the Obama-nites realize they can place more people into power with an CGI web-mercial.

Anonymous said...

Leftist bullshit aside, Lokeman wouldn't last a full round with even one of Mr Weavers students. This isn't just "an army college" This is where seasoned front line commanders go to become generals.

This is where contingencies, strategies and battle plans are developed. The greatest military minds in the history of the world have attended this college and it's "students" have all, already graduated from places such as West Point.

Archer05 said...

I don’t agree that the steady drizzle of ‘acid rain’ by the liberal media hasn’t mortally wounded them. Once rational people realized they were being spoon-fed, dishonest opinions rather than news, the public trust was broken.

Why read or pay for such propaganda? Another big mistake is thinking all liberals appreciate dishonest reporting. Plenty of them are starting to question the facts of the matter.

One case in point is the Weather Channel.
“Headline: -Weather Channel Founder: Global Warming ‘Greatest Scam in History”-

The former owner even came out and said people just want to know what the weather is to get to work, drop the global warming agenda. The W.C. ratings were going down the tubes once people realized their weather report came with a big dose of brainwashing.

Well, guess what? Most of the Weather Channel’s global warming ‘Experts’ are gone. I haven’t heard the W.C. parrots repeating “You can expect to be “Hot, hot, hot” for a long time. Maybe because it is cold, cold, cold. Maybe because global warming is a farce.
Headline: "31000 scientists reject 'global warming' agenda”

Dave D. said...

..." The liberal media could die tomorrow..."
..Don't tease me like that.