I had a somewhat odd experience with thedailypage.com forum, channel 27, Mike Hanson, the democratic party, the Mitch Henck show and the Vicky McKenna Show last week.
It all started when I posted some crime statistics from this blog and then said this on thedailypage.com forum:
Part of me is a little cynical in that we have a public information officer for the City of Madison who is running for Sheriff . . . and I wonder how that all plays into all this attention to crime of late . . . .
At first, I got a response where someone tried to twist what I said into this:
What are you implying? That Mike Hansen is out commiting crimes to support his race for sheriff?
Which blew my mind, cuz that wasn’t at all what I had intended. So I replied:
That was not what I implied in the least bit.
Its just that someone running for sheriff benefits everytime his mug is in front ot the cameras or in the paper or on the radio . . . so the more attention he calls to the issues, the more attention he calls to himself . . . all those trolls concerned about taxes should be screaming from the rooftops that he is campaigning on the taxpayer’s dime . . .
p.s. as someone who has had campaign lit sent out implying that I was causing rapes in the downtown, and been accused of causing people to commit acts of vandalism, I”m a little sensitive to what is implied and I certainly did not mean to imply that Mike Hanson was committing crimes . . . I’ve had that tactic used against me and its shitty. Apologies if that was somehow read into what I said.
And then the “discussion” deteriorated into . . . well, it went to that special place that only an internet forum can go to . . . and I thought it was over . . . but no . . .
I get a call from Channel 27, asking about my posting on thedailypage. I explain to them that it was a comment on a discussion board and that it wasn’t news. They persisted. They said that they were going to interview Mike Hanson and that if I didn’t comment it would look funny. Since this is the station that calls me at 3:30 when they don’t really want my comment and then report “Konkel refused to comment” when I’m unavailable, I got the reporters point. If I didn’t comment the story would have been “Alder accuses Police Public Information Officer of Misconduct in office”. So, I did the interview.
But I did a little research first. And it seems I wasn’t the first one to raise to this issue. In a letter to Wayne Bigelow, Chair Democratic Party of Dane County, Chief Noble Wray explains in response to Mr. Bigelow’s request that Chief Wray assign Michael Hanson “a different role during the course of this campaign” for Sheriff that he cannot reassign Mr. Hanson unless it is “basedon performance or discipline”. (Sorry, that was a horrible sentence!) Chief Wray goes on to say that he has requested that Officer Hanson review policy 4-1000 regarding political activity and that there was contact with Attorney May and that the following guidelines were discussed:
No campaign materials with pictures of Officer Hanson in Madison Police uniform
No campaign materials at work
No campainging or fund raising while at work
No campaign events during work hours
Discussed limitations on how he can state his profession, for example, it is OK to say that he is a Madison Police Officer in a resume fashion
So, I tried to get channel 27 to discuss this with the folks who had raised this concern in a more official capacity, but they didn’t really seem interested. They kept asking if I’d call for his resignation. I said no. Or if I’d ask for an investigation. I said no. Or would I alleging something was done improperly. I said no. They ran the story anyways.
And then . . . enter, AM radio talk shows. The next morning, Jed Sanborn, filling in for Mitch Henck had Officer Hanson on the radio to talk about my concerns. And then later that day, Vikki McKenna was talking about it as well.
All of this, from a dailypage comment? Is this where this town gets its news? Is this news? Ugh. I hate to even bring it up again Mike Hanson’s role or thedailypage), as its likely to cause more controversy. My point here is . . . how does an alleged “news” agency take a posting from an internet discussion board and blow it up into a news story despite the fact that the “source” of the news isn’t alleging the story they are trying to create. And then, why is it that the AM radio talk shows are right there the next morning with their guests all lined up to discuss this non-news? And why do they do all of this when they do have a legitimate news story with the Democratic Party chair?
