Tuesday, March 4, 2014



UPDATE:  11:41 AM


 My Thoughts On Today's Blog - March 4, 2014

Tue, Mar 4, 2014 at 11:34 AM

From:  Chuck Osborne

To:   Martin Olson

Hello Martin,

Time and again, I am amazed why I end up being the story when it is the failures of the process of government and of the people who manage the process of government that should be the point of the discussion.

We all know, by general observation that all levels of government are failing the people they have sworn to represent.

Just as you, I have the time and inclination at this stage of my life to follow government and the people in it very closely. You do it on a much wider scale than I do as I choose to focus my attention in my immediate community.

I do know this: There needs to be a better way to bring the process of government and the conduct of those individuals who manage that process to the attention of the citizens they have sworn to represent.

You and Mr. Ponder state that my efforts to determine whether Mr. Snyder had healthcare available from his employer was more than just a little “over-the-top.”

As you well know, information does not just fall out of the sky. One must search for it. That information comes from attendance at public meetings, from the study of public records, and exhaustive investigation.

I am sure the SCPR does all of that. I am sure that Mr. Ponder does all of this in preparation of his program.

If anyone has a genealogist in the family, he knows that one has to travel great distances and spend many hours over a lifetime to uncover facts and information to learn about his roots.

Some people travel great distances to attend concerts. You get my point.

With regard to the current situation, Council President Jon Snyder has repeatedly stated that healthcare was not available with his employer. This was questioned by me and others. A phone call two months ago to the corporate headquarters revealed that the employer did provide healthcare to employees. I wanted to be more comfortable with that fact before presenting information that contradicted the statements of North Canton’s second highest elected official, thus the trip to Buffalo.

Ascertaining the truth is very important to all of us. Without truth there is no trust. Without trust there can be no faith in government. You and Mr. Ponder should be focusing on the people who violate the trust placed in them. The SCPR has its methods in finding the truth and I have mine.

At the beginning of Mr. Ponder’s show yesterday, he made it clear that Jon Snyder was his “friend.” Clearly, for Mr. Ponder, friendship is more important than the truth. And that is what’s wrong with government today. It is often a collection of cronies who are looking out for themselves and their friends and the public be dammed.

Thank you,

Chuck Osborne


It was quite shocking for the SCPR to hear WHBC's Ron Ponder "on the air" say yesterday "Screw You! Chuck Osborne."

While like the SCPR, Ponder on his daily show "Points to Ponder," WHBC1480 (Monday through Friday, 10:00 AM to Noon) is primarily an opinion person; "apparently" there is a MAJOR difference between Ponder and The Report.

The SCPR provides exceptors to the Stark County Political Report "point-of-view" with a pretty much unlimited opportunity to respond to any SCPR opinion piece.

In saying "Screw You! Chuck Osborne" it appears to The Report that Ponder is saying that Osborne is in effect worthless as a credible person on public issues and by implication that he is not going to allow Osborne "on the WHBC airways" to explain his actions.

And guess who was not on Ponder's Points to Ponder yesterday?

Of course!  Chuck Osborne.

And this after Ponder made Osborne conduct a "a major 'bone of contention"' on yesterday's edition of his program.

To the SCPR, for Ponder to have acted in this way was unacceptable by anyone's definition of "fairness" in journalistic fairness.

Ponder's unhappiness - in its most immediate context - with Osborne seemingly involves Osborne's recent effort:
  • to delve (by subterfuge, in the opinion of the SCPR) into employment practices of the company that North Canton councilman Jon Snyder has an employment relationship with so as to extract from that "pretend" to want a job process whether not Snyder had the capability (early on in the process; let's say before December 1, 2013, the "supposed effective date of the November, 2012 North Canton voter passed Issue 5 [72% to 28%]) to get alternative health care insurance coverage from his employer,
The SCPR agrees with Ponder that Osborne's "pretense" at applying for a job at Snyder's company to gain information as to what company provided health care benefits might or might not be available to Snyder was more than just a little "over-the-top."

What is particularly ridiculous about Osborne's effort is that it would not  establish conclusively that Snyder was eligible for employer coverage and therefore not eligible for North Canton coverage as precluded by the language of Issue 5.

But for radio journalist Ponder to "stack the deck" for his point of view in the process of vilifying Oborne is something that should disturb journalists everywhere.

Again, the SCPR agrees with Ponder's implication yesterday that Osborne is a chronic complainer who seems not to have the skills needed to show others that he has a sense of balance and perspective.

On rare occasions, The Report has seen Osborne demonstrate "balance" and "perspective," but RARE is the operative word.

The Ron Ponder that the SCPR knows is not the Ron Ponder who uttered "Screw You! Chuck Osborne" as he ended yesterday's segment on the North Canton health care insurance issue after having denied Osborne a full and fair opportunity to defend himself.

Once he thinks it over, the SCPR expects Ponder to reverse himself and invite Osborne onto WHBC's Points to Ponder and provide him with a fair and full opportunity to disagree with Ponder.

While the SCPR takes a more skeptical view of Stark County politicians and office holders than Ponder does (I once said to him:  "Ron, you see a glass as being 'half-full' whereas I see it as being "half-empty'), The Report thinks it is healthy for Stark County based-journalists to have different ways of perceiving Stark County political and government officials.

The Report would not have Ron Ponder be Martin Olson.

But the SCPR would have Ron Ponder emulate Martin Olson and the Stark County Political Report in affording subjects of his journalistic efforts a "fair and full opportunity" to respond to on-air attacks.

The SCPR thinks that once he thinks it over, WHBC/1480 talk show host Ron Ponder will do the right thing.

We shall see?

No comments: