Newspaper breaks promises on running op-ed opposed to I-66 tolling
President Trump calls the liberal biased media ‘Fake news’ and the label is used by conservatives around the nation now.
But besides suppressing news and information from a conservative angle, the Washington Post also seems uninterested in conservative opinions on local issues – especially when it conflicts with their editorials, which favored the I-66 tolling regime.
I recently submitted online an op-ed piece bashing the new I-66 inside-the-Beltway toll regime. The media and pundits supporting the project have failed to note the inequity involved – in that, only folks commuting toward DC and back in the evening pay high tolls, which peaked at $40 the first day.
No tolls are charged for the inside the Beltway, and yes, DC and Maryland residents, commuting West to Arlington, Tysons and the Dulles Corridor. No tolls are levied on nights and weekends, either, which I feel also is designed to advantage Arlington and Falls Church businesses and shoppers.
There are now bipartisan efforts underway in Richmond to roll this back. Democrats, at least, held a news conference to denounce it. Let’s see if they muster up the will to block it via legislation, which I am sure Republicans will support.
The Post’s letters editor first rejected the piece, but when I pressed, she promised to run it online – for which I was most appreciative.
But as of this date, it has not run – despite twice offering to rewrite it. Instead, she ran an op-ed by a former scholar from the. liberal Brookings Institution, who supports the high toll scheme.
In past years, the Post has run my letters – even when I was serving in local office. Newspapers are sometimes reticent about giving politicians publicity.
But today, with the Post squarely part of the Democrat “Resistance” movement, it is not surprising that a local Republican cannot get his or her views on their ‘fake news’ pages.
Since the Post has apparently refused to run, it you can read it here on TBE.
What follows is the back and forth I had with Jamie RileyKolsky, the letters editor, in reverse chronological order. (Begin at the bottom.)
Riley, Jamie ([email protected])To:you Details
I’ll try to get your piece up today, and I will send you a link!
I am a female Jamie. Is your Jamie a nickname for James? I was named for my father, when, after four girls, he gave up on having a boy.
jr
Jamie Riley
Letters and Local Opinions Editor | The Washington Post
202-334-6215 | 314-954-9134
From: Ken Reid [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2017 9:45 PM
To: Riley, Jamie <[email protected]>
Subject: Thanks
Dear Jamie
Just wanted to thank you for agreeing to run my I-66 op-ed online and was wondering if you could email me a link.
My son’s name is Jamie. But you’re a female Jamie, right? 🙂
Thanks !
Ken Reid
Great! Nothing. I’ll send you a link when it goes live, probably Thursday but maybe tomorrow afternoon.
Jamie
Jamie Riley
Letters and Local Opinions Editor | The Washington Post
202-334-6215 | 314-954-9134
From: Ken Reid [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Monday, December 11, 2017 6:07 PM
To: Riley, Jamie <[email protected]>
Subject: Re[2]: FW: Op-ed from [email protected]: I-66 tolling
Online would be great! What do i need to do if anything?
Thanks !
Ken Reid
—— Original Message ——
From: “Riley, Jamie” <[email protected]>
To: “‘Ken Reid'” <[email protected]>
Sent: 12/11/2017 5:49:26 PM
Subject: RE: FW: Op-ed from [email protected]: I-66 tolling
It’s possible. It’s also possible I could run it online.
Jamie
From: Ken Reid [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Monday, December 11, 2017 5:48 PM
To: Close To Home <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: FW: Op-ed from [email protected]: I-66 tolling
How about if i rewrite it and make it shorter in response to your eidtorial today
Thanks !
Ken Reid
—— Original Message ——
From: “Close To Home” <[email protected]>
To: “[email protected]” <[email protected]>
Sent: 12/11/2017 5:42:21 PM
Subject: FW: Op-ed from [email protected]: I-66 tolling
Thank you for this submission. We read it carefully. Unfortunately, we are going to pass.
Jamie
Jamie Riley | Letters and Local Opinions Editor | The Washington Post
[email protected] | 202-334-6215
@jmrk | facebook.com/jamie.m.riley
You are receiving this e-mail message because your form has received a new submission.
If you believe you have received this message in error, please contact the SUB team
Washington Post
1301 K St NW
Washington, DC 20071
6 comments
I like turtles.
Sounds like someone has a little bit of a bruised ego…
This is not “fake news.” It is skewed news. The media does not make things up, but they just skew their coverage.
Take hate crimes, for example. The media only reports allegedly white-perpetrated hate crimes, even though blacks, who are but a mere 13% of the population, perennially commit, according to FB hate crime statistics, about 24% of all hate crimes. And whites, who are close to 2/3 of the adult population, commit only 48% of the hate crimes And oh, by the way, that 48% is jacked up because when Hispanics commit hate crimes, the FBI, for whatever reasons, tabulates them as “white.” But the media ignores this reality of minority-perpetrated hate crimes and focuses exclusively on the white hate crimes. Therefore, it is not fake news, as whites do indeed commit hate crimes – but skewed news, by totally ignoring the rest of the story. And of course, the media TOTALLY ignores the tidal wave of these fake hate crimes, truly committed by allegedly aggrieved minorities.
Now, based on the private, off-line conversations I have had with many of you conservatives, I would estimate that over half of you have been “red-pilled” and really know the identity of the folks who have their hands on the information spigot in this country and are responsible for skewing the news. Thanks to the internet, many now know that there is absolutely NO diversity among the major network CEOs and the major network news presidents in that they ALL come from the same sub-set of whites. I know this, because it is the sub-set of whites with which I identify – and do so proudly.
But I find it odd that in this age of “diversity is a strength” and “diversity is a compelling national interest,” somehow the top media moguls have been allowed to exclude themselves from the very standards of diversity they impose on everyone else. But then again, I remember the old saying, “If you want to know who really runs a country, then consider the people whom you are not allowed to criticize.”
it isn’t just news organizations that have a national reach that undercut conservative opinions, it is often local newspapers. Many of the local papers act as training grounds for the national organizations, and local writers, editors, etc get noticed based upon their biases as well as the quality of their writing. I have experienced this personally when the editors of my local newspaper changed from relative open to all well presented ideas to open only to leftist ideas. The change was so dramatic that some local conservative writers confronted the new editor – to no real avail.
Come on don’t tell us that the Post having a liberal bias is a surprise
Not long ago the Washington Post was a leftist newspaper on shaky financial footing. Other than a storied history (especially around Watergate) the Post was like a lot of other old school news outlets struggling in the Internet age. Then along comes a retail and technology magnate who buys the Post. After that, the buyer (who has roots in New Mexico, Texas, Florida and Seattle) buys a mansion in DC. Now, this guy is no mere “wealthy entrepreneur”. He’s not worth a hundred million dollars. He’s worth a hundred billion dollars. Almost concurrently, our former president, who vetoed limits payments to filthy rich retired presidents, signs a book deal for $65m (paltry by Bezos standards but nice coin to most of us). That gives him the jack to buy a mansion in DC too. Obama claims he stayed in DC because one of his daughters was still going to school in DC. Maybe that’s a valid reason to break with precedent and stay in DC but that daughter ought to graduate in the Spring of 2019. Will the Obamas return to their beloved Chicago when the younger daughter graduates? Want to bet? Meanwhile, local pol Terry McAuliffe (living just across the river from DC) will be the soon-to-be-ex governor of Virginia. He’s already making noises about running for president.
What’s going on here? Obama doesn’t need to lobby in order to get rich, he’s filthy rich already. Why a mansion in DC? Bezos is running a behemoth company based in Seattle – why a mansion in DC?
Vast wealth, media control, political royalty – all residing in the nation’s capital. Did you ever wonder how Samuel Adams, George Washington and the rest must have viewed London in 1774?