Power blackout
 	 		 		
Power blackout | October 10, 2001 | SFBG News
 		 		 		 		
Why is the Chron ignoring public power?                                                 

By Tali Woodward
 						
SAN FRANCISCO VOTERS have a unique chance on Nov. 6 to completely 
revamp the way energy is generated and delivered in this city. 
But our major daily paper, the San Francisco Chronicle, has 
hardly even acknowledged the two historic public power 
initiatives on the ballot, even in the context of the statewide 
energy crisis.
 						
The Chronicle is not exactly revered for its penetrating local 
coverage, but still, it's striking that the Los Angeles Times has 
done a better job explaining what is at stake in San Francisco. 
That paper ran a 1,500-word story Oct. 1 that included thorough 
descriptions of all the measures and detailed comments from both 
supporters and opponents. The story, written by Maria La Ganga, 
emphasized that Proposition F and Measure I are the only public 
power initiatives currently being considered in the state. It 
also explained how Propositions B and H – which have gotten 
cursory coverage in the Chron – would jump-start groundbreaking 
solar energy projects.
 						
The Sacramento Bee ran a story Oct. 1 about the two public power 
initiatives. And the New York Times, which published a story on 
the burgeoning public power movement here back in January, has 
recently contacted campaign workers from MUD Now about another 
story.
 						
Meanwhile, our hometown paper has provided only spotty coverage.
 						
When supporters who were trying to get a municipal utility 
district measure on the ballot last fall kept encountering 
hurdles, the Chron was there. Within a month's time the paper did 
four stories that went into detail about how public power 
advocates were being stymied. Once the MUD initiative was placed 
on the ballot in February, coverage tapered off. While most media 
have understandably focused on international events during the 
past month, the Chron's only mention of the MUD initiative since 
July was a passing reference in an Aug. 1 story about the 
Department of Elections.
 						
Sometimes it's seemed that the Chronicle staff is entirely 
unaware of the energy initiatives. A Sept. 1 column by Mark Simon 
about possible changes to the Hetch Hetchy system didn't mention 
the public power measures. Neither did a lengthy piece by Hal 
Plotkin posted Oct. 4 on S.F. Gate (www.sfgate.com 
[http://www.sfgate.com] ), the paper's Web site, that said 
mounting tensions in the Middle East should prompt California to 
make a renewed push for energy independence.
 						
When the Chronicle has referred to the MUD initiative, it has 
usually managed to be dismissive. A March 11 story by Ed Epstein 
quoted Mayor Willie Brown characterizing the initiative as "a 
hoax" that "has no promise of reduction in rates or production of 
electricity supply." No more information about the proposal was 
given. A story that ran a month earlier under the headline 
"Public Power Is Looking Appealing" was devoted mostly to 
outlining the practical difficulties in switching to a public 
power system.
 						
And the Chron has never delved below the surface in its local 
energy coverage. At any other metropolitan paper in the country, 
a reporter would have almost certainly been directed to take a 
longer look at the proposals, simply because they could have 
far-reaching implications for residents. But that doesn't seem to 
have happened here. Chronicle managing editor Jerry Roberts did 
not return phone calls from the Bay Guardian.
 						
Ross Mirkarimi, the campaign director for three of the energy 
initiatives, told the Bay Guardian that the Chronicle has 
willfully ignored the campaigns. "If the paper was doing its job, 
the campaign would almost run itself," he said. "And I think 
that's why the Chron writes us off its radar – it's aiding and 
abetting PG."
 						
The Hearst Corp., which sold the San Francisco Examiner and took 
over the Chronicle last year, has a long history of siding with 
Pacific Gas and Electric Co. in battles like this one that 
threaten the company. That may or may not explain the paper's 
treatment of the energy measures, but there's no denying that the 
Chronicle has once again failed to provide its readers with 
rudimentary information about a significant local issue.
 						
E-mail Tali Woodward at tali@sfbg.com [tali@sfbg.com] .
 						
[http://www.sfbg.com/searchit.html]