Fairbanks Legislator's Concerns About Potential Alyeska Move and Some Blogging Guidelines

Walking around the Capitol, stories fly at you from every direction.  The temptation is to just post the easy ones - those that come to you pretty much packaged.

Here's one like that I got from  Rep. Guttenberg (D - Fairbanks) yesterday.  He is concerned about Alyeska’s plans for “consolidation of facilities in Fairbanks with certain jobs possibly being relocated to Anchorage.”  The Fairbanks Chamber of Commerce had a meeting about this to discuss “what this community can do to be more competitive in retaining jobs and attracting future investment from Alyeska.”

[I’m writing this from a couple of pages of email Rep. Guttenberg gave me.  And I asked what I could post and he said it is all public.] In an email the Rep sent out today, he wrote in part (I haven’t edited the message):

“I just wanted to keep in touch regarding the Alyeska move.  It just keeps getting more bizarre every time I hear something.

The information I have gathered from a variety of places reveal that there is no justifiable reason for the move, not financial, safety or logistical.  The internal work Alyeska did for themselves says doesn’t justify it, there is no return on the dollars spent and it will make it harder to respond to situations.  They don’t seem to remember that the pipeline doesn’t run through downtown Anchorage.  An internal email dated November 17, 2009 demands a predetermined outcome:  “The bias needs to be in favor of them working in Anchorage unless there is a compelling business case to the contrary.”  You could give them whatever they wanted and it wouldn’t matter.  From what I understand there has been internal dissent on the move, but it keeps getting overridden at the highest level.”

[Note:  my academic training tells me that I should put [sic] after each typo or grammatical error in a quotation to let the reader know it was in the original and not in my sloppy copying.  But I also know when I read non-academic stuff full of [sic]s that it looks like the writer is being very snooty and pointing out all the mistakes and saying, "But I know better."  That's just how I feel. But I'm also avoiding the temptation to just correct the typos.  But there will be times when the typos may be relevant to judging the source. So I haven't sicked the above email, nor have I corrected the typos.  I'm not sure that's the right decision and I'm not sure it should apply to more formal material (like proposed legislation or documents that go to many people).  So if readers have any strong feelings on this let me know in the comments or email me. ]

Okay. This is where I’m getting on thin ice.  I haven't quite figured out my role - I'm part journalist, part reporter, part diarist, part guide, part royal fool, using the platform of a blog.  I'm not sure where this legislative blogging is going.   I have a general idea that I want to give Alaskans (first, and then others) a sense of what happens here in Juneau when the legislature is in session.  The goal is to make the news reports you hear about the legislature more real because you've seen pictures and videos about the people and places, because you know a little more than their formal facades that show up on the nightly news, because you get a bit deeper into specific bills or specific committees.   And while I will try to be as objective as possible, I'm a person who has a world view, and what I see and hear and write will inevitably be shaped by that world view.  Much of that view is amply displayed in other parts of this blog.  If I'm aware that it's particularly affecting what I'm writing, I'll try to tell you that.

If I leave things out it will be because I've learned something in confidence or because I think my reporting it may have negative political consequences for  someone or something, and/or it might negatively affect my ability to get access to useful information in the future.  (I think that last one means, I may have a good story, but if I post it, it could be my last good story.  So I'd have a short term gain, but a long term big loss.)  I'm discovering the rules as I go along.

But I will follow some basic blogging guidelines:

1. I will be as objective as possible, attempting to verify important facts.  (In this post, the story itself is Rep. Guttenberg's concern about the Alyeska move.  That's verified.  The information about the details of the move isn't. See number 2.)
   
2. I will not feel compelled to always get "the other side of the story."  First, because sometimes there just isn't time and getting the story out is enough to alert others who can track down the rest.  Or I might do it in a later post.   Or the story isn't all that important, it just provides flavor or feel to this experience.  Second, because sometimes there isn't a valid other side.  Sometimes one side is right and the other is wrong and giving them equal time falsely suggests their positions have equal weight.
   
3. I will treat people I write about with respect.  If I have a problem with the logic, the assumptions, or the facts of what they say, I should address those specifically, and not make comments about the people themselves.  If I get a strong feeling about someone that seems very relevant, I may consider mentioning it. 
   
4. I will avoid gossip about people's private lives.  However, if their personal behavior affects their work as legislators, or is inconsistent with their speech or action as legislators (or staffers), then I may consider it if the story is important or if it helps readers understand the context of what is happening.
   
5. I will be reasonably transparent  and reveal relationships I have with people I write about or my (or lack of) experience or knowledge about my subjects so that readers can better judge what I write. 
   
6. I will expand this list or amend it as I deal with new and/or unexpected situations.  

[Jay (who asked about my ethical standards covering the legislature in a comment), is this what you had in mind?]

So, readers be warned.  I’m being used here by a legislator to get his issue out in the world.  This is just one piece of information about an issue that ‘s out there.  Minimally, you are now aware that Alyeska is thinking (planning?) to consolidate facilities in Fairbanks and at least one Fairbanks legislator isn’t happy about it.

UPDATE 1pm:  I forgot to put in the picture and the link to Rep. Guttenberg's profile.  They're in now.  All the Reps and Senators have profiles.