Compromising readers?

After reading this week’s issue of the River Reflections, I saw that you had included another letter to the editor (is it the third one in less than 2 months?) written by a rep from The Cascade Policy Institute, a PAC I have researched extensively.

Out of concern, I sent you a note, wondering why you are allowing this far-right organization to get free advertising for its singular intent on spreading disinformation funded by wealthy individuals and organizations connected to the fossil fuel industry (mostly Koch Bros. in this case). Had you done the research on this organization before printing?

Like the Federalist Society, but on a far smaller scale, the Cascade Policy Institute has targeted Oregon, among other ‘blue’ states, making a strong attempt to blindside Oregonians with false or twisted statements about issues and policies that have protected Oregonians from the corruption, environmental degradation, and general malaise that Republican states have experienced for years; all so that the financial elite can avoid paying taxes and run their businesses with as little regulation as possible (they usually disappear when taxpayers are forced to pay for cleaning up the mess).

The Koch Bros. made their fortune building refineries for Russia, for heaven’s sake, where there are no health and safety regulations, and an overabundance of dark money. Do you think they have any interest in democracy, environmental safety, and honesty in any aspect of financial integrity when they’ve kept such a deep and hugely profitable relationship with a dictatorship?!

These organizations never reveal their true intent, but only exist to create confusion and distrust in the very social and political structures that make this country the place immigrants strive to enter, and international billionaires want to safely cache their (often illegally obtained) assets.

They should not be allowed to compromise your readers, free of charge, without stating their organizational goals, their donors, and general affiliates. The statements in all three Letters to the Editor you have published are not substantiated, and have no intention of solving real issues we all face. Why the Cascade Policy Institute, when there are so many interesting, accurate and insightful sources to draw from, available to the public at large? The Cascade Policy Institute is not one of them.

When I asked you for an explanation, you replied that “Someone put me on Cascade’s mailing list after sending a note complaining that River Reflections had a liberal bias that was “disturbing the community.”

Perhaps this person would prefer to live in Russia or China, for starters, where there is only one journalist voice, the state dictator’s, and any contradictory (liberal?) statements get put in jail, or better yet, Putin’s preferred response, assassinated (Putin has brutally assassinated at least 21 journalists, it’s probably far more, and that’s not counting the dozens that have been harrassed, beaten and jailed). This kind of attitude never helps create healthy communities; never.

The best journalism strives for the truth, which can be very difficult to ascertain, as well as complicated, but we stop striving to get to it at our own peril, as history tells us over and over again. Let me enclose the voice of one of America’s most beloved and renowned journalists of all time, Bill Moyers. It is an excerpt from his presentation to the Society of Professional Journalists conference on September 11, 2004, exactly 20 years from this month. And yet, it is just as apropos today as it was then, while it gives us both a historical perspective and a vivid challenge for today and the future. I strongly encourage any of your readers with the above-stated attitude to take heed and learn something that might be useful, from one of the best of us.

It’s election time! Let the River Reflections flex its small-but-mighty muscles and engage both of our District 12 candidates to write Letters to the Editor, stating their reasonable and realistic goals if elected. What is their knowledge of our state legislature, the bills that are coming up before it starting Jan. 13, 2025 and their thoughts on how they will approach their votes? What specific teamsmanship skills would they bring to their work? What impediments to good governance does the state legislature face, if any? How are they going to keep an independent mind when faced with the constant barrage of lobbyists that don’t always have the health and safety of Oregon and Oregonians in mind? Direct answers to (at least) these questions would surely be helpful to all your readers.

We have time for our congressional candidates, too. And perhaps some of our locals might want to weigh in on their thoughts about the upcoming ballot measures. All statements should be fact-checked for accuracy.

Let’s get a conversation going! For that’s what democracy is, a conversation (there are no conversations in authoritarian governments). And this conversation is only useful when it is honest, thoughtful, and as precise as possible. Let’s get going, Mr. Editor and River Reflections community!

Sincerely, Francesca Anton