Following is the Public Editor column for Sunday, May 11, 2008:

The North Carolina primary was a big test for the Democratic presidential candidates -- as well as for all the state and local candidates down the ballot.

It also was an important test of The News & Observer's efforts to secure a broader audience for its election news by extending the coverage from the printed newspaper to online. The paper did more than it ever has to add value online to what readers could get from their ink-and-paper newspaper. If you didn't read the online edition on Election Day, as well as in the weeks leading up to the election, you missed a lot of information about the most important North Carolina primary election in decades.

What ran online that wasn't in the paper?

=> Read more!

Reader Richard Kevin was surprised by this front-page headline today, “Easley supports college for aliens,” on a story about the legal tussle over admitting children of immigrant families to state community college and university campuses. (The headline on the online story is different from that in print.)

Kevin said The N&O in the past has shown sensitivity to issues of the Latino immigrant community.

“Because of this history, I was all the more shocked and appalled to see ‘illegal’ aliens in your headline," he wrote. "Three instances of ‘illegal’ in the box to the right of the story and numerous uses of the term in the body of the story reinforce a distorted and pernicious frame of thinking about the ambitious and talented youth who overcome the many barriers to academic success which face poor Hispanic children. These children are no more illegal than are the children of speeders and drunken drivers who are in the car when their parents are arrested.”

When I read the headline, I thought the governor was supporting admission of little green people to the state’s campuses.

The N&O’s official style is “illegal immigrant,” which is too wordy for a headline. I share Kevin’s queasiness about describing children of immigrants as “illegal,” even if technically they are. It fosters an already excessively xenophobic mentality among too many of our readers.

Here's a column I wrote a few years ago about this labelling issue.

Some readers were disappointed that The N&O did not provide actual numbers, along with percentages, in reporting the results of Tuesday's elections in the print edition of the newspaper.

For example, the paper reported that Bev Perdue beat Richard Moore 56%-40% for the Democratic nomination for governor. But the story did not say that Perdue received 845,698 votes to Moore's 601,071. Moore's total was more than the combined total (505,634) of the five Republican candidates for governor.

"Actual numbers matter," e-mails Michael Crowell. "They matter in particular in elections. It is newsworthy whether Obama got his 56% victory with 200,000 votes or 800,000 votes. It is newsworthy how many more people voted in the Democratic primary than the Republican one. It is worth knowing whether 100,000 fewer votes were cast in the gubernatorial primary than for president. It tells a lot to know whether the two percent margin of victory in the county commissioner race represents 2,500 votes or 25 votes (and thus might be subject to a protest). The numbers are known, they have to be, otherwise there would be no way to figure the percentages. So someone at the newspaper has to decided to omit that information. Why?"

Actually, the numbers are reported in the paper's website coverage, but not in the print edition. Capitol Editor Bill Krueger explains why:

"We have to make choices on election night about how to use our limited time and space to present a report that is as clear, accurate and complete as possible. One of the choices we made was not to use absolute numbers - it's one less thing we have to change between editions, freeing up reporters and editors to spend more time on the stories.

"But I don't see how it's misleading. Our goal was to let readers know who won the various primary contests, how convincing their win was, how they did it, and what the political landscape looks like for the fall. I don't think the absence of absolute numbers hurt that effort."

I understand the paper's concern about maximizing the efforts of its limited staff. But one of the advantages of newspapers is that they can provide a printed record that readers can examine and parse at their leisure - as compared to television and radio, which have the advantage of speed. Internet alters the equation, in that it allows both immediacy and detail, and The N&O takes advantage of that on the website. But the paper is giving up value to newspaper-only readers by leaving out the numbers behind the story.

Readers in Franklin County were feeling a little left out this week as The N&O told the story of the North Carolina primary elections.

I heard from several readers upset that the races there weren't covered in the Primary Guide, a freestanding section on all the Triangle races published Saturday. Another was disappointed that there was no coverage of the elections Tuesday.

"Believe it or not, we held elections yesterday in Franklin County, but there was not one word in the N&O about Franklin County," said Gary Baker. "We exist and we still take The News & Observer down in Franklin County."

They did have news to be interested in. Franklin County voters on Tuesday approved a $53 million bond refendum for a new high school. Voters favored Barack Obama over Hillary Clinton - despite a visit to Louisburg Monday by Bill Clinton - and they cast votes for two county commissioners seats.

How do I know that? From the Web site of The Franklin Times, the county's Louisburg-based newspaper.

Thad Ogburn, metro editor, said The N&O regularly covers big stories there, such as a controversy over moving the county hospital and a front-page story on Franklin's economic worries.

"Franklin County also is featured in our North Raleigh News coverage from time to time," Ogburn said. "But we don't have a dedicated Franklin County reporter at this time. I think that's something we'll continue to look at as Franklin keeps growing and we try to determine where best to put limited resources."

Following is the Public Editor column from Sunday, May 4, 2008:

Barack Obama is ahead of Hillary Clinton in North Carolina by 12 points. No, it's 5 points. Wait, now the lead is 14 points.

That's all in the same week, as reported in an N&O story Thursday that referred to various polls that are being conducted on the Democratic presidential primary. The 12-point lead was reported by Raleigh-based Public Policy Polling.

Only a week earlier, PPP had said Obama was ahead by 25 points. Had the race tightened that much -- the poll was taken in the midst of the latest Jeremiah Wright controversy -- or is something wrong with the numbers? Meanwhile, SurveyUSA was showing Obama's lead at only 5 points and the Rasmussen Reports poll had him up 14 points.

The polls are an interesting, and fun, tip sheet for the political horse races, but not necessarily a take-it-to-the-bank guide. Last month, PPP showed Democratic gubernatorial candidates Beverly Perdue and Richard Moore virtually tied one week, then Perdue ahead by 10 points two weeks later (the polling method changed.) Another poll at about the same time by the Civitas Institute had Perdue and Moore tied.

The day before the April 22 Pennsylvania primary, Public Policy Polling showed Obama ahead of Clinton 49-46. Clinton ended up winning by nearly 10 percentage points.

With such wandering numbers, what's a voter to believe? And why should a newspaper publish them?

=> Read more!

As we head into game day for the North Carolina primary, The N&O is receiving lots of criticism for its coverage of the Clinton-Obama race.

The bad news is the criticism. The good news is that it comes from both sides.

Mary Delaney, Cary: "It is biased! A perfect example is the Obama - Clinton skirmish. The N&O is so pro-Clinton - Hillary this and Hillary that - positive and gaining-ground stuff. Reading journals and the internet, one learns that what you print is not the case."

Jennifer Blair, Wallace: "In my perception, your coverage today was very biased in favor of Senator Obama. It would seem that he is the only one running, since there were many more pictures and articles regarding him. A prestigious paper such as yours downplayed a very important and relevant article about the governor's endorsement of Senator Clinton while placing two separate articles about Senator Obama's pickup basketball game."

Never mind that one of the Obama stories suggested that UNC broke NCAA rules by letting Obama work out with the team.

Journalism rule #1: If you're making both sides mad, you must be doing something right. Keep reading.

Will The N&O endorse a presidential candidate in the May 6 primary?

I've had that question several times this week, actually more from people inside the paper than out. The answer is: Likely not.

Steve Ford, editorial page editor, says the paper has not endorsed in primary elections in the past. The reason, he says, is that the paper could end up arguing against itself.

If The N&O endorsed Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama in the Democratic primary, then it could find itself in the general election choosing between the Democrat it had already endorsed and, presumably, John McCain. If The N&O endorsed McCain, it could be arguing against the Democrat it endorsed in the primary.

(OK, you don't need to tell me how many times The N&O has endorsed a Republican for president; we're talking hypothetical here.)

The same situation would apply for all other races on the ballot - governor, U.S. Senate, General Assembly, and on down to county commissioners.

Ford said the paper would endorse in the Durham school board election, because that is non-partisan and is not a primary. In other words, those elected will take office.

One reader wonders about the limited coverage The N&O gave to Vice President Dick Cheney's visit to Raleigh Monday.

The Under the Dome column today reported Cheney's visit in three paragraphs that didn't say much. Why so skimpy?

"His plane landed, he went directly to a private fundraiser at a house they would not disclose, drove back to the airport and flew out of town. They wouldn't tell us who hosted the fundraiser, how much was raised, etc. We asked for an interview and were declined," said Capitol Editor Bill Krueger.

"Doesn't take more than three paragraphs to describe that."

Hmm. I know the political staff is busy. But I sure would have been interested to know where the fundraiser was, who was there, and what the vice president told a Raleigh audience the week before the Democratic primary in North Carolina.

A number of readers were not happy with The N&O's coverage Sunday of the "Salute to our Troops" parade in Downtown Raleigh on Saturday.

The N&O ran the story, with pictures, on the City/State front, but not the main front page.

"Thousands of people turned out in appreciation of the sacrifices made by military personnel and their families," wrote Julie Doyle, of Wake Forest. "I told my five-year-old daughter, who thought the parade was awesome, that it would be front-page news. She woke up early this morning and rushed out to get the paper, only to be disappointed by the meager coverage. Your newspaper buried this story!"

Ned Barnett, weekend editor, said editors considered the story for the front but opted instead for a staff story on Iraq veterans struggling to make the transition from military to campus. That was a more compelling article with more news value than the parade, he said.

Other readers were upset that the story gave attention to the protestors who used the parade to demonstrate against the Iraq War. The story pointed out that the protestors' numbers were tiny compared to the large crowd watching the parade.

"Even though it states that 'the protesters were a tiny minority, unseen by much of the crowd,' you then proceed to devote about 40 percent of the written space to them," wrote Fred Ullman, of Raleigh. "That distorts the picture for me entirely."

I thought the coverage was fine. The story with two pictures dominated the local page, and there was a third large picture inside the paper. On the main front page was a small picture pointing readers to the coverage inside.

I agree with Barnett that the vets-on-campus story had more news value than the parade, which had been widely previewed in advance.

The parade was controversial - letters to the editor last week volleyed back and forth over the morality of militaristic displays on city streets. Covering the protest was responsible.

My one gripe is that the story didn't say how many people attended. The N.C. Bankers Association, sponsoring the parade, said 50,000 attended, but the reporter, David Ranii, said that number appeared to be inflated, and he couldn't verify it with Capitol or Raleigh police. He did report that the parade route was packed.

Following is the Public Editor column from Sunday, April 27, 2008:

Saturday, April 19, was a big day for N.C. State football fans. It was the day of the Red-White game to show off next season's team, and 15,000 Wolfpack diehards poured into Carter-Finley Stadium to watch the spring scrimmage.

But for many, the day got off to a bad start when they picked up their morning copy of The News & Observer. Spread across the Sports front was a five-column package of stories about the College Inn student apartment complex, owned by the school's booster club. "An address of choice," proclaimed the big, bold headline.

The story examined whether the residence hall complied with NCAA regulations on "jock dorms" and concluded that it appeared to fall within the limit of no more than 50 percent athletes. But, the article added, "N.C. State could run the risk of violating [the rules] because it has monitored the College Inn arrangement loosely."

A sidebar looked at a property tax exemption that saves the NCSU Student Aid Foundation, or Wolfpack Club, $132,000 a year in taxes on the off-campus property.

Wolfpack fans were not pleased with the stories, which they saw as smoke where there was no fire -- since there were no NCAA violations. "Your paper makes every effort to stick it to our hometown university every chance it gets, even when the facts don't support the premise," wrote Paul Michaels of Raleigh. "Innuendo on the day of a spring football game. Low, low class."

=> Read more!

Reader Helen Deere of Cary is distressed that The N&O did not run on the front page Tuesday its story about Sgt. Lance O. Eakes, a National Guardsman from Apex killed in Baghdad last week. The story ran on the front of the City/State section.

"I realize that according to the Defense Department's tally, Lance was death number 4,041 in Iraq since the beginning of the Iraq war in March 2003," she wrote. "That might seem boring to some, but not to me. Giving to others, as Lance has, is the ultimate in sacrifice. Put him and the many others who die on our behalf on the front page! What is going on with the values of our nation and community?"

N&O editors said they did consider the story for the front page. But the family did not wish to speak with reporters, so the paper was unable to produce a story that was more newsworthy than reports that had been out all the previous day on television and radio.

Being able to "advance" a story is one criterion for what makes it worthy of the front page. The paper did put a brief notice on the front page that referred readers to the story on the City/State front.

The N&O did run a front-page story last week about a war hero, Staff Sgt. Emanuel Picket of Burgaw, and that story brought a tremendous reader response. In that case, his family wanted his story told, and the paper was able to do a better job.

The N&O received a boatload of e-mail from N.C. State fans less than happy about a pair of stories Saturday on the College Inn, an off-campus dormitory owned by The Wolfpack Club. Here is one story; here the other.

The articles found that many NCSU athletes, especially in basketball and football, live in the dorm. The story said the facility "could run the risk of violating" NCAA rules that prohibit varsity athletes from claiming 50 percent of more of a dorm or any wing of the dorm.

The paper wasn't able to get numbers from State or the Wolfpack Club. It did compile information indicating that the building itself is in compliance with the rules, but one floor may not be.

Wolfpack fans howled. The story didn't get any goods on state but by innuendo suggested that something was wrong, they said.

"I kept waiting for your punchline or your point...maybe you had evidence. Maybe you were going to suggest a course of action....maybe you had quotes from students complaining of being treated unfairly. You had none of those," wrote Travis Edmunds. "You informed people that there was a private dorm at NCSU that some athletes lived in. Is that front page, top section, large picture-worthy journalism? I hardly think so."

Andy Curliss, assistant sports editor, edited the stories. He said: "The piece on the College Inn was an interesting and detailed look at an aspect of the athletics program that I venture to guess many people knew little about. As we noted in the piece, NCSU says it is within the rules. NCSU also acknowledged loose monitoring of the facility -- and as was made clear in the story, the university did not allow several key people involved to speak with us about the facility.

"Within the rules or not, it is still worth reporting about things that are of interest to readers. The Wolfpack Club is one of only two booster groups that are also landlords in the ACC."

The other is Florida State.

Following is the Public Editor column from Sunday, April 20, 2008:

The News & Observer's front page became an inbox last week for sensational stories about e-mail.

First, the newspaper reported Tuesday about its own suit against Gov. Mike Easley over his office's handling of state government e-mail. Then, there was the story Thursday about a love-addled lawyer allegedly breaking into the office e-mail account of her ex-boyfriend, a high-level Wake County official.

In an increasingly online society, e-mail is our main avenue of communication, and it's inevitable that it becomes yeasty matter for news. Readers took notice of and wondered about both stories.

=> Read more!

Jack Squire of Chatham County is a former newspaper executive from New York (Newsday), and he was perturbed by an ad he saw in Wednesday's N&O.

The full-page ad on the back of the business section looked like a newspaper page, with headlines, pictures and a story about "Public gets 72 hours to clean out vault." It was selling rolls of buffalo nickles.

Problem was, Squire said, you couldn't tell it was an ad. The format looked like a regular newspaper page, and the only indication otherwise was a tiny line at the top of the page, in lightface type, that said "Special advertisement feature."

"You've got to really squint to see that that's an ad," Squire said. "I would bet that many if not most people would not think it was an ad."

Jim McClure, vice president for display advertising, agreed that the disclaimer wasn't large enough. He said he would remind his sales representative that the advertisement notice needs to be more prominent.