A reader notices that the New York Times discovered that $236,000 of private money was spent to advocate for Mayor de Blasio’s plan for universal pre-kindergarten. But the Times did not find it newsworthy that $3.6 MILLION was spent to dramatize the plight of Eva Moskowitz’s charter schools. From a confidential source, I know that the Times’ reporters had the information about the $3.6 million but either didn’t understand it or didn’t care about it.
And here’s what the NYTimes reported on today: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/20/nyregion/familiar-consultants-hired-by-the-mayors-pre-k-drive.html?emc=edit_tnt_20140319&nlid=26825267&tntemail0=y
Here’s the question the Times needs to answer: why are they harping on $236,000 of PRIVATE funds being used to “promote” pre-kindergarten— a bona fide need for children that clearly promotes learning— while missing the story that for-profit charter proponents are spending $3,600,000— FIFTEEN TIMES AS MUCH— to promote the use of space funded by taxpayers to subsidize their schools???
Meanwhile, the $3.6 million ad campaign has driven de Blasio’s poll numbers down. Just a few months ago, he won in a landslide. Now, the latest poll shows the public disapproves of his handling of education. The public has been bombarded repeatedly on television with slick ads showing adorable black and brown children “evicted” from their charter school, making the implicit and preposterous claim that the Mayor–who is married to a black woman and has biracial children–is a racist. Two of the charters that were turned down had not opened; no one was “evicted” from them. In the one school that was not allowed to expand into a middle school, those “evicted” children are being exploited. If the mayor allowed their school to expand inside a public school in Harlem, as Eva demands, children with disabilities would have to be evicted from the public school to make room for the charter middle school. Meanwhile, Eva is outraged that the mayor expects her to pay rent, yet her friends could have bought a new building for her with that $3.6 million.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Didn’t understand it, my foot! They’re OWNED!!!
We need to create a climate were politicians FEAR it becoming public knowledge that they have accepted money from wealthy individuals and their pet “foundations”. They need to be so scared of getting caught that they refuse the money out of terror that being caught taking it will end their political careers FOREVER.
Fomenting hatred towards the rich would be the ugliest way to accomplish this, but it might be the easiest. And haven’t THEY been fomenting hatred towards US for well over a decade now?
LikeLike
And De Blasio clearly can’t be bought. That’s why he’s a threat and they – the insane rich behind the privatization movement – want to make an example of him, It truly must be “tale of two cities” there in NYC, with the rich even telling the poor what to say and think. Sounds like totalitarianism to me.
Mayor De Blasio – He’s my new hero.
LikeLike
I hope he has the guts to stand strong.
LikeLike
I have sent e-mails to several Times reporters to correct some of their “deformers” statistics. I never get a response. I can only conclude that the editors are holding the “party line.” Very sad comment on what is supposedly one of our leading newspapers, printing statistics that they have never verified. They are definitely part of the group of media “enablers.” I am not against charters. But if they get public money, the public deserves the facts. It is shame that the contracts of these schools have no provision for audit or oversight.
LikeLike
It’s interesting that the charter ads talk about “Charter schools and other public schools,” yet the money that bought those ads paid for the ruling that declared charters “private” and immune from audits! Height of hypocrisy.
LikeLike
Somebody bribed Justice Breslin to rule that the NY Comptroller lacked the authority to audit charter schools? I can’t believe the media isn’t following up on that story.
LikeLike
Did not mean to imply judge was “bribed,” but rather that money bought top notch legal minds to make the case.
Charters are able to be chameleons as to when they are, and are not, private.
LikeLike
It’s a full court press. All the media celebrities are chiming in:
“On Tuesday, the New York Post published an op-ed by Jindal in which he criticized the mayor’s hostility to charter schools, saying that de Blasio’s actions have the “markings of a petulant tyrant holding low-income students hostage.” He also accused de Blasio of “[embarking] on a systematic campaign to destroy the city’s burgeoning charter school movement” and said the mayor’s “immoral policies will limit the futures of yet another generation of African-American youths.”
I love the conclusory set-up in that paragraph: “the mayor’s hostility to charter schools” Ahem. No bias there!
“When did you stop beating your wife?”
LikeLike
De Blasio needs to not only stand firm on his current educational policies, but he should go on the offensive with regards to PR for them. As much as it pains me to say so, he should be more like Bloomberg in that regard – take a stand on this national issue, get on his New York soapbox and go after them!
LikeLike
Yes, he needs to stand firm on this. He’s in for four years and should stop looking at poll numbers. If he stands firm maybe the numbers will rise.
LikeLike
He needs to get the facts and start a continual assault. He needs to show what is wrong with them and continue to defame them every chance he gets.
LikeLike
The foundering NY Times is desperate for ad revenue and will take it from wherever it comes. (Sometimes I wonder whether their editorial page isn’t a form of paid advertising.)
LikeLike
The New Yorker just did a hagiography of Eva Moskowitz which mentioned how she always travels with four assistants. When she enters a school one of her four lackeys takes her hat and coat. Another runs to the nearest Starbucks and fetches her a latte.
Four million spent on advertising.
Eleven million recently contributed to her by Eli Broad.
Yet she can’t pay rent!!!!!!!!!!
LikeLike
“Yet she can’t pay rent!!!!!!!!!!
It’s not easy being an expensive whore!
LikeLike
Classic charter CEO. They barely work, get paid tons, and have a job for life while they treat their staff like dog doo doo. Why doesn’t anyone on t.v. grill her about the fact that she can’t keep staff? She is a disgusting person sucking up tax money.
LikeLike
http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2014/03/19/4778491/can-charter-school-pay-stay-secret.html#.UyswF61dVH3
I wonder if people will put up with this:
“North Carolina charter schools don’t have to disclose employee salaries like other public schools do, even though they receive hundreds of millions of dollars in public money, state education officials said this week.
“On its face all their personnel records would be public unless they show an applicable statute that says the record is not public,” said Cohen, who spent three decades in charge of drafting legislation. Lawyers for the N.C. Press Association and Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools agree.
“Charter staff are not employed by a public school board but by a private nonprofit board and, as a result, their salaries are not subject to public records law the way public school board employees’ or state employees’ salaries are,” said DPI spokeswoman Vanessa Jeter.”
I wonder too about property ownership.
If a community invests in a “public school” for decades (with state funding) shouldn’t they own the facility? If I look up my public school facility in the county recording system, it’s owned by the city. That’s what the deed says. Is the same true for charters? Shouldn’t it be? Why should they benefit from any accrued equity interest in property that the public funded?
LikeLike
This seems like the type of story that Jon Stewart would have a ball with on The Daily Show, especially the bit from the New Yorker regarding Eva Moskowitz’s four assistants. Has anyone tried to bring this to his attention?
LikeLike
I am not a fan of any of our local newspapers, but at least the Daily News did report the actual expenditure.
LikeLike
The NY Daily News has wonderful reporters and it has the irreplaceable Juan Gonzalez, who has written expose after expose. But its editorial board hates public schools, hates unions, hates teachers, and thinks that Eva is Evita reincarnated. The newspaper is owned by billionaire Mort Zuckerman, who also owns US News.
LikeLike
Those interested can email comments to publisher@nytimes.com .
You can also find emails for president, editors, etc. online.
LikeLike
Reblogged this on onewomansjournal and commented:
By dianeravitch
March 20, 2014 //
16
A reader notices that the New York Times discovered that $236,000 of private money was spent to advocate for Mayor de Blasio’s plan for universal pre-kindergarten. But the Times did not find it newsworthy that $3.6 MILLION was spent to dramatize the plight of Eva Moskowitz’s charter schools. From a confidential source, I know that the Times’ reporters had the information about the $3.6 million but either didn’t understand it or didn’t care about it.
And here’s what the NYTimes reported on today: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/20/nyregion/familiar-consultants-hired-by-the-mayors-pre-k-drive.html?emc=edit_tnt_20140319&nlid=26825267&tntemail0=y
Here’s the question the Times needs to answer: why are they harping on $236,000 of PRIVATE funds being used to “promote” pre-kindergarten— a bona fide need for children that clearly promotes learning— while missing the story that for-profit charter proponents are spending $3,600,000— FIFTEEN TIMES AS MUCH— to promote the use of space funded by taxpayers to subsidize their schools???
Meanwhile, the $3.6 million ad campaign has driven de Blasio’s poll numbers down. Just a few months ago, he won in a landslide. Now, the latest poll shows the public disapproves of his handling of education. The public has been bombarded repeatedly on television with slick ads showing adorable black and brown children “evicted” from their charter school, making the implicit and preposterous claim that the Mayor–who is married to a black woman and has biracial children–is a racist. Two of the charters that were turned down had not opened; no one was “evicted” from them. In the one school that was not allowed to expand into a middle school, those “evicted” children are being exploited. If the mayor allowed their school to expand inside a public school in Harlem, as Eva demands, children with disabilities would have to be evicted from the public school to make room for the charter middle school. Meanwhile, Eva is outraged that the mayor expects her to pay rent, yet her friends could have bought a new building for her with that $3.6 million.
Share this:
Press ThisTwitter64Facebook32EmailGoogleLinkedIn1
Related
Di Blasio Administration Shifts Funding from Charter Schools to Pre-School Plan
In “Bill de Blasio”
David Kirp Explains Why High-Stakes Testing Gets an F
In “Testing”
Charters Rule: New York State Senate Proposes to Protect Charters But Not Public Schools
In “Charter Schools”
LikeLike