As a prime example: Oct. 29, and the headline "2011 should be slightly better," followed by the comment "Economists dismiss ideas of deflation, new recession."
The article then begins to explain that the new Congress in January will confront the economy, job market, etc., and speaks of other possibilities for marginal improvement. The last paragraph stated that "the economists the AP surveyed expect the economy to sidestep some threats raised in recent months. They dismiss the likelihood of a second recession and think the risk of deflation is remote."
Isn't this a very questionable and even dishonest article to appear on The Chronicle's front page four days before the most critical election we have ever experienced? Why don't you get your information from The Wall Street Journal or a similar reputable source?
Also on the front page of this paper, we see a very large picture of Democrat gubernatorial candidate Roy Barnes at a reception in Augusta, followed by a detailed article by Staff Writer Susan McCord. Below this overwhelming picture of Barnes is a very small picture of the Republican candidate, Nathan Deal, followed by an article by Staff Writer Bianca Cain.
How can the senior staff at The Chronicle explain the content and structure of this front page, as well as the continued bias of the articles received from the Associated Press?
Many of us believe that The Chronicle will not survive as a daily paper for more than a few years. Isn't there an awareness among your staff that many readers find much of the current content of your paper distasteful?
I will be very watchful in the months to come before I decide to be one of your past subscribers.