At the Investigative Reporters and Editors conference in San Antonio in late June, Hall participated in a “hastily arranged panel” that focused on what other investigative centers should do if they find themselves targeted by lawmakers. Hall and Lauren Fuhrmann, the center’s public engagement director, drew up a checklist detailing how other investigative outlets can “prepare and respond” to an attack.
Before the fact, much of the advice boils down to telling your newsroom’s story, accurately but assertively: develop a values statement, make 990s and other financial forms publicly available, tout the impact of your stories and the success of former interns, and put it all on a high-quality website. They also suggest that centers “nurture personal relationships” with their journalistic partners—editors, station managers, and others who use their work—by generously sharing credit and participating in conferences, parties, and ceremonies.
Should a legislative attack happen, centers must shift into red-alert emergency: “Drop everything else. This is your new life, at least for awhile,” Hall and Fuhrmann attest. They advise moving swiftly to post a statement, even if it has to be revised later, and assigning an employee to handle media requests on the issue. They recommend telling your story to anyone who will listen, including those who may seem “hostile to your newsroom—you may find that by speaking with them, you may develop some surprising allies.” To that point, they link to the Wisconsin Reporter, published by the conservative Franklin Center for Public Integrity, which posted a lengthy article that was sympathetic to WCIJ’s fight.
The fact that the four-year-old WCIJ could activate a diverse network of allies to respond to an unexpected and time-sensitive crisis attests to the respect it has earned. That support may have been pivotal in winning Walker’s veto—and it wasn’t conditional. Had the provision gone through, and WCIJ been homeless, its allies would have come through all the same: about 10 days ago, Hall told Capital Times that he had received “multiple generous offers” from across the state to house the center’s staff. Now, that won’t be necessary.
Follow @USProjectCJR for more posts from this author and the rest of the United States Project team.

Yay!
#1 Posted by Dorothy Knable, CJR on Mon 1 Jul 2013 at 03:36 PM
Looks like Charles Lewis might be next in the spotlight:
http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/newsdesk/2013/07/the-kochs-and-the-action-on-global-warming.html
"When President Obama unveiled his program to tackle climate change last month, he deliberately sidestepped Congress as a hopeless bastion of obstruction, relying completely on changes that could be imposed by regulatory agencies. A two-year study by the Investigative Reporting Workshop at American University, released today, illustrates what might be one of the reasons why he had to take this circuitous route....
The investigative study tracks the political influence wielded by the billionaire Koch brothers, who have harnessed part of the fortune generated by their company, Koch Industries, the second largest private corporation in the country, to further their conservative libertarian activism. Charles Lewis, the Executive Editor of the Investigative Reporting Workshop explained that the I.R.W., a non-profit news organization attached to American University, spent two years focussing on Koch Industries because, “There is no other corporation in the U.S. today, in my view, that is as unabashedly, bare-knuckle aggressive across the board about its own self-interest, in the political process, in the nonprofit-policy-advocacy realm, even increasingly in academia and the broader public marketplace of ideas.”"
The report is here:
http://investigativereportingworkshop.org/investigations/the_koch_club/story/Koch_millions_spread_influence_through_nonprofits/
#2 Posted by Thimbles, CJR on Mon 1 Jul 2013 at 07:56 PM
And, as Charley Pierce reminds us:
http://www.esquire.com/blogs/politics/koch-brothers-climate-change-070113
these guys do like to tamper with Universities:
http://www.aaup.org/article/fine-print-restrictive-grants-and-academic-freedom
"In attempting to gain a foothold in universities, the Kochs often work in tandem with other groups that share their values. The foundation formed by John Allison, former CEO of the regional financial-services holding company BB&T, is a frequent collaborator with the Kochs, reaching out primarily to economics departments and schools of business."
Allison is that Ayn Rand freakjob who pays for children to be indoctrinatated by forcing "Atlas Shrugged" into their curriculum.
For example:
"There was no ambiguity about how the money was to be spent:
The Department of Economics would create a new course, Morals and Ethics in Economic Systems, with Ayn Rand as required reading.
The course would be offered by the College of Social Sciences to 108 students each term, and the size of the class would eventually increase to as many as five hundred students.
The course was also to be offered online.
The Department of Finance would add additional readings and course content in free markets, selfinterest, and individualism to its current required coursework.
Every undergraduate student in the College of Business and all graduate students in finance and economics would receive a copy of Atlas Shrugged, and discussion groups would explore the book’s themes.
A distinguished speakers series would be created, with presentations focused on the “core values of the free-enterprise system” and the “moral and ethical foundations of capitalism.” The Ayn Rand Institute would be consulted for the list of the recommended speakers.
Two program professorships would be awarded, and they would play key roles in developing and promoting the free-enterprise curriculum in the classroom.
Because of the importance of the program, it would be initially codirected by the heads of the economics and finance departments.
The program would sponsor and support the Students in Free Enterprise club."
I've mentioned how free market "philanthropists" have been lobbying for tax cuts, depriving universities of state funds, and then using their donor leverage to define curriculums and pick faculty.
This is how people like Glen Hubbard keep their jobs. This is the model of plutocratic higher learning.
#3 Posted by Thimbles, CJR on Mon 1 Jul 2013 at 08:14 PM
And you can see how it works where you have people like John Summers, the Baffler Editor who Justin Peters just profiled in your pages, languish as impoverished adjunct professors:
http://junctrebellion.wordpress.com/2012/08/12/how-the-american-university-was-killed-in-five-easy-steps/
and how universities now pay lavish rewards for a superstar faculty:
http://gawker.com/cuny-is-paying-david-petraeus-200-000-to-work-three-ho-604712137
and then seek private donations to fund them.
This is not how 21 century higher learning should function: increasingly dependent on right wing political good will for protection, 'philanthropist' good will for revenue, and a risk adverse approach to education to avoid blackmail action.
The truth has no representation. Students and the society as a whole have a diminished influence which will get pepper sprayed if it gets too uppity.
All in all, we'd best make ourselves aware what's going on because somefolks are brewing for a fight.
#4 Posted by Thimbles, CJR on Mon 1 Jul 2013 at 08:28 PM