http://people.bakersfield.com/home/Blog/soundoff/35681 Reader: I opened my Californian newspaper (Saturday, Oct. 4) and saw the headline “Kern picks Palin in poll.” The article stated that it was a Bakersfield.com poll. In other words, the participants were not chosen at random, they were self-selected, which can cause significant problems on how accurate the results are. The headline should have probably read, “Bakersfield.com users pick Palin”. This would be closer to accurate. How do you know that you had a broad cross section of Kern County residents in this poll? Could the participants respond more than once to the poll? I know Channel 17 has done phone-in polls for years, but they have always mentioned that these are not “scientific polls”. The Californian’s poll would fall under the same category. — Tom Greenwood, professor of mathematics, Bakersfield College Mullen: Thanks, Tom. You’re right in that the poll wasn’t scientific, and we’ll be more careful with our labeling in the future. ■ ■ ■ Reader: Two nit-picky thoughts for your consideration: 1. The Californian is consistently inconsistent in publishing the list prices of cars featured on the front page of Saturday’s Auto Section. Best to consistently make the price one criteria for accepting a car dealer’s press release. 2. The local gasoline prices fail to include the 9/10 of a cent at the end; lowest price of $3.21 is actually $3.219. I think it is strange for gasoline vendors to still use the meaningless 9/10 of a cent price; which started when gasoline sold for less than $0.20. But prices are prices and to round-down is not good policy. — Jon Crawford Mullen: Thanks, Jon. I’ll let marketing director Robert Meszaros respond to your first thought, as the Wheels section falls in his department: “The press releases we run don’t come from the dealers as the reader suggests, but rather from the manufacturers. Since there are so many various trim levels and options to any given model, the price points are rarely included in the releases we run. From time to time, we will look on the consumer site and note a ‘starting at’ MSRP to give the reader an idea. What’s more, most times, since the Wheels section is an advertising supplement, the ad directly below the car we feature on the Wheels cover will include the price point and/or lease special at the local dealership.” To your second thought: Though we risk being unclear, I think we will continue to report average gas prices to the penny rather than include the fraction, which, as you point out, is largely meaningless to most readers and consumers. ■ ■ ■ Reader: Marylee, Marylee, Marylee, there you go again showing your dislike for the gay community with your column about PG&E’s contribution against Proposition 8. You spoke about Brad Dacus, president of the Pacific Justice Institute who did research to find an independent, unregulated gas company that would not “suddenly support a cause divergent from what mainstream Californians would support.” Strange, the last poll I saw showed more people opposed to Proposition 8 then there were for it. Sounds like mainstream Californians are heading in the other direction. I think he was searching for a gas company that supported the Proposition. So, I checked Tiger Gas Web site and guess who they currently distribute their gas through, yes PG&E. I checked out the NOtoPGE Web site and found it is a site for Tiger Gas who in my opinion obviously supports Proposition 8 as their home page starts out with “Stand Up To PG&E’s Attack on Marriage.” Although Johnathan Burris of Tiger Gas says the “company takes no public stand on Proposition 8 the NOtoPGE Web site speaks for itself. What a better way to go public than a Web site. It criticizes the Supreme Court’s decision and PG&E’s contribution. The site was very interesting to say the least. What a gimmick to get you to change gas companies. So by all means run out and change gas service to an unregulated independent gas company who distributes its gas through PG&E and uses their lines. Tiger gas does not get its gas for free. If any repairs are needed they will have to be done by the line owner, PG&E. They often do minor service calls for no charge, but if it’s Tiger Gas, will they. — James McCall Columnist Marylee Shrider responds: Mr. McCall is, of course, entitled to his opinion, but I’m going to be generous here and assume he’s merely mistaken, and not deliberately misleading, when he says Tiger Natural Gas supports Prop. 8 as evidenced by the company’s home page. The NOtoPGE Web site recommends Tiger Natural Gas as an alternative for PG&E customers rightly outraged by the utility’s massive donation to defeat Proposition 8. The page includes a link to the Tiger Web site, tigernaturalgas.com, where potential customers will find not one word in reference to or support of the measure. They will, however, find an informative overview of the company’s residential program, some impressive testimonials from clients like Pepsico and NASA and a convenient cost analysis form. I’m not sure what point Mr. McCall was trying to make with his gleeful discovery that Tiger distributes its gas through PG&E, but there’s no secret as to how it works. The natural gas market in our area is deregulated, which means we may choose where we buy our natural gas. While Mr. McCall is correct that PG&E still owns the pipelines and will charge customers for the transmission of the gas to their homes, the customers will pay Tiger’s price for their natural gas. And the money they pay for that gas will go to Tiger instead of PG&E. ■ ■ ■ Reader: As a child of the ’60s, I remember the embarrassment when people first saw TV ads for intimate apparel on partially clothed women. People were shocked when ads for tampons were discussed on TV, much less shown. I remember when “Adult” magazines weren’t displayed in stores where youngsters could easily view them. I remember when newspapers cared more about the impact of advertisements of a sensitive nature on young readers, than they did on ads’ income. Yes, I’ve seen many changes in advertising over the years. I was recently “offended” by an advertisement that appeared on the first page of the “Science section” of The Bakersfield Californian’s Sunday paper, titled “Slimmer & Sexier.” Within the “tummy-tuck” type ad it offered intimate female “… Makeovers” as well as “… Rejuvenations”. I won’t repeat the specific sensitive wording, but it offered an “increase in sexual pleasure.” Have we come to a time when sexuallyrelated ads are going to appear in our “newspaper”? Why did The Bakersfield Californian feel the need to place such an ad, and did it have to appear on the first page of a section, in the Sunday newspaper no less? Sunday, the one day that youngsters are more likely to “thumb-through” the paper, looking for the comics? We are offered parental controls from cable TV and Internet providers to protect the morals of our children. Do we now need to “thumb-through” The Californian daily to remove sensitive items before our children have the chance to see them? — Rose Thompson Advertising director John Wells responds: While I can understand the reader’s concern with the subject matter, I also have to weight the business if offering a service desired by a target piece of The Californian’s readership. I personally feel that the client has done a tasteful job at describing the surgical procedure and its benefits. If there was not a market for it here in Bakersfield, they would not be using The Californian. ■ ■ ■ Reader: In your TV Guide you have “DVS” in parentheses and “PA” in parentheses and there’s nothing that describes what it stands for. I’d appreciate an answer. — Lillian Lett Mullen: Thanks, Lillian, for reading our TV listings. “DVS” stands for Descriptive Video Service, a service for blind and lowvision audiences. The designation means that the program is optimized for that particular service. “PA” stands for Parental Advisory, meaning the show might not be suitable for young viewers. ■ ■ ■ Reader: When I was a kid in the ’60s I would buy MAD magazine. That whole decade at first it cost 25 cents, then it went up to 30 cents, then it went up to 35 cents. Today, that same MAD magazine costs $4.99 plus tax which is ridiculous. It should only be $1 or $2 at the most, which brings me to The Californian. Fifty cents for the Monday through Saturday paper but it’s too thin. I don’t think it would be too much to charge $1 today. That’s not too much if it would be a lot thicker than that. We’d have more to read. Just please don’t charge $4.99 for it. — Mike Neufeld Mullen: Thanks, Mike, for reading, and it’s true we indeed have gotten smaller in recent months, including a reduction in the width of the paper. Most comments we’ve received have been positive, as many readers seem to appreciate the easier-to-handle pages and some of the other format changes we’ve made. While I should point out that the subscription rates we offer are cheaper than the single-copy price, I’d argue that even at 50 cents daily and $1.50 on Sunday, you’re getting more than your money’s worth out of The Californian (especially if you use the coupons and money-saving ideas found in our pages and advertising inserts). And at times, the local news is much more amusing than what you might find in a $4.99 copy of MAD. Reader: I opened my Californian newspaper (Saturday, Oct. 4) and saw the headline “Kern picks Palin in poll.” The article stated that it was a Bakersfield.com poll. In other words, the participants were not chosen at random, they were self-selected, which can cause significant problems on how accurate the results are. The headline should have probably read, “Bakersfield.com users pick Palin”. This would be closer to accurate. How do you know that you had a broad cross section of Kern County residents in this poll? Could the participants respond more than once to the poll? I know Channel 17 has done phone-in polls for years, but they have always mentioned that these are not “scientific polls”. The Californian’s poll would fall under the same category. — Tom Greenwood, professor of mathematics, Bakersfield College Mullen: Thanks, Tom. You’re right in that the poll wasn’t scientific, and we’ll be more careful with our labeling in the future. ■ ■ ■ Reader: Two nit-picky thoughts for your consideration: 1. The Californian is consistently inconsistent in publishing the list prices of cars featured on the front page of Saturday’s Auto Section. Best to consistently make the price one criteria for accepting a car dealer’s press release. 2. The local gasoline prices fail to include the 9/10 of a cent at the end; lowest price of $3.21 is actually $3.219. I think it is strange for gasoline vendors to still use the meaningless 9/10 of a cent price; which started when gasoline sold for less than $0.20. But prices are prices and to round-down is not good policy. — Jon Crawford Mullen: Thanks, Jon. I’ll let marketing director Robert Meszaros respond to your first thought, as the Wheels section falls in his department: “The press releases we run don’t come from the dealers as the reader suggests, but rather from the manufacturers. Since there are so many various trim levels and options to any given model, the price points are rarely included in the releases we run. From time to time, we will look on the consumer site and note a ‘starting at’ MSRP to give the reader an idea. What’s more, most times, since the Wheels section is an advertising supplement, the ad directly below the car we feature on the Wheels cover will include the price point and/or lease special at the local dealership.” To your second thought: Though we risk being unclear, I think we will continue to report average gas prices to the penny rather than include the fraction, which, as you point out, is largely meaningless to most readers and consumers. ■ ■ ■ Reader: Marylee, Marylee, Marylee, there you go again showing your dislike for the gay community with your column about PG&E’s contribution against Proposition 8. You spoke about Brad Dacus, president of the Pacific Justice Institute who did research to find an independent, unregulated gas company that would not “suddenly support a cause divergent from what mainstream Californians would support.” Strange, the last poll I saw showed more people opposed to Proposition 8 then there were for it. Sounds like mainstream Californians are heading in the other direction. I think he was searching for a gas company that supported the Proposition. So, I checked Tiger Gas Web site and guess who they currently distribute their gas through, yes PG&E. I checked out the NOtoPGE Web site and found it is a site for Tiger Gas who in my opinion obviously supports Proposition 8 as their home page starts out with “Stand Up To PG&E’s Attack on Marriage.” Although Johnathan Burris of Tiger Gas says the “company takes no public stand on Proposition 8 the NOtoPGE Web site speaks for itself. What a better way to go public than a Web site. It criticizes the Supreme Court’s decision and PG&E’s contribution. The site was very interesting to say the least. What a gimmick to get you to change gas companies. So by all means run out and change gas service to an unregulated independent gas company who distributes its gas through PG&E and uses their lines. Tiger gas does not get its gas for free. If any repairs are needed they will have to be done by the line owner, PG&E. They often do minor service calls for no charge, but if it’s Tiger Gas, will they. — James McCall Columnist Marylee Shrider responds: Mr. McCall is, of course, entitled to his opinion, but I’m going to be generous here and assume he’s merely mistaken, and not deliberately misleading, when he says Tiger Natural Gas supports Prop. 8 as evidenced by the company’s home page. The NOtoPGE Web site recommends Tiger Natural Gas as an alternative for PG&E customers rightly outraged by the utility’s massive donation to defeat Proposition 8. The page includes a link to the Tiger Web site, tigernaturalgas.com, where potential customers will find not one word in reference to or support of the measure. They will, however, find an informative overview of the company’s residential program, some impressive testimonials from clients like Pepsico and NASA and a convenient cost analysis form. I’m not sure what point Mr. McCall was trying to make with his gleeful discovery that Tiger distributes its gas through PG&E, but there’s no secret as to how it works. The natural gas market in our area is deregulated, which means we may choose where we buy our natural gas. While Mr. McCall is correct that PG&E still owns the pipelines and will charge customers for the transmission of the gas to their homes, the customers will pay Tiger’s price for their natural gas. And the money they pay for that gas will go to Tiger instead of PG&E. ■ ■ ■ Reader: As a child of the ’60s, I remember the embarrassment when people first saw TV ads for intimate apparel on partially clothed women. People were shocked when ads for tampons were discussed on TV, much less shown. I remember when “Adult” magazines weren’t displayed in stores where youngsters could easily view them. I remember when newspapers cared more about the impact of advertisements of a sensitive nature on young readers, than they did on ads’ income. Yes, I’ve seen many changes in advertising over the years. I was recently “offended” by an advertisement that appeared on the first page of the “Science section” of The Bakersfield Californian’s Sunday paper, titled “Slimmer & Sexier.” Within the “tummy-tuck” type ad it offered intimate female “… Makeovers” as well as “… Rejuvenations”. I won’t repeat the specific sensitive wording, but it offered an “increase in sexual pleasure.” Have we come to a time when sexuallyrelated ads are going to appear in our “newspaper”? Why did The Bakersfield Californian feel the need to place such an ad, and did it have to appear on the first page of a section, in the Sunday newspaper no less? Sunday, the one day that youngsters are more likely to “thumb-through” the paper, looking for the comics? We are offered parental controls from cable TV and Internet providers to protect the morals of our children. Do we now need to “thumb-through” The Californian daily to remove sensitive items before our children have the chance to see them? — Rose Thompson Advertising director John Wells responds: While I can understand the reader’s concern with the subject matter, I also have to weight the business if offering a service desired by a target piece of The Californian’s readership. I personally feel that the client has done a tasteful job at describing the surgical procedure and its benefits. If there was not a market for it here in Bakersfield, they would not be using The Californian. ■ ■ ■ Reader: In your TV Guide you have “DVS” in parentheses and “PA” in parentheses and there’s nothing that describes what it stands for. I’d appreciate an answer. — Lillian Lett Mullen: Thanks, Lillian, for reading our TV listings. “DVS” stands for Descriptive Video Service, a service for blind and lowvision audiences. The designation means that the program is optimized for that particular service. “PA” stands for Parental Advisory, meaning the show might not be suitable for young viewers. ■ ■ ■ Reader: When I was a kid in the ’60s I would buy MAD magazine. That whole decade at first it cost 25 cents, then it went up to 30 cents, then it went up to 35 cents. Today, that same MAD magazine costs $4.99 plus tax which is ridiculous. It should only be $1 or $2 at the most, which brings me to The Californian. Fifty cents for the Monday through Saturday paper but it’s too thin. I don’t think it would be too much to charge $1 today. That’s not too much if it would be a lot thicker than that. We’d have more to read. Just please don’t charge $4.99 for it. — Mike Neufeld Mullen: Thanks, Mike, for reading, and it’s true we indeed have gotten smaller in recent months, including a reduction in the width of the paper. Most comments we’ve received have been positive, as many readers seem to appreciate the easier-to-handle pages and some of the other format changes we’ve made. While I should point out that the subscription rates we offer are cheaper than the single-copy price, I’d argue that even at 50 cents daily and $1.50 on Sunday, you’re getting more than your money’s worth out of The Californian (especially if you use the coupons and money-saving ideas found in our pages and advertising inserts). And at times, the local news is much more amusing than what you might find in a $4.99 copy of MAD. en-us Mon, 20 Oct 2008 10:52:25 PDT