Mr. Mike Clark-Madison

Mike Clark-Madison tells us that props 1 and 2 are not progressive, a term he takes to be a synonym of "well-meaning ninny" ["Austin@Large," News, May 5].Certainly this is how Clark-Madison comes off in his diatribe against these propositions.Then again, maybe not.Neither Clark-Madison nor the former City Council members who oppose Clean Austin have chosen to reveal how much they're being paid by EducatePAC.org, a name taken straight from the playbook of the Bush administration, since the primary goal of this PAC is to obfuscate, hoping to confuse voters into voting against their own best interests.Well, except for voters who also happen to be developers hoping to get special tax breaks for paving over the aquifer.Clark-Madison should be challenged on every inane point that he makes; however, the Chronicle affords Clean Austin proponents only 300 words to make their case, so one will have to suffice.

Clark-Madison equates the validity of making information public with how many people will directly use this information.
...
Sixty-seven million clams would pay for an awful lot of library, Mike.
...
But there was no similar condemnation by the Chronicle nor a story examining journalistic ethics when Chronicle reporter Mike Clark-Madison recently parlayed his progressive journalism credentials to a position as a PR man for TateAustin's clients, who include AMD, the Austin Chamber of Commerce, and the local toll road authority.Instead, last week the Chronicle published as a piece of journalism a PR piece by Clark-Madison, who in the first sentence identifies himself as "a progressive writer and journalist" and an "active citizen and neighborhood leader" ["Austin@Large," News, May 5].Mr. Clark-Madison does not identify himself as a PR man whose clients are the very corporate insiders that are targeted by Propositions 1 and 2.And the Chronicle has neither covered TateAustin's work on behalf of those opposing Propositions 1 and 2 nor explained how passage of Propositions 1 and 2 would adversely affect TateAustin's clients by affecting city support for toll roads, providing timely public disclosure of tax-giveaway deals, and preventing those who would pollute the aquifer, like AMD, from getting taxpayer subsidies.The Chronicle did little to help the reader evaluate Clark-Madison's piece, only noting in small print at the end of it that Mr. Clark-Madison is now "in partnership with TateAustin" and that his "column" was written for an anti-proposition PAC.

Mr. Clark-Madison is just doing his PR job.
...
Mike Clark-Madison responds: I was not paid anything, by EducatePAC or anyone else, to write the piece that appeared on their Web site and in the Chronicle last week.Period.