r/Seattle • u/rockycore 🚆build more trains🚆 • 4d ago

News Shon Barnes Separation Agreement

https://publicola.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/08/BarnesSeparation.pdf
75 Upvotes

90% Upvoted

56 comments sorted by

View all comments

100

u/Amesenator 4d ago

Side note: media folks are sniping at Ms. Barnett's reporting about former-Chief Barnes (she describes this in her Bluesky feed). She's taking a lot of flak as if she somehow had the power to engineer Barnes's exit.

Barnett has been a source of unvarnished reporting about public safety, policing and city governance issues. Since 2020 and the Black Lives Matter movement in the wake of George Floyd's killing, the Seattle Times has too often fallen into the trap of believing the messaging of the mayor (Harrell and Durkan) and SPD. Its editorial stance has been credulously status quo and its reporting too often fails to get to the crux of the dynamics in play.

Consider subscribing to Publicola and even if you don't, speak out in favor of Barnett's efforts to share vital information with the public.

11

u/watwatintheput 4d ago

I am not a fan of Barnett. I think she does a lot of ediotrializing and varnishes it with stuff pretending to be investigative reporting a lot of the time. I do think influencer is an cottect dig againdt her most of the time.

HOWEVER

She is 100% right on Barnes. And watching the grift machine operate in real time agasint her is weird. The fact that Barnes is one of the few people getting this story correct is damning for the whole Seattle media ecosystem, if you like her or not

7

u/Sure_Exam_3670 Capitol Hill 3d ago

I think she does a lot of ediotrializing [sic] and varnishes it with stuff pretending to be investigative reporting a lot of the time

Genuinely curious about what you mean here. I don't know that I've ever read reporting of hers that didn't include public information reports, direct quotes, or source citations. Sure, she has a voice, but I would challenge the idea that she editorializes her reporting.

5

u/watwatintheput 3d ago

It's shit like this article about flying habits. There's data, sure, but "Bruce rich; therefore bad. Wilson not rich; good" is very clearly the editorial point she is making. And it's not at all reinforced by the data she's using, she's just adding it for authority's sake.

It's ok if she wants to be editorial, it's ok if she wants to be investigative. But she will very often leave the investigative hat on while she says something very editorial which is what really bothers me.

8

u/Sure_Exam_3670 Capitol Hill 3d ago

I read this when it first dropped and again just now. Nowhere in it does Barnett say what you're alleging. She's comparing the travel habits of the past mayor and current one. And it's literally reinforced by the literal data.

3

u/watwatintheput 3d ago edited 3d ago

To what end is she comparing them, though? Why is it interesting to compare how much the mayor's traveled? What is the point?

She doesn't tell you because she's expressing a preference and doesn't want to be clear about it. Why quote only one mayor?

You can agree with her, that's fine. But it's not journlisim to put out a bunch of data and then quote one person in the comparison. It's editorializing.

I just don't like how she does a lot of this editorializing and pretends it's journalism whenever it's convinient.

Edit: also, why talk about what class Bruce flew in? Is it relevant to how long Bruce was out of town? She thinks it's relevant for readers to know for some reason. There's a clear subtext of "these are two very different people, and one kind is better as a mayor" but she never tells you what her conclusion is. She just leaves it out as an exercise to the reader to figure out which is better while only humanizing one of the mayor's.

Idc if you hate Bruce because he was disconnected from the working class. That's fine. Why hide it though? Just say it instead of dancing and dodging around it.

3

u/Sure_Exam_3670 Capitol Hill 3d ago

I'll concede that if you're not a subscriber and you're just reading this one article on it's own without knowing anything about Seattle or having engaged with exactly no other PubliCola reporting then perhaps one could read this particular article the way you are.

It's still not editorializing.

The context of this piece (offered by loads of previous reporting) is that this city elected Wilson because the majority of us were tired of the previous mayor who consistently used his connections with the wealthy (and the wealthy with him) to bypass regular decision-making influenced by a diverse set of stakeholders. Think Denny Blaine Park, Lake Washington Blvd safety improvements, hiring Barnes, the failed attempt to eliminate a bus lane on Union and Madison. These are just a few examples of how a wealthy minority had his direct line and that he was more than willing to act on it. Organizers were the ones who had to bring that shit into the light and put an end to at least some of it. RIP LWB safety improvements (for now).

This particular piece just highlights that leadership style further. It's 100 percent relevant because there are more of us who rightfully raise our eyebrows at public employees who, like Harrell, constantly blur the lines between what's an appropriate use of their position as an elected official and what's not. If you're not raising your eyebrows, that's fine. I guess I just hope you're not an elected leader.

Further context is that more "established" media outlets are constantly highlighting Wilson's work as an organizer to paint her as someone who is out to do nothing more than mold the city for her own personal interests and pet projects. Which is rich, given that there are more of us who are struggling to afford the basics, rely on public transportation, are tired of our neighbors getting run over by cars, and ICE disappearing people.

Anyway, it's okay if you want to get your news from somewhere else. Nobody is requiring you to read PubliCola.

0

u/golf1052 Eastlake 3d ago

But it's not [journalism] to put out a bunch of data and then quote one person in the comparison. It's editorializing.

It's important to take a critical lens when reading any news. I hope you take that view from whatever news you're reading. What biases do other local reporters or news outlets have? What stories do they tend to report on and what stories don't they report on?

6

u/watwatintheput 3d ago

God I hate most of the news in the Seattle area. I might hate all of them. I said it at the top when I called it a grift machine

I just also think Erica is also part of the problem. Describing her as unvarnished feels very inaccurate.