Connect with us

News from the South - North Carolina News Feed

The Watchdog is changing how we handle reader comments. Here’s why. • Asheville Watchdog

Published

3 months ago

on

avlwatchdog.org – KEITH CAMPBELL – 2025-03-06 06:00:00

Beginning today, Asheville Watchdog is changing the way readers can comment on our stories. 

Readers are still invited to share their thoughts on our reporting on The Watchdog’s Facebook page, where they can also interact with other readers, but we’re discontinuing the comments feature on avlwatchdog.org.

It’s a decision that we didn’t come to lightly. 

The Watchdog has experienced dramatic growth in its audience, and with that, an enormous increase in comments. In 2020, the year we launched, we published 212 comments. We published more than 6,500 last year.

We’re delighted readers are engaging with our content, but our tiny news organization — a mix of paid staff and volunteers — doesn’t have the bandwidth to read each comment, determine if it’s in line with our comments policies, and, increasingly, research readers’ claims in an effort to combat unverified rumors and misinformation. 

Now, more than ever, it’s crucial that The Watchdog focuses on our core mission, which is to provide local news reporting and analysis as a public service to the residents of Asheville and Buncombe County. 

We still welcome your comments on our Facebook and Instagram accounts. And you’re welcome to engage with us at our free public events. We’ll soon have news to share about one coming in late May.

Asheville Watchdog is a nonprofit news team producing stories that matter to Asheville and Buncombe County. Keith Campbell is the managing editor of The Watchdog. Email kcampbell@avlwatchdog.org. To show your support for this vital public service go to avlwatchdog.org/support-our-publication/.

Original article

The post The Watchdog is changing how we handle reader comments. Here’s why. • Asheville Watchdog appeared first on avlwatchdog.org

The Watchdog

Related Topics:

News from the South - North Carolina News Feed

Children of Negro Leaguer Jenkins reflect on dad's life, impact

Published

9 hours ago

on

June 15, 2025

By

www.youtube.com – ABC11 – 2025-06-15 21:26:40


SUMMARY: Jim Jenkins, a North Carolina baseball trailblazer and Negro Leagues player, exemplified resilience and excellence both on and off the field. His sons recall his superior skills—hitting, running, and catching—and how he faced challenges due to his skin color. Beyond baseball, Jenkins was a community father, teaching youths fundamentals and helping those in need. He shared a friendship with legend Hank Aaron, often attending Braves games with his family. His legacy endures through his children, who honor not just his athletic achievements but his kindness and humanity, inspiring future generations to carry on his impact.

James “Jim” Jenkins had a profound impact on the game of baseball as a trailblazer known in the Carolinas.

https://abc11.com/post/jenkins-family-remembers-patriarch-nc-baseball-trailblazer-fathers-day/16759447/
Download: https://abc11.com/apps/
Like us on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/ABC11/
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/abc11_wtvd/
Threads: https://www.threads.net/@abc11_wtvd
TIKTOK: https://www.tiktok.com/@abc11_eyewitnessnews
X: https://x.com/ABC11_WTVD

Source

Continue Reading

News from the South - North Carolina News Feed

The cost of saving 1.5%: Our health

Published

1 day ago

on

June 15, 2025

By

ncnewsline.com – Hannah Friedman – 2025-06-15 05:00:00

SUMMARY: A scientist reflecting on the politicization of science warns that ideological influence undermines objectivity, breeds mistrust, and hampers public understanding. The FY2026 budget proposal cut NIH funding by about 40%, saving taxpayers $18 billion, but only 1.5% of the total federal budget, while increasing defense spending by 13%. These cuts severely impact states like North Carolina, where science drives $2.4 billion in tax revenue and thousands of jobs. The cuts target indirect costs vital for research infrastructure and diversity efforts, mistakenly seen as ideological rather than essential scientific practices. The author calls for unity to prioritize facts over politics and protect scientific progress for societal and economic health.

Read the full article

The post The cost of saving 1.5%: Our health appeared first on ncnewsline.com

Continue Reading

News from the South - North Carolina News Feed

Unwavering party preference in 2 bills valued at $1.6T | North Carolina

Published

1 day ago

on

June 15, 2025

By

www.thecentersquare.com – By Alan Wooten | The Center Square – (The Center Square – ) 2025-06-15 02:01:00


North Carolina’s U.S. House members voted along party lines on two Republican-backed bills: the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” (H.R. 1), which cuts \$1.6 trillion in government spending, and the “Rescissions Act of 2025” (H.R. 4), which eliminates \$9.4 billion from entities like USAID and public broadcasting. Republicans called it a purge of waste, citing spending on drag shows and foreign projects. Democrats criticized the cuts as harmful and symbolic, calling the effort fiscally irresponsible. H.R. 1 passed 215-214; H.R. 4 passed 214-212. No Democrats supported either. A few Republicans broke ranks and voted against their party on each bill.

(The Center Square) – North Carolinians in the U.S. House of Representatives were unwavering of party preference for two bills now awaiting finalization in the Senate.

Republicans who favored them say the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, known also as House Resolution 1, slashed $1.6 trillion in waste, fraud and abuse of government systems. The Rescissions Act of 2025, known also as House Resolution 4, did away with $9.4 billion – less than six-tenths of 1% of the other legislation – in spending by the State Department, the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), the Corp. for Public Broadcasting (PBS, NPR), and other entities.

Democrats against them say the Department of Government Efficiency made “heartless budget cuts” and was an “attack on the resources that North Carolinians were promised and that Congress has already appropriated.”

Republicans from North Carolina in favor of both were Reps. Dr. Greg Murphy, Virginia Foxx, Addison McDowell, David Rouzer, Rev. Mark Harris, Richard Hudson, Pat Harrigan, Chuck Edwards, Brad Knott and Tim Moore.

Democrats against were Reps. Don Davis, Deborah Ross, Valerie Foushee and Alma Adams.

Foxx said the surface was barely skimmed with cuts of “$14 million in cash vouchers for migrants at our southern border; $24,000 for a national spelling bee in Bosnia; $1.5 million to mobilize elderly, lesbian, transgender, nonbinary and intersex people to be involved in the Costa Rica political process; $20,000 for a drag show in Ecuador; and $32,000 for an LGBTQ comic book in Peru.”

Adams said, “While Elon Musk claimed he would cut $1 trillion from the federal government, the recissions package amounts to less than 1% of that. Meanwhile, House Republicans voted just last month to balloon the national debt by $3 trillion in their One Big Ugly Bill. It’s fiscal malpractice, not fiscal responsibility.”

House Resolution 1 passed 215-214 and House Resolution 4 went forward 214-212. Republican Reps. Warren Davidson of Ohio and Thomas Massie of Kentucky were against the One Big Beautiful Bill and Republican Reps. Mark Amodei of Nevada, Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania, Nicole Malliotakis of New York and Michael Turner of Ohio were against the Rescissions Act.

No Democrats voted yea.

The post Unwavering party preference in 2 bills valued at $1.6T | North Carolina appeared first on www.thecentersquare.com


Note: The following A.I. based commentary is not part of the original article, reproduced above, but is offered in the hopes that it will promote greater media literacy and critical thinking, by making any potential bias more visible to the reader –Staff Editor.

Political Bias Rating: Centrist

The article presents a straightforward report on the partisan positions and voting outcomes related to two specific bills, highlighting the contrasting views of Republicans and Democrats without using loaded or emotionally charged language. It neutrally conveys the Republicans’ framing of the bills as efforts to cut waste and reduce spending, alongside Democrats’ critique of those cuts as harmful and insufficient fiscal discipline. By providing direct quotes from representatives of both parties and clearly stating voting results, the content maintains factual reporting without promoting a particular ideological stance. The balanced presentation of arguments and absence of editorializing indicate a commitment to neutrality rather than an intentional partisan perspective.

Continue Reading

Trending