In a recent correspondence regarding an article on campaign finances for local politicians, someone referred to my reporting as “controversial information.” Publishing the contributions that politicians receive from companies in the real estate, gambling, technology and petrochemical industries should not be considered controversial—it’s a service that we need now more than ever.
Who a candidate takes money from should always be scrutinized. State Senate candidate Scott Sakakihara may not go easy on Big Tech when he takes office in Sacramento, but Meta thinks he might. They spent over $3 million to support him over pro-regulation candidate Anne Kepner. Taking thousands of dollars from gambling interests across the state should similarly raise eyebrows.
When city council members and mayors take contributions from the real estate and landlord lobbies, voters should know. Politicians build networks of power and we need to understand that network to hold them accountable. Local journalism used to fill that gap for us, but they’re a species on the brink.
A recent article from NPR interviewed people who are using AI chatbots to help them decide how to vote during the midterms this year. This was especially true for down-ballot races at the state and local level. “Some users noted that the decimation of local media has left them with fewer options for learning about down-ballot races,” it says.
It’s not easy finding this information, as “publicly available” as it may technically be. But chatbots are known to hallucinate and push people toward outcomes they would already favor anyway.
We lost accountability so long ago that we’ve forgotten what it’s like. It’s uncomfortable and it’s not fun. But we’re supposed to be the bosses of our elected officials—in the City of Hayward org chart, residents are at the top—and to be good bosses we have to do the hard thing. We need to ask difficult questions.
They only have power because we allow it. We should make sure they’re using it wisely.
