Last week, a friend tipped me to the wild Republican primary for Nebraska’s open U.S. Senate seat. A little known state legislator named Deb Fischer had just pulled a major upset, beating two very established and experienced state politicians to win the party’s nomination. It was a stunning development. As recently as February, heavily favored Attorney General Jon Bruning had been polling nearly half the vote, with Treasurer Don Stenberg running a solid second at 19%. At the time, Fischer’s paltry 6% had relegated her to a distant fourth.
So how did Fischer manage this last minute miracle despite having a far smaller budget, resumé, and base of support? An endorsement from Sarah Palin certainly helped put her on the map. But more importantly, Joe Ricketts, the Omaha-based founder of Ameritrade, spent lavishly on Fischer’s behalf. As the race wound down, his super PAC sank a quarter of a million dollars into TV ads that boosted her name recognition and implied Bruning was crooked.
I blogged about it on May 16, a day after the election. I got some nice feedback from Nebraskans, some of whom I knew, some of whom I did not.
Then came a perturbing tweet.
Someone I didn’t know named Deena Winter wrote:
@PublicProfessor Except that two weeks before the election, Fischer was within 9 points of Bruning.
She went on to say that Fischer and Bruning had been in a statistical dead heat even before the Ricketts-funded ads had begun running.
Could I have gotten it all wrong? Was my story, largely based on the reporting of others, completely off the mark?
I checked the links she included, which turned out to be for articles she herself had written for an online newspaper called Nebraska WatchDog. On April 30, more than two weeks before the primary, when Bruning still seemed to be in control, Winter’s article did indeed claim that his lead had shrunk to 9 points, with Fischer now in third. And on May 7, Winter wrote a piece citing a poll that put Fisch
er in a statistical dead heat with Bruning, his small lead within the poll’s margin of error.
Had an independent journalist at a small website figured it all out first, only to be ignored by the state’s biggest newspapers? Something smelled fischy, if I may coin an awful pun.
As Winter’s article noted, the poll claiming Fischer and Bruning were effectively tied had been funded by Fischer’s campaign. So it’s understandable why most analysts took it with a grain of salt. Indeed, The Omaha World Herald also covered the “dead heat” poll on May 7. But they cautiously noted that “if” Fischer was actually surging, it was despite not having enough money to run TV ads. Of course, Joe Ricketts would do that for her.
To Winter’s credit, in retrospect she nailed it, even if the the source was problematic. But why had she taken this poll at face value when other journalists had not? And why was she now trying to convince me that this same poll proved Joe Rickett’s money was not responsible for Fischer’s victory?
When I dug a little deeper, I discovered something very interesting: Nebraska WatchDog, the wesbite Winter writes for, is funded by none other than Joe Ricketts’ son, Peter Ricketts.
Seriously.
When I called Winter on this, she responded plainly: “Pete Ricketts, Joe’s son, is one of our many donors.”
One of many? Perhaps. But also one of the biggest. In fact, there are only two major donors listed on the Nebraska WatchDog website. The other one? The Franklin Center for Government and Public Integrity, a conservative non-profit that’s in the business of training “independent” journalists, such as Winter.
The Franklin Center has been creating a conservative media network by funding a series of Watch Wire organs, Nebraska WatchDog among them. And though it’s only been around since 2009, The Franklin Center already has a history of sponsoring and releasing dubious polls. Just earlier this 
year, they were behind a suspicious poll that claimed an overwhelming majority of Wisconsinites supported the controversial budget cuts championed by Republican Governor Scott Walker; you know, the same Scott Walker who tried to break that state’s teachers’ union, which in turn set off massive protests last year, and he is now facing a recall election.
So no wonder that few experts had put much stock in the Fischer-financed poll. No wonder the state’s two biggest newspapers were caught off guard by Fischer’s last minute come-from-behind win. No wonder that both state and national media such as The Atlantic still think Ricketts’ money is largely (though not entirely) responsible for Fischer’s victory. And small wonder, perhaps, that Deena Winter came out of the blue to try and convince me that Ricketts’ money was not responsible for Fischer’s victory.
So after a brief exchange, I called Winter on the charade.
@DeenaNEWatchdog So P.Ricketts-funded group cites Fischer-funded poll to dismiss claims J.Ricketts influenced race? Or am I missing something
Instead of addressing my concerns, Winter tweeted back:
@PublicProfessor Go ahead, kill the messenger, prof.
I didn’t take the patronizing bait. For starters, I have no patience for false martyrs, especially when they’re being slippery. Ick.
Instead, I just poked around some more and found out that Winter had once been a journalist at the Lincoln Journal Star, but she quit in September, 2010. After that, she founded her own blog, but not much came of it (I can sympathize). She then ran a long shot independent campaign for the Lincoln City Council against a long term incumbent Democrat, a move, for the record, that I greatly admire (see my many rants against our political duopoly). Predictably, however, she lost. After that, she landed her new job with Nebraska WatchDog.
So what am I to make of Deena Winter? I have no idea. I don’t know her, and I’m not going to make blind guesses about her motivations, ideals, or aspirations.
But I am willing to make something of the entire affair. First, the Ricketts family seems uncomfortable with the obvious narrative; their spending made Fischer’s victory possible, and she owes them big time. Beyond that, regardless of what Deena Winter may or may not believe, she did contact me with an explicit purpose: to discredit the notion that Fischer’s startling upse
t was made possible by Ricketts’ money. And in doing so, she failed to mention a blatant conflict of interest: Ricketts’ son ponies up a chunk of her salary.
All of this leads me to believe that The Franklin Center and supporters like the Ricketts family are trying to pull one over on the American people. That they are funding a growing number of Watch Wire groups (including Nebraska WatchDog) that seem to be yet another ideologically driven media organization wrapping itself in false pretensions to independence, objectivity, and a “new breed” journalism. But the truth betrays that well manicured image. You’re only as independent as your paycheck.
It’s really quite simple. Deb Fischer would not be where she is today without the Ricketts’ money. And maybe Deena Winter wouldn’t either.