Reading Time: < 1 minute

Inside our newsroom, we often talk about filling information gaps — providing Wisconsinites with information they need but struggle to find elsewhere.

We’ve filled a range of gaps, whether related to accessing FoodShare benefits, applying for college financial aid or preventing the spread of infectious diseases like measles. It’s all part of our effort to “complete rather than compete” with other sources of quality information. 

We’re also identifying gaps in our own work. That means asking whether everyone we aim to serve can access our reporting. 

For the past several weeks we’ve discussed how to improve the experience of one particular demographic of readers: those who are blind or visually impaired. 

In partnership with the nonprofit Hacks/Hackers, a convener of technologists and journalists to improve the information ecosystem, we’re experimenting ways to improve the audio descriptions of photos for those who use screen readers, known as alt text. That includes formalizing internal standards for higher-quality alt text and testing artificial intelligence tools — always checked by a human editor — to efficiently generate alt text that adheres to our new standards. 

The result, we hope, will be a better experience for visually impaired readers.

Our next step will be to explore offering more audio versions of our reporting. While we currently partner with WPR to produce audio versions of Addie Costello’s stories and have begun airing audio versions of fact briefs through Civic Media radio stations, much of our reporting still exists only as text. Expanding audio serves a variety of audiences, not just people with visual impairments. 

As we’re having these conversations, we want to hear from you. If you use a screen reader or have other accessibility needs, tell us how we’re doing and what we can improve. You can email me directly at jmalewitz@wisconsinwatch.org.   

How can we make news more accessible? We want to hear from you.  is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

Reading Time: 2 minutes

If you avidly read Wisconsin Watch, you’ve learned plenty about prisons in Wisconsin. As our reporting has shown, they’re overcrowded, understaffed and particularly expensive to operate. In 2020, the state spent $220 per resident to lock up people — significantly higher than neighboring states. 

Wisconsin Watch has covered prison issues for more than a decade, but we’ve prioritized that coverage since reporter Mario Koran teamed up with The New York Times to expose a staffing crisis that resulted in extended lockdowns, substandard health care for prisoners and untenable working conditions for correctional officers. Our press corps colleagues joined us with months of sustained coverage, forcing lawmakers and the Department of Corrections to respond in some ways. 

We’re proud of that reporting. But as we continue exposing such problems, we’re doubling down on exploring solutions. For instance, Addie Costello and Joe Timmerman last month profiled Camp Reunite, a unique program that helps Wisconsin prisoners maintain relationships with their children — recognizing that family visits have been shown to reduce recidivism. 

But how might Wisconsin solve its biggest prison problems? We’re discussing that as a staff. The question is tricky because so many challenges outside of prison walls shape the problems within them, whether its barriers to housing, jobs or health care. That’s why we’re discussing coverage with beat reporters across the Wisconsin Watch and Milwaukee Neighborhood News Service newsrooms. 

In the coming months, expect more coverage that highlights more humane and cost-effective ways to protect public safety and rehabilitate people who do break the law. What can Wisconsin learn from other states that have reduced prison populations without jeopardizing safety? We’re asking. 

As with all of our stories, we’ll prioritize those with the potential for impact. Our journalism aims to help people navigate their lives, be seen and heard, hold power to account and come together in community and civic life.

Meantime, we want to hear from you. What topics or storylines do you hope to see us follow? What perspectives would you like to share? Feel free to email me at jmalewitz@wisconsinwatch.org.

How we’re reporting on Wisconsin prisons is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

Reading Time: 3 minutes

As homelessness grows across Wisconsin, social service agencies are feeling a crunch. The federal government is slashing funding for tackling the problem, and state lawmakers aren’t helping much either. 

Reporters for Wisconsin Watch, the nonprofit news organization for which I work, unpacked those challenges in a mid-July story. They noted the Legislature’s budget writing committee rejected a $24 million proposal by Gov. Tony Evers to boost funding for homelessness support services and shelter operations. 

The reason? Committee leaders won’t say. 

The 2,358-word story included perspectives of multiple service providers and policy experts, but the lawmakers were conspicuously absent. My colleagues sent multiple requests for comment to four members of the committee, including its two co-chairs. One declined an interview request. The others did not reply.

The silence leaves the public guessing. 

Do the lawmakers disagree on the scope of the problem? Do they think money can be better spent on other issues? How much is just politics between a Republican-controlled committee and a Democratic governor? 

We don’t know because they won’t tell us.

It’s hard to address homelessness — or any complex challenge —  if we don’t even know where leaders stand.

Unfortunately, independent journalists are growing accustomed to being ignored. In a trend spanning multiple levels of government and political parties, public officials are increasingly avoiding answering inconvenient questions about matters of public concern. They’re sending generic statements instead of agreeing to interviews that are more likely to yield clarity. That’s if they respond at all. 

It’s happening in Wisconsin and beyond.

“Patterns of media evasion and selective engagement have become the norm for many newsmakers. They may work with media that are friendly to or aligned with the source’s views, resulting in little to no accountability questions or pushback,” states a 2024 Poynter Institute report. “Many sources who once engaged with reporters, even if grudgingly, have become masters of media avoidance.” 

Such tactics are less harmful to journalists than they are to constituents. We ask questions on behalf of the public — not to satisfy our own curiosities. Ignoring us is ignoring the public. 

In Wisconsin, the silence means less information on everything from state prison staffing shortages to the politics behind state conservation funding or dormant city initiatives in Milwaukee. 

Earlier this year, a McFarland man who arrived three years ago from Cuba attended what he thought would be the first hearing in his asylum case —  after following steps laid out by the federal government. Instead, a judge dismissed Miguel Jerez Robles’ case and agents with Immigration and Customs Enforcement arrested him.

“He had everything in order, and he was arbitrarily arrested and placed in expedited removal when he doesn’t qualify to be in expedited removal,” his attorney told the Capital Times and Wisconsin Watch. 

The news outlets reached out to ICE for comment. It did not respond. A month after his arrest, the man was released, still with no explanation. 

Thankfully, such stonewalling is not universal. Some officials still value transparency, agreeing to interviews that help the public understand their actions. It’s probably not always easy. Engaging with journalists takes time and energy, and requests may flow in with tight deadlines.

But their constituents are better off for it.

While writing this column, I emailed the four lawmakers who did not comment during Wisconsin Watch’s homelessness reporting in July: Rep. Mark Born, R-Beaver Dam; Sen. Howard Marklein, R-Spring Green; Sen. Romaine Robert Quinn, R-Birchwood; and Sen. Eric Wimberger, R-Oconto. I offered a fresh chance to discuss their vote and share their perspectives on receiving media requests. 

None of them responded. 

Your Right to Know is a monthly column distributed by the Wisconsin Freedom of Information Council (wisfoic.org), a group dedicated to open government. Council member Jim Malewitz is managing editor of Wisconsin Watch.

Your Right to Know: ‘No comment’ is no help to the public is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

Reading Time: 2 minutes

In welcoming you behind the scenes of our reporting, we’ve shared plenty about how our newsroom operates — from how we’re covering Washington’s disruption to how your tips shape our coverage of everything from rural homelessness to the return of measles.

Today I want to discuss something more fundamental: Out of the infinite stories we could report at a given time, how do we decide which to pursue with our finite resources?

This requires us to evaluate whether a potential story would fit within our mission and deliver impact for residents. How we do that is something we’re constantly refining. 

Our mission is to make the communities of Wisconsin strong, informed and connected through our journalism. Our intended impact: that people use our reporting to navigate their lives, be seen and heard, hold power to account and come together in community and civic life.

Before green-lighting a story, we consider its potential impact. If we can’t identify any, it’s likely not worth pursuing — at least not yet. We ask where the idea originated (bonus points for ideas directly from the public) or whether other newsrooms have covered this topic. Recognizing that we want to fill gaps rather than re-report the news, we consider whether the story will add knowledge and understanding to previous reporting — and whether our story would elevate different perspectives. 

Another question: Why is it important to tell this story now, as opposed to other stories?

We’ve formalized this process, which begins with a pitch form that reporters fill out and discuss with their editor. The process has sparked productive conversations about how we can best serve the public. In some cases, we’ve decided an idea doesn’t fit. In other cases, the process has persuaded a skeptical editor that a story is worthwhile.

If you have questions about why we have — or have not — reported a particular story, feel free to reach out. I’m at jmalewitz@wisconsinwatch.org.

What makes a Wisconsin Watch story? Mission and impact matter is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.

Reading Time: 3 minutes

Back in February I shared our newsroom’s plan for covering President Donald Trump’s return to the White House. As noted then, whether you love or loathed the disruption in Washington, it promised to deeply affect our lives in Wisconsin. 

And it has.

Five months later, Washington’s whirlwind is still churning — whether it’s the dismantling of the Department of Education, canceled or frozen grants, tax cuts that disproportionately benefit the rich or newly enacted work requirements that are expected to kick people off of Medicaid.

Here is an update on how we’ve leaned into our strengths in keeping communities connected and informed during exhausting news cycles. We promised: 

Reporting that prioritizes your questions and tips

That includes Addie Costello’s tip-inspired feature about Madison’s Yahara House, which focuses on building relationships and job opportunities for adults with serious mental illness — a model shown to work. Costello explored how Wisconsin could expand support for such programs and how federal cuts to Medicaid could jeopardize access.

We’ve also focused on news you can use, such as this story from Devin Blake of Milwaukee Neighborhood News Service, which explained people’s rights as U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents conduct sweeping arrests.

Prioritizing context over speed

When Milwaukee County Circuit Court Judge Hannah Dugan was arrested in March for allegedly helping a man without legal status evade federal immigration authorities, we amplified daily updates from our trusted partners at the Associated Press while considering what our specific expertise could add to the conversation. The result: this context-rich story from Jack Kelly about how Dugan’s arrest echoed the arrest of a Massachusetts judge in 2019. 

This approach has shaped how we’ve covered tariffs, frozen funding and disrupted programs. We’ve examined local impacts to adult education students, AmeriCorps volunteers, local farmers, people who are homeless and a program that teaches about Milwaukee’s history — just to name a few.  

It has also informed our coverage of Trump’s self-described big bill-turned law, including what provisions mean for Medicaid recipients and people seeking workforce training. Our fact briefs in partnership with Gigafact have helped readers understand which claims about the bill were true. 

Collaboration

As always, we’ve continued to distribute our reporting for free, team up with other newsrooms on big stories and amplify the great work of our partners. 

In June, Wisconsin Watch’s Natalie Yahr collaborated with Erin McGroarty of the Cap Times to bring you the story of Miguel Jerez Robles, a McFarland man who was among the first people swept up in a wave of arrests inside immigration court buildings. The story illustrated the volatility and randomness of the country’s immigration processes — and the aggressiveness of Trump’s approach. We detailed Jerez’s detention and, shortly after publication, his surprise release.

We additionally republished a pair of stories from The 19th about Yessenia Ruano, a Milwaukee teacher’s aide and mother of twin U.S.-citizen daughters who hoped to avoid a forced return to El Salvador — 14 years after arriving in Wisconsin. The most recent story illustrated Ruano’s farewell to Milwaukee as she and her children left rather than risking detention.

Meanwhile, we’re still rounding up top headlines in our Wisconsin Weekly newsletter, the most recent of which included a WPR story about Trump’s proposal to ax the U.S. Chemical Safety Board, which investigated a 2018 refinery explosion in Superior that injured dozens of workers and forced residents to evacuate. 

We want our coverage to offer you actionable information — and help you digest the most important storylines without feeling overwhelmed.

Let us know how we’re doing. Please keep shaping our reporting by sending your tips, questions and feedback. If you don’t hear from us immediately, please do know that we read everything you send.

How Wisconsin Watch is covering disruption from Washington is a post from Wisconsin Watch, a non-profit investigative news site covering Wisconsin since 2009. Please consider making a contribution to support our journalism.