Fair Reporting? Pssshhhht

I understand that finding all of the story isn't as easy as one could assume...but I also know that if you're only reporting hearsay, you need to have your butt kicked off the team. Seriously? You must be a newbie, because you only interviewed one moron and acted like you've gone far in your career. Congrats, you interviewed one of the many deadbeats on the job that doesn't DESERVE his job and would happily be screwed over to keep his job since no other jobs would let him screw off as much as he does at work. However, while you're talking to Dummy McStupidpants, the real hard-working guys who voted to NOT be shafted in the small amount of time they have left did so for good reason. Did you look into the reasons that they might've voted against losing out on thousands of dollars they already are in contract for? Especially when they're going to lose their jobs in a few short years anyway? If they voted yes, the company would make over 100,000,000,000 in the next 5-7 years...which is how much it's going to cost them to move. So, voting to take a pay cut to make their move free is a pretty stupid idea. They're under contract and don't have to take a pay cut as the contract was negotiated this way. Voting NO didn't take away jobs, it took away pocket padding for the CEO. Also, you don't seem to understand that they're losing their jobs no matter what they vote...you reported that this vote made the jobs go away and that's quite false. You must've been getting your information from the corporation that's trying to screw over it's employees before it LEAVES THE STATE ANYWAY! Also, the state has paid them almost 6 figures to stay here. Money our state doesn't have, but gave away freely over more hearsay. The company is still moving, but blaming the move on this vote just made your workers look dumb and the fat-cat company look better. Thanks for that truth in reporting. It was super. I'll be sure to take all of my news stories with a grain of salt from now on.