What is back ...
No I am not referencing some scary movie, although on occasion I am sure it has caused as many nightmares on Center Street and other by-ways in town as the latest slasher flick.
I am referencing the Fairhaven Neighborhood News, the latest edition out yesterday.
Let's be honest, whether you love to hate it or hate to love it, you probably missed it. I know I did.
I suppose everyone is entitled to some time off, even B.D.
Great listing of weekend events, some interesting pieces, and good pics. Check it out.
I have said it before, we don't know how lucky we are to have three papers servicing our little town. The two weeklies and the one daily combine to provide us with a combination of news coverage you seldom find elsewhere.
And speaking of the daily, the editor of the opinion section of the Standard Times must have had a dream come true for today's edition. Two letters complaining about the slant of coverage by the paper on the wind turbine issue. One noting the slant toward opponents of the project, the other lamenting how the paper is leaning in favor of the developer.
Now I am sure newspapers get an avalanche of letters complaining about biased coverage. I would guess they often get similar letters on more than a periodic basis. But the devil in me would guess that receiving two in close proximity about recent articles is kind of like hitting the daily double.
I imagine there was just no way to pass up printing these letters one on top of the other.
Who can blame the paper? I mean you can print all the pieces you want about your reporting, but the bottom line is people will read into it what best suits their needs. The slant of coverage is a matter of perspective. I have my own perspective on coverage of some issues.
Two related but distinct pieces, one an opinion column and one a news article, generate two differing opinions on the newspaper's own perspective. Call it the "Goldilocks" syndrome. Too hot, too cold, mix them together, just right.
Well maybe not just right, but it seems that way, at least for today.
Okay, so how many people were really riled up about the delay with the fireworks? I mean nobody likes to wait, that is a given.
Could the fact that there was going to be a delay have been communicated, well yes. But the fact that the fireworks didn't go off on time might have been a pretty good indication of that. I am pretty sure if the event was going to be cancelled that would have been announced.
Not sure I would classify the wait as a debacle though. That would be 20 minutes of fireworks going off in 20 seconds like in San Diego, or making people wait as long as they did and then cancelling the show.
I guess it is a matter of perspective.
Re: the delay of fireworks yet no mention of yet another example of the ineptitude of our unapologetic -never partly to blame - selectman.
ReplyDeleteWas debating whether to publish your comment or not, as the political connotation is really irrelevant to the fireworks.
ReplyDeleteI am not an apologist for any selectman, however as the competency of the individual is questioned by you in a totally non-office related endeavor, it is only fair to note a decades long involvement by the individual in such matters, with numerous events without problems. I suppose the only thing that really bothers me in your comment is the use of the word "ineptitude" as it may apply to one's skill with "fireworks".
One may be inept at one thing and quite good at another. Wherever the fault lies for this particular event, I would submit that the record as far as "fireworks" (literal not political)does not warrant such a description.
As to no mention of the individual per se, what would a mention have added to the piece? Had this been a function of political office, there would have been mention. Since it was not and was about peoples reaction to delay, what would it have added?
I would like to think I would have written the piece, given the same information known to me, in the same manner no matter who set off the fireworks, even you.