The woes of a one-newspaper town: Part II
The second in a multi-part series on why Rochester needs more editorial voices
Competition is good for everyone. That, of course, is the principle on which the concept of free market economics relies. When a good, established business has a strong competitor come to play in its yard, that healthy competition makes both businesses better. You know the saying; a rising tide lifts all ships.
The Democrat & Chronicle is in desperate need of some competition. Nowhere is this more evident than on the D&C's editorial page. The editorials in the D&C are predictably poor and politically one-sided. Take the example of the Thumbs up, down feature that appears every Saturday. This feature is poor in that in normally gives almost all thumbs up to people in the community who have done nice things. There's nothing wrong with that, but it's not exactly hard-hitting editorial work. They almost never have the courage or insight to use this feature to offer any meaningful political or social criticism with a nice, meaty thumbs down. This past Saturday, however, they found the issue on which they finally want to take a firm stand: George Bush riding around on his ranch without his seatbelt on. Not kidding. Read it here (it's the last one). I don't want to waste any time picking it apart. It's just that dumb. I challenge anyone to find me an example of the D&C's editorial staff using this feature to take such a petty potshot at a prominent Democrat. Imagine, for example, the likelihood of them giving a thumbs down to Al Gore or Leonardo DiCaprio for flying around in gas-guzzling private jets while preaching at everyone else about decreasing their carbon dioxide emissions. This may be a minor point, but it's indicative of larger issues with the D&C editorial page. It's not sharp, it's not thoughtful, and it's just plain not good.
Even if another strong editorial voice (whether online or in print) also had a tendency to lean to the left, it would at least keep the D&C's editors on their toes. I believe their editorials would be more thoughtful, and I believe their page would be better. Until such a voice emerges, we're left here to lament yet another woe of being a one-newspaper town.
Read Part I of this series here.
2 comments:
I grant that the D&C is a Democratic paper, but IMO this isn't an example of one-sidedness. Instead, it's gutless inability to take a stand that might possibly offend anyone. The Gore and Leo examples might offend someone. But dinging Bush for failing to wear his seatbelt is the ultimate safe bet: everybody thinks seatbelt use is a good thing, and even staunch Bush supporters aren't going to be too upset if Bush gets a tweak for forgetting to buckle up.
Good editorial writers - left or right - would want to make enemies. Bad ones, like the D&C, just churn out a stream of drivel like this.
Well, I think we agree and disagree at the same time. I think it's a good example of both one-sidedness and gutlessness. Either way, drivel is a very good word.
Post a Comment