Mr. Ambivalence
Dear Readers,
Here we are, hours away from the election and Mr. Ambivalence is still sitting in my lap. I remain uneasy about the incumbent due to her lack of vision, her reactive policies, and her reputation of indifference and even hostility toward grassroots activists. Though the challenger has vision, is proactive, and claims to be open to activists, I'm disappointed that he is so focused on budgetary-economic reform. I know these are important and that in reality budgetary matters are the chief concern of elected city officials, but my ideal candidate would have a vision that's a bit . . . higher, . . . more focused on social, environmental, and political issues. I'd like a candidate that focuses primarily on development, who has creative ways to bring in the sort we want and keep out the sort we don't.
Now that I've concluded that the incumbent will win, however, I feel a sense of loss. Although I'm wary of his aims and his allies, I'd still like to see a change: some fresh blood in office, a different approach, and a spur to citizen involvement -- even if it is to rally against the new mayor.
This is something akin to wishing conservative Republicans come to power so it will galvanize opposition to them.
So, on election eve, my vote is floating like a feather. It could blow in any direction and is just as likely to come down on a protest vote for Rudy, or for someone like Joy Austin-Lane, who I wish had run.
- Gilbert
PS. Voter info from the city website:
City Election - November 8, 2005. Polls Open 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. The single polling place will be in the Computer Learning Center (rooms between the Community Center and the Library - please see the map). Voter parking will be in the rear parking lot - enter the lot from Philadelphia Avenue. Voters who are walking may enter from the rear parking lot or they may enter the polling place by crossing the pedestrian walkway from Maple Avenue.
See the website for the map and other information such as a sample ballot: www.takomagov.org/index.html
posted by William L. Brown @ 5:44 PM
8 Comments:
Gilbert,
Thank you for fostering a reflective approach to the election. You've performed a public service with style and wit. But your dogged devotion to even-handedness has dispelled your disguise: you, Gilbert, are all of us.
You're on to me, T.
- G
I've enjoyed your blog, even though I'm not technically a TP resident. I hope you continue to discuss local issues here even after the election is history, as it now appears to be.
The others on the TP mailing list still seem to be bewildered about the results; but I have a highly esoteric, uber-high tech source of insider info: the front page of the Washington Post Metro section.
What's this I hear that Takoma Voice endorsement of Kathy Porter was by Howard Kohn? Two people have told me this. He was campaigning for her and they let him write the editoral? Is that true?
What's this I hear that Takoma Voice endorsement of Kathy Porter was by Howard Kohn? Two people have told me this. He was campaigning for her and they let him write the editoral? Is that true?
Kathy was probably busy campaigning.
Well, if you heard it from two people, then it must be true (joke). One of my assistants came into the office with this story, so I know to some extent where this is coming from (and I was a little surprised). I will say that the subtextual level of this election seemed particularly dynamic.
I did talk with many people as I considered whether or not to endorse. In the end, I sat down with my own thoughts and wrote the editorial for the Voice. I chose to keep it positive, focusing on why I thought Kathy ought to be re-elected.
On a similar topic, every election this does come up--whether or not the Voice should endorse. It is the tradition of newspapers to do so. The Post endorses. So does the New York Times. But in a municipal election, the fishbowl is so small that people do wonder why a local rag like the Voice weighs in. Of course, I've endorsed enough candidates who have gone on to lose that I am unsure how much it matters anyway.
In every election, I take pains to give readers enough information to make independent decisions. This election, I was more thorough than usual. At the election forum, I used a method that some consider boring. I ask each candidate identical questions, screening out accusations and rhetorical flourishes (which often arrive with the question from the audience), so that they are fair for each candidate.
In the election edition, I published an extensive questionnaire from each candidate. This year, I solicited letters from supporters of each candidate asking why they were voting for Seth, Kathy, Colleen, or Eileen. I found that really interesting. In fact, those letters gave me a lot to think about.
Finally, I assign a writer to cover the election independently. I think that Julie Scharper did an excellent job this year. She's a graduate journalism student at the University of Maryland, and a new resident of Takoma Park. I have no idea how she voted or even if she did vote. Her job was to cover the races with objectivity. In fact, as a Ward 2 resident, she decided that she could not cover that race for the November issue as the election neared, and we scrambled to find another reporter.
Bill Brown also works independently. I don't know what will show up until it arrives. This month, I made an editorial decision in Seth's favor. When I felt that the cartoon was too pointedly satiric of Seth, I ran the previous month's cartoon as well to try to lend some balance.
Balance and fair coverage is what I strive for, and I do impose disciplines to achieve this, often ignoring my own disposition on a particular matter. I am well aware that it is not always perceived that way. Maybe we need an ombudsman. It is occasionally amusing when I have someone on the phone raking me over the coals for slanted coverage when my own opinion is actually in line with that of the caller. However, I assigned a writer to cover a story and did not doctor the article to fit my view.
Still, I am open about my views, and hold them independently. I am also aware of the importance of covering all views, and cannot be dissuaded from that mission.
Often, I hear from two sides on an issue, both unhappy with the coverage of the other point of view in an article. I suppose that is success. But my goal is not to make everyone unhappy. Nor is it to make anyone in particular happy. I try to serve the community as best I can by informing and providing a forum.
Letters have been a recent area in which bias has been alleged. On the one hand, I hear from one side that I am running too many letters from a particular point of view. On the other hand I'm taken to task for not monitoring length adequately. Anyone who observed the production of the Voice as a tiny staff throws it together would see that getting to the press is the only priority at a certain point. I am pleased when we get letters from any point of view, and do my best to run them all.
As I often say when someone is complaining about coverage in the Voice: write a letter. I want to hear from you.
Eric Bond
Eric, I think the Voice election coverage was decent overall. Putting aside the endorsement -- and I also heard the rumors that Howard had written it -- there were minor avoidable factual errors in some stories but no howlers.
Seth
By the way, I really hate this blog format. It serves Gilbert well but comments have second-class status and that's not good.
Seth
Post a Comment
<< Home