News-Press Cape Life shows part of the story.
I've been known to state things contrary to the News-Press a number of times during this UEP investigation and discussion. I personally feel that it is important to tell the entire story, even if the answer isn't something that we want to hear.
I reviewed the Cape Life section of the paper this morning, along with an introductory article on the front page of the paper. Several things immediately jumped out at me.
First, the price for services to the residents changed three times from the front page of the paper, to the front of Cape Life, to the second page of Cape Life. 28k on the Front page, by Jeff Cull, 25k on the Intro area on the front of Cape Life, and 24k in Tom Hayden's introduction on the second page.
Next, going through the 'Key Players' they left out at least one very important key player on staff, Mr. Chuck Pavlos. Mr. Pavlos is not only heavily involved, he is ultimately responsible with maintaining the system as it comes online. His modifications to processes, and his guiding hand are responsible for many of the tweeks, and savings they have been able to put in place for us.
Lastly, they chose a forum thread to cover as a news story. They listed a handful of posts from a thread related to flooding in a neighborhood. This thread had nothing to do with the Utility Expansion at all. It was instead a story about a new school being built, and the flooding caused during an extremely heavy downpour. They left out any posts other than the most inflammatory, and decided not to post anything about the outcome.
For your edification, the entirety of the original post is here: I want the NP to look into a construction site! After the situation was resolved, a new thread was created, and the outcome of the complaint was listed here: Have to give credit where credit is due!
News-Press, I'm disappointed. You want to investigate, and place yourself in a position of trust, for the people. You want us to believe in your investigative power as journalists. You want us to purchase your paper, because you are 'watchdogs' of the City's interest. If you wish to be in this position, you need to display the entire story, not just the part that supports your current position.
I reviewed the Cape Life section of the paper this morning, along with an introductory article on the front page of the paper. Several things immediately jumped out at me.
First, the price for services to the residents changed three times from the front page of the paper, to the front of Cape Life, to the second page of Cape Life. 28k on the Front page, by Jeff Cull, 25k on the Intro area on the front of Cape Life, and 24k in Tom Hayden's introduction on the second page.
Next, going through the 'Key Players' they left out at least one very important key player on staff, Mr. Chuck Pavlos. Mr. Pavlos is not only heavily involved, he is ultimately responsible with maintaining the system as it comes online. His modifications to processes, and his guiding hand are responsible for many of the tweeks, and savings they have been able to put in place for us.
Lastly, they chose a forum thread to cover as a news story. They listed a handful of posts from a thread related to flooding in a neighborhood. This thread had nothing to do with the Utility Expansion at all. It was instead a story about a new school being built, and the flooding caused during an extremely heavy downpour. They left out any posts other than the most inflammatory, and decided not to post anything about the outcome.
For your edification, the entirety of the original post is here: I want the NP to look into a construction site! After the situation was resolved, a new thread was created, and the outcome of the complaint was listed here: Have to give credit where credit is due!
News-Press, I'm disappointed. You want to investigate, and place yourself in a position of trust, for the people. You want us to believe in your investigative power as journalists. You want us to purchase your paper, because you are 'watchdogs' of the City's interest. If you wish to be in this position, you need to display the entire story, not just the part that supports your current position.
posted by Lloyd at 5:38 AM
Subscribe Here.
4 Comments:
I read those articles as well and I find that you are not completely accurate either. Case in point....
On page 1 of the Newspress the reporter stated
"Assessments for new sewer, water and irrigation lines peaked in the latest expansion area to about $22,000. With other fees added, the cost jumped to nearly $28,000 for a typical two-lot site."
Note the word "about" and "nearly"
On the first page of the Cape Life section the reporter stated
"Owners of typical homestites are now facing total bills of about $25,000 and those costs could go higher for those who haven't gotten the service yet."
Note the words "about and "could"
On page 2 of Cape Life the reporter stated
"Our online forums at newspress.com continue to be filled with people upset that they have to pay in excess of $24,000 for the assessments and hookups for a two-lot site."
Note the words "in excess of $24,000".
If I were reading this piece as someone not aware of what was going on here I would never have come to the conclusion you did, the figures presented were approximate and stated as such, quite frankly, our current assessments are approximates as well. I find nothing in this regard to be inaccurate or inconsistent.
Also, the forum thread regardng the flooding wasn't the only piece quoted. Furthermore, there really isn't much "good" posted in the Newspress forums to write about.
Now, radio, I realize that this is your blog, I'm not defending the Newspress or downplaying your role in investigating this story, but I do have to hope that you heed this quote that you posted at the bottom of your blog today
"If you wish to be in this position, you need to display the entire story, not just the part that supports your current position."
I look forward to your updates and normally consider you to be fair and willing to look at the whole picture before forming your opinion. Your entry today puzzles me.
A couple of different people today have said that they think my take on NP's Cape Life section may have been a bit unfair.
I'm really very concerned about the opportunity they had to expand on the whole of the story. They chose to stick with one side only. I decided to display the other side, to counter the work that they put out. It appears they wouldn't need any help showing the bleak side of the situation.
As to the forum postings, they stated that they followed only one thread. They didn't display all takes on that thread, only the ones that were inflammatory. They didn't display any of the follow up. I simply put a link to both threads in my article. Feel free to read them both, and get a fuller picture than the one the NP gave everyone in the Cape Life section of the paper today.
If you're puzzled, maybe I can clear it up further, by saying that I am continually disappointed in the choices made by the News-Press in regards to the UEP. I want action, I want fair representation of costs, and I want a fair discussion on the story.
The NP needs to stick with one format when presenting the pricing. They either need to stick with just the estimated assessments and then mention that there are additional costs. OR they need to mention the estimated cost with the assessments included. By doing it both ways within the article they are confusing those who aren't familiar with the situation. Those of us "in the know" realize that there are two sets of numbers but those from outside the area may not be.
Lloyd, I do agree with you regarding the fact that the NP left out the followup to the flooding post, it would have been a nice reflection on the city had it been included. As far as the nitpicking over the figures presented, the articles were written by different journalists, furthermore, the figures were stated as approximates, and I personally took that as such, remember, everyone's assessment can be slightly different based on the size of their property.
Post a Comment
<< Home