Letter: Tabloid journalism
I subscribe to The Recorder and enjoy reading the paper. Some of the writers, both reporters and columnists, are terrific at what they do.
I take issue, though, with The Recorder’s Friday and Saturday editions regarding their coverage of Albert Norman speaking at an Appointments and Ordinances Committee meeting. Simply put, the headlines and lead articles seemed to me to be inflammatory and one-sided; more in line with tabloid journalism than with the solid, small-town journalism that The Recorder most often offers.
The Recorder also covered the topic on the editorial page those days, including a lengthy editorial on Saturday. And while I have a different opinion from what was written, the pieces were placed in appropriate forums. The same cannot be said for the angry-toned, front-page articles, which more properly should have been placed alongside the other two pieces on the editorial page. Even better, the stories should have been rewritten, employing an objective voice and a proper journalistic approach.
The opening words on Friday’s article were: “It appears a Town Council Committee has created a new process, allowing a known sprawlbuster ...” My first take in reading the article was that this was a slanted opinion piece which echoed Joseph McCarthy-like language (“known sprawlbuster”), reminding me of McCarthy’s “known communist” taunts.
I can certainly understand The Recorder stirring the pot and staking out positions on their editorial pages, though I didn’t appreciate the tone or agree with their perspective. I do want to respond to one specific statement that The Recorder made about the process: “It shows a disdain for open and transparent government …” Actually the process was completely “open and transparent” as Mr. Norman appeared at a televised meeting of the committee to give his input. Are The Recorder’s motives in writing these articles “open and transparent?”