Media: Can’t win on the merits, attack the personalities
The anonymous writer of today’s editorial woke up and discovered that sometimes the questioning gets a little intense on the floor of the Peoria City Council. The anonymous letter writer decided to respond to this by delivering an anonymous attack on the personalities of those members of the Peoria City Council who seem to be taking a stand contrary to that taken by the anonymous member of the editorial board, which is that the Library Board’s wishes, must be obeyed, without question. Too bad the anonymous letter writer didn’t happen to notice that for the most part the answers to these questions were evasive and lacked any rational basis.
And just once, I’d like to see the award-winning (snicker) editorial page of Peoria’s one and only newspaper of record address this question: By what rational (not emotional) basis does the Library Board think they need to expand the Lakeview Branch after they build the new far north Peoria branch, considering that many of the Lakeview Branch’s current customers will live closer to the new branch? I’d get snippy too if I kept asking that question and didn’t get any answer.
June 22nd, 2008 at 9:38 pm
I was very disappointed in today’s editorial. It was short on substance and long on snark. That would be OK for a blog, ah-hem, but I have come to expect more from the PJStar.
Why do they have it in for Ardis, anyway? Did someone steal someone elses prom-date a long time ago or what?
June 22nd, 2008 at 9:47 pm
Conspiracy theories abound as to why the JS hates Ardis. Ardis had the audacity to make them look bad. They backed Dave Ransberg in a big way, Randburg lost badly.
Alxso, the JS has a long-standing with Peoria firefighters, who the Journal Star blames for everything because they insist on earning a decent wage for their work. Also, a former firefighter once punched an edit board member in the face. And Jim Ardis is brother to the union president.
Plus, Mike Bailey is an ego-driven dweeb.
For whatever reason, because of the history of the sloppy reporting and personal attacks on Jim Ardis, nothing the JS prints about him or anyone who tends to support him can be taken seriously.
June 22nd, 2008 at 10:18 pm
Well I guess they will hate Ardis all over again when he wins re-election in a landslide.
June 22nd, 2008 at 10:41 pm
Oh, absolutely. Ardis isn’t perfect, to be sure, but the city is safer and cleaner and more honestly run than any time during the reign of the JS’s favored “progressives.”
Snort.
The fact that the award-winning (snicker) edit board favored RANSBURG is all the evidence I need at how fundamentally corrupt the bosses are at the JS.
June 22nd, 2008 at 10:53 pm
I wouldn’t call it corrupt – perhaps “not in touch” on this issue.
June 22nd, 2008 at 10:56 pm
OK … corrupt is a loaded word. “Out of touch?” To say the least. But I can’t get over how the JS went out of its way to make readers think the very worst of Ardis, Sandberg, Van Auken and Manning.
June 23rd, 2008 at 7:02 am
It does reek of, at worst, bias and at best, a lack of professionalism.
We have been agreeing far too much lately, Billy. This worries me. Seriously.
June 23rd, 2008 at 8:17 am
Sounds like something Reno would do.
June 24th, 2008 at 4:23 pm
[...] that go toward the library. Interestingly, I hear that Patrick Nichting — who was among those villified by the Journal Star for being insufficiently subservient when questioning the library board that the council itself [...]
June 24th, 2008 at 5:13 pm
Speaking of short on substance and long on snark, would you care to elaborate, Billy, on your assertion that “for the most part the answers to these questions were evasive and lacked any rational basis”? I thought they answered all the questions directly when they could, and offered to get the answers to the council when they didn’t have the information immediately at hand. They were certainly professional and non-confrontational even in the face of open hostility from the council members.