Media Cranks
Post by Fred Jandt
Editor, Mass Transit
If there is one thing that I can’t stand, it’s self-proclaimed “journalists” who use the media as a personal soapbox. Nothing gets me more irritated than these cranks who try to tell me what I should think. Actually, no, the thing that gets me more irritated than that are the blind followers these New Age “prophets” gather in droves who mindlessly spew back their “truths” as if they were quoting from a textbook.
Okay, I’m not opposed to pointing a finger at myself. I know that this blog is largely my opinion, but I’m not trying to hide that behind words like “report,” this is a position piece and it is clearly stated in the title. And it’s separated from the news section, not wrapped up in it.
Let’s break out Webster here for a minute. Webster defines journalism as “the collection and editing of news for presentation through the media” and “writing characterized as a direct presentation of facts or description of events without an attempt at interpretation.” In other words, to quote Dragnet, “Just the facts, m’am.”
So what got me all fired up about this and how does it relate to transit? Well, I saw a news piece this week that stated that transit officials were more interested in building the system they could instead of what could work. Now, I admit, this was more op-ed piece than news, but hiding your opinions within a news story doesn’t suddenly stop it from masquerading as a news story and proclaiming it as an editorial piece.
Okay, so my first reaction to this was, huh? You have to be kidding me. Sure, historically I can see transit agencies being created under the principle of showmanship more than ridership, but with all of the legalities and funding issues they are faced with today, I just don’t believe that is, or could, be the case anymore. It’s not like transit agencies are swimming in money. Most of them have to fight to get what funding they can and process intolerable amounts of paperwork just to qualify for the review process for some funding. I know of at least one agency that has a full-time grant writer on its staff to help get such funding.
That comment then reminded me of a line from a movie. The person talking about transit here isn’t the least bit interested in solving traffic problems. “He’s interested in two things, making you afraid of it and telling you who to blame for it.”
I can’t help but look at this analogy for transit when it comes to the media. We’re always seeing how:
- Transit officials are wasting money.
- Agencies are “greedy” and want more and more tax money.
- Transit officials don’t know what they are doing.
- Transit is a waste of time since we already have cars.
I just sigh when I look at stories like that. That isn’t just how you win elections, it’s also how you get readers — by making them afraid of it and telling them who to blame for it.
Thanks for reading the MT Position, updated every Thursday.
Fred
April 5th, 2007 at 3:54 pm
“transit officials were more interested in building the system they could instead of what could work.”
Right. They’re interested in building what they can NOW. Maybe it isn’t what would really work better if they had more money, but building a transit system is an incremental process. I believe that they will build increments that work “for now.”
I recognize that the negative spin on this quote is that systems might be built only because the NIMBYs and the environmental hurdles can be avoided. There are so many checks in the process of getting systems funded that I can’t quite believe that can happen.
April 7th, 2007 at 11:34 am
Even though some (or most?) transit systems may operate at a loss, in my opinion, they give back much more to the communities they serve in the form of enhance commerce and trade. You can see this with the development along their right of ways. They also make our cities “livable” again.