Herald wants to add interest
Herald wants to add interest
The Herald wants to know what it can do to make elections more “interesting”. Boy, I thought I’d get three days off and then Scott Ayers writes this nonsense in today’s paper. Scott really talks down
The Herald wants to know what it can do to make elections more "interesting". Boy, I thought I'd get three days off and then Scott Ayers writes this nonsense in today's paper. Scott really talks down to us readers and lectures us and complains that not enough of us voted. This is too rich.
Scott, you run the opinion pages and, as you have told us, you have nothing to do with news reporting. But you can walk across the room and talk with the news editors over there. Instead of asking us readers why we don't vote you might ask your news editors why they don't provide us voters with coverage of the candidates, the forums, the issues and the development of the campaigns. Maybe people don't vote because there is so little coverage of the election in our own daily newspaper. One way you can make election coverage more "interesting" is to have conprehensive election coverage.
Campaign news reports only started in the Herald several weeks after filing was over. Some candidates were 'covered' with a few questions in one or two articles. Some forums - including the packed house at the county courthouse for the last forum and the only one with all seven mayor candidates - were not covered at all by the Herald. No reporter attended. Not a word was printed. Hell, the Herald was even skimpy in telling voters about that forum. It seemed as if the Herald was afraid we readers could not handle a lot of campaign reporting.
In Sam Taylor, the Herald has a good, young and aggressive political reporter. I've watched him and read his stuff. He gets it and could do a better job of reporting than anyone else out there if allowed. But I know how the Herald operates and they probably feel that more political reporting will not get them more advertisements. And advertising revenue is the prime concern of the Herald publisher, not comprehensive election reporting. Scott Ayers knows this as well. And all the rest of us noted the lack of coverage. Every political activist in the county that I talked to this summer was disappointed in the lack of campaign coverage by the Herald.
The Herald probably will not release any numbers of how many people read their top-rated election story that ranked 185th of their web site. I wonder how that compares with the hobby-like effort on my part at this website. (this is strictly a personal-free-time thing). I got an average of about 200 visitors per day during August. But the statistic that astounds me is from one mayoral candidate website that got 867 referrals from NwCitizen during the same weeks they got 151 from the Herald website. A referral is tech talk for a person clicking a link on this page to go to another website. Hmmm Maybe I should accept advertising.
Scott, the Herald can make elections more "interesting" by reporting on the candidates and issues in a comprehensive manner. Starting this week. We would all be delighted and we could all vote more intelligently.
Scott, you run the opinion pages and, as you have told us, you have nothing to do with news reporting. But you can walk across the room and talk with the news editors over there. Instead of asking us readers why we don't vote you might ask your news editors why they don't provide us voters with coverage of the candidates, the forums, the issues and the development of the campaigns. Maybe people don't vote because there is so little coverage of the election in our own daily newspaper. One way you can make election coverage more "interesting" is to have conprehensive election coverage.
Campaign news reports only started in the Herald several weeks after filing was over. Some candidates were 'covered' with a few questions in one or two articles. Some forums - including the packed house at the county courthouse for the last forum and the only one with all seven mayor candidates - were not covered at all by the Herald. No reporter attended. Not a word was printed. Hell, the Herald was even skimpy in telling voters about that forum. It seemed as if the Herald was afraid we readers could not handle a lot of campaign reporting.
In Sam Taylor, the Herald has a good, young and aggressive political reporter. I've watched him and read his stuff. He gets it and could do a better job of reporting than anyone else out there if allowed. But I know how the Herald operates and they probably feel that more political reporting will not get them more advertisements. And advertising revenue is the prime concern of the Herald publisher, not comprehensive election reporting. Scott Ayers knows this as well. And all the rest of us noted the lack of coverage. Every political activist in the county that I talked to this summer was disappointed in the lack of campaign coverage by the Herald.
The Herald probably will not release any numbers of how many people read their top-rated election story that ranked 185th of their web site. I wonder how that compares with the hobby-like effort on my part at this website. (this is strictly a personal-free-time thing). I got an average of about 200 visitors per day during August. But the statistic that astounds me is from one mayoral candidate website that got 867 referrals from NwCitizen during the same weeks they got 151 from the Herald website. A referral is tech talk for a person clicking a link on this page to go to another website. Hmmm Maybe I should accept advertising.
Scott, the Herald can make elections more "interesting" by reporting on the candidates and issues in a comprehensive manner. Starting this week. We would all be delighted and we could all vote more intelligently.
