...we posted under the title “An explanation, please?” It concerned a morning paper story headed, “Brewer, Hogsett need to share plans” which described a meeting of the two mayoral candidates with the paper’s editorial board. The author was disappointed in a lack of specifics in campaigns.
Yesterday we got an editorial headlined “Indy voters deserve better.” The point seems to be a lack of “debates” which presumably would enlighten voters. A specific paragraph which caught our attention was as follows:
“The scheduled debate time is simply not enough to adequately explore the many complex challenges and opportunities facing this city, and for voters to get a firm handle on which candidate is best qualified to lead Indy for the next four years.”
It occurred to us, perhaps wrongly, that one of the main reasons for existence of a daily newspaper is the use of its own personnel to dig out, verify and print the very type of material suggested in the editorial.
We plead ignorance. Which individual at a daily paper decides what is truly important to its readers and to the welfare of their city? We don’t know. But we were disappointed by that decision in this morning’s paper.
Section A - twelve pages - presumably carrying general news of interest and importance. Of those twelve, one is devoted to a football game, including most of the front page for art and text, and a little more than five are paid advertising.
Section B - six pages - carries the Gannett version of national news, with two of the pages devoted to sports and entertainment.
Section C - twelve pages - of sports news, with approximately one quarter of one page used for an ad. So we have about two thirds of the total content of this morning’s paper devoted to sports, while editorial policy continues to be a more than likely vain hope that something really germane to city government improvement will come out of a “debate.”
It’s time to ask your own serious questions about specific issues, and throw away all the press releases. They're not reliable, Mr. Editor!!