I've never read an editorial quite like the screed in last week's East Boston Times. There's almost no attempt to make a logical case for the position that casino gambling should be brought to Suffolk Downs; instead there's a collection of ridiculous hyperbole and a bunch of straw-man arguments.
According to the Nov. 4 editorial, "Negative vibes," those against bringing a casino to East Boston:
-- "stand against progress in this litigious world" and "prefer economic inertia to sound development and job creation"
-- believe a casino at Suffolk Downs would be an "immoral Tower of Babel"
-- believe a casino would be "ruinous in every measure."
-- believe a casino would require "twin eight lane highways costing $500 million" and that traffic will be "so bad that life is going to stop"
-- believe that "East Boston ...will be ruined if Suffolk Downs is developed"
-- believe that "East Boston ... will be obliterated, the fabric of the community torn, the civil society shredded, tattered beyond recognition with East Boston itself taking on the persona of a homicide victim brutally stabbed to death and left to bleed."
-- believe that, "Small business will be ruined. Housing values will tumble. Prostitution will take over. Drugs will flow."
-- believe that "East Boston becomes Sodom and Gomorrah and people looking back at the neighborhood will run the risk of turning themselves into pillars of salt."
Are they serious? Was this supposed to be an actual attempt to say something intelligent on an important matter? Bringing casino gambling to Massachusetts and, specifically, to East Boston is an issue that has legitimate arguments on both sides. Reasonable people can discuss the subject and reach different conclusions. With this ridiculous polemic, the Times completely ignores rational discussion.
Meanwhile, the Times' front-page story about a State House hearing on casino gambling reads like a transcript of comments by an official from Suffolk Downs. The article is completely one-sided for two reasons: first, the remarks aren't evaluated, investigated, fact-checked, scrutinized or analyzed; and second, no one else is quoted in the story. You mean to tell me that nobody showed up who was on the other side of the issue? Or did those who write the Times' editorials instruct their reporter to ignore anyone at the hearing who is against casino gambling?
35 comments:
There it is again Jimbo, your jealously of the Times. If its just a job you want there I can certainly call Josh for you.
You won't print this because your too embarrassed of the truth to be told.
Get over Jim, casino is coming and we'll get you a real job!
Hi Jim,
I agree with your description that there is intelligent discussion to be had on both sides.
Although I have not read the Times article depicted in your story, it does seem to me that the concerns have been reduced to absurd catch phrases and sound bites. I'm not sure which side is perpetuating that.
Clearly there are those among the decision makers that have vested interests in seeing a casino come to East Boston. I myself am not a proponent of the casino as I believe East Boston has born the burden for the rest of the city and state on enough projects without receiving value added mitigation and rewards.
That being said - there are ways that would likely make the prospect of adding a casino more palateable. If the powers that be would take the time to understand the concerns of the citizens of East Boston and nearby communities, rather than dismissing them as nonsensical rantings, there might be a way to coexist - or find another solution.
Jimbo do you find it amusing that the same people,and we all know who they are,(give me permission and I will name them for you publicly),keep writing in everytime the subject of the Times comes up?
They are very upset with your blog because you expose them.This newspaper will probably be out of business within the next two or three years anyway,but until then lets let them entertain us.
I just read all of those quotes from the Times and laughed. SERIOUSLY??
Honestly, how can someone say you are jealous of that newspaper?!
I love it when Jim teaches new words. "Bollocks" is listed as rubbish, nonsense or claptrap. Another entry explains it as testicles. So, the Times entertains us by having the testicular fortitude to spoon feed us nonsense that is espoused by the people who will reap the most benefit by the casino. Thanks, Jim, for the lesson.
I read the other story in last week's edition about the testimony given by proponents of Suffolk Downs who consider their property a preferred venue. One comment caused me concern. If, after all is said, studied and decided, a casino comes to East Boston, I was hoping to hear proponents articulate concrete promises to the host neighborhoods of East Boston and Revere. Instead of proffering that those communities would receive direct aid in real property tax relief to homeowners, it was hinted about "how much revenue a casino could generate for the state coffers." If we are going to be asked to bear the greatest burden, I don't want to see all the revenue sent to the black holes of the city and state coffers.
I think it's wrong for the paper to suggest that for 50 years residents have not been complaining to the state about the problems with Route 1A. One large problem for East Boston is the continued presence of the state trooper at the intersection of 1A and Boardman Streets. That detail officer assignment has long outlived its necessity, given the success of the Ted Willliams Tunnel and airport roadway improvements. Yet, East Boston residents continue to sit through countless light cycles while exiting or entering East Boston at that intersection, while North Shore commuters enjoy the benefit of being "pulled through" the traffic by the state trooper. Residents of Orient Heights have complained repeatedly to city and state elected officials and their respective transportation department employees for relief from that situation. The trooper is still there.
Residents have been persistent over recent years about their wanting a valid transportation study done of Route 1A as it relates to current density of trucking businesses, oil farms and passenger vehicles. It can hardly be said that we have been reticent about our concerns about traffic impacts to East Boston. It's just that residents are often left feeling that their concerns take a backseat to growth along Route 1A.
As long as so many in positions of power consider East Boston to be a cut through neighborhood, residents will continue to be wary of any new development, especially one of such a large scale.
Jim good job. A quick look at your posts for the last week didn't really get many hits so now you have dredged up last week's Times stories in a hope to get some people back on the blog. Hope your proud.
Face it, like it or not more people (perhaps as many as 15,000) read the Times every week and you get maybe the 6-10 people on the Blog.
Really get over it or start a paper of your own.
Your turning into Jim Mitchell from the Advocate where your entire existence is based on criticizing the Independent Newspaper Group.
How pathetic.
First your criticize the 'editorial'. I mean really Jim, the paper can't even have an opinion any more?
Then the news story which was nothing more than a straight news story reporting on what Suffolk Downs testified they would or plan to do.
Sorry Jim, I usually like coming on here but these attacks are dumb and unfounded and I beleive you just do it to stir something because most your hits are when your negative about the Times (and I hate to say this Jim but the majority are those jumping to thier defense).
Bryan
Hey Jimbo, it was a EDITORIAL and as the saying goes the Times are the utmost authority on THIER OWN OPINION whether you agree or not!
Keep up the good work John Lynds and the Times--I look forward to tomorrow's edition.
Expanded gaming or full scale resort-style casino’s in the Commonwealth are not going to be as epidemic as crack was in the 1980s as some suggested at last week’s public hearing at the State House.
However, it is also not going to solve all of the state’s fiscal woes as others would suggest.
Somewhere in the middle is where the truth lies.
While testimony came from all sides and angles last week, all eyes here in East Boston were focused on the testimony of Suffolk Downs Racetrack.
The famed local horse racing venue has long desired expanding gaming as a way to sure up its struggling thoroughbred industry and hopes to file for one of three gaming licenses if Governor Deval Patrick’s bill to legalize resort-style casinos in the state is approved by the legislature.
But before Suffolk Downs is given ‘permission to print money’ as some would put it, the racetrack and its ownership team led by Richard Fields would have to concede to some hefty mitigation that would include solid job creation and roadway and infrastructure improvements.
At last week’s hearing, Suffolk Downs’ Chief Operating Officer Chip Tuttle launched the racetracks next round of salvos aimed at convincing the legislature that the racetrack is not only interested in a gaming license but is willing to create local jobs and improve infrastructure surrounding the track.
That's the first 7, yes 7 paragraphs. What's the problem Jim, seems pretty straight forward without being overly pro-Suffolk Downs. The rest of the story reports on what they 'promise' for the community. Now we can hold it over thier head.
That is quite an opening sentence, huh?
I can't see why people read all these ominous motives into Jim's blog. He is talking about things that are interesting to him, one of which is what he sees as the slanted and sometimes not very professional local paper. You might not agree with him, but that doesn't mean he wants a job at the paper or that he's just throwing this post out there to stir up comments. Plenty of other posts he has written with way more comments. These "conspiracy theories" about Jim's motives are just silly.
Although, if Jim started his own paper, I'd be the first in line to advertise in it.
15,000 readers Bryan? Really? Do they even print that many papers?
Jim knows what he's doing and for those not familiar with the inside baseball going on here!
I beleive they print 8 to 12,000 a week and most are gone by Thursday.
Got mine this morning at Lanzilli's and it had some nice stuff in it this week.
What really bothers me about Jim's attacks is that he never pays them a compliment so he's completely one sided here. He has it out for them, for whatever reason, plain and simple.
He did use to work there, maybe they fired him or something.
To Anonymous at 4:38: "Nice stuff," huh? You must mean the gratuitous pics of the same old group at the Santarpios luncheon. It's been asked often, but bears repeating: how many people live in East Boston? And how many stories about those people are ever in Josh's and John's paper?
The Times is a great newspaper and there seems to be alot of jealousness going on. Jimo, the only time theres this amount of posts is when the Times is mentioned. Doubt me? Go back and look at older posts, its a fact.
Still more posts than the Times gets letters to the editor.
Jim said...
That is quite an opening sentence, huh?
November 10, 2009 11:31 PM
Anonymous said...
To Anonymous at 4:38: "Nice stuff," huh? You must mean the gratuitous pics of the same old group at the Santarpios luncheon. It's been asked often, but bears repeating: how many people live in East Boston? And how many stories about those people are ever in Josh's and John's paper?
November 11, 2009 5:23 PM
Hey, Jimbo looks like your style. I'd be careful calling pictures of your boss gratuitous!
Not so fast anon at 6:24 - Cider Doughnuts would appear to generate just about the same amount of controversy
I never post anonymously, but the sentiment is one I've expressed before and I have no trouble repeating: the Times publishes photos of the same people every week ... and they're generally static photos with posed subjects. Not very interesting.
Seriously, John and Josh, do you really want to insinuate that not many people in East Boston would know to use a word like gratuitous? Then, again, monosyllabic words may be more in keeping with the Times literary style.
In answer to N.starluna's question. The Times is currently printing three thousand copies per week. The rumor that the paper is printed out of state is not true. Lanzilli's and the White Hen on Byron street both get 150 copies each.I know people at the Revere Journal who informed me as to the circulation, and asked the people at both stores. I go into both of those stores often and know the employees well.
To Jimbo, do you really think taking a photograph of a 2liter bottle of cider is exciting? C'mon Jimbo, you opened yourself with that one. I'd like to see more photographs of beautiful women taking a stroll than cider.
Thank you anonymous on 11/12 at 8:59. If this is true, then the Times prints enough copies for 10% of the EB adult population. Indeed, less than 10% because the population of EB has likely grown since the 2000 census. No wonder I never seem to be able to find a copy of it anywhere.
Why would anyone want to look for work at a newspaper? That'd be like trying to look for work at a horse-buggy repair shop in the 1930s.
News Flash..
Eastie needs something to help the neighborhood out. Everyone that bought houses to turn the place around is upside down and unless something happens it will always be a miserable convient place.
Clean up Eastie
News flash: Not everyone who bought a house in Eastie is upside down.
The only people who need to worry about being upside down are those who want to move. If you aren't planning on selling, and unless you have a 1980s era interest rate at 2004 mortgage, you don't have much to worry about.
Another news flash: not everyone in Eastie is stupid and led by the hyperbole they hear on the TV news, or in the Eastie Times.
To: NStarluna, are you kidding me? Your attacking the Times. You mentioned in a blog how you read it every week. What a joke, now your on the kick ass bandwagon too!
You speak out of both sides dear, I suggest you stay with one point of view because now you have shown your true colors
Calling someone "dear" in this day and age just shows what a dinosaur you are, Anonymous. My guess is that you could never begin to carry even water for N.starluna, let alone compete in an intelligent debate with her.
N.starluna: you have developed quite a following through Jim's blog.
Hmmm, is it fair to respond to someone who does not know how to make a contraction or use a period? What do you all think?
I could rebut the nonsense of anonymous of 11/14 at 11:43, but I just don't think it would be very satisfying.
Nope, I think the best use of my time is in putting away the laundry, grading my student papers, and reading a book.
Anonymous at 11:23 makes no sense. I look at the Times as well and I don't see that as being hypocritical. And, again, I'm not sure why anyone would get so ruffled at criticism of the Times. An engaged public should be critical of government and of the press. I am just fulfilling my role as a citizen in a democracy.
To NStarluna and Jim: You both must live in Jupiter. I bet neither one of you contribute to this community. As a matter of fact I know neither one of you do.
Nstarluna, I would never have my kids taught in your class because in my opinion you would corrupt them with your ideas.
I hope the both of you stay in your clouds and never come out!
How many years have you, Anonymous at 3:41 p.m., worked at non-profit organizations in the neighborhood?
I'm not saying that this is the only, or best, criteria, but -- as you raised the issue -- this criteria certainly should be considered. And unless you've done so for two decades, I've got you there.
I'm sorry Jimbo, did you get paid for it? Oh yeah, I got you my pal.
I didn't and don't get paid for volunteering which you wouldn't know because you did receive money. Right Jimbo?
Post a Comment