Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Called the city, spoke to - well - played toss the call to a bunch of different people because none of us know anything staffers. I wrote down so many names I can't honestly say who I spoke to that had some idea of what I was talking much less the desire to do anything about it. I had to slowly direct them to the site, they were in the CURA office, directed there from the Mayor's office because I was told the Mayor is too busy for something like this. CURA, the organization that has the job of putting the best face on the city was not aware of the website much less of the photo. When I finally got them to it, their reaction?
"Oh that is a really nice photo, I recall being told how much it cost to have it done. I do not think they will take it down just because the civic center has had a refresh."
A REFRESH!?!?
I am counter-punched all the time because I point out the shortcomings of all civil servants. But, I think I am reserved for not calling these morons, moron to their face. I called the Civic Center and spoke to some underling, because the people that matter were too busy for this sort of thing - I see a trend here. She said, "Well, it is still the civic center, I do not see a problem. Won't it be a nice surprise when people get here and see all that we have done?"
I thanked her for her time and hung up. I thought ok, maybe it is just government. So I called WCHS-TV thinking maybe they needed some filler story for soft news. I was told that they were restricted from doing any negative stories about the city and especially down near the Town Center and Civic Center.
Now, what does everyone here think about all of that?
Edit - By the way, the photo is still there, a week later.
If true, wouldn't that tread on the First Amendment? Freedom of the press?
Or did they mean that their producers are restricting them? I interpreted that both ways.
If true, wouldn't that tread on the First Amendment? Freedom of the press?
Or did they mean that their producers are restricting them? I interpreted that both ways.
I really do not know. But, being West Virginia, it can mean a host of things, which is a sadness all of its own. I will be gracious here and assume it is local policy for the station based on the whims or whatever manager is present. I am sure there are backroom discussion all around the city from CURA to the Mayor to the CVB to the mall owners (US Bank) to the various merchants actually paying some of the bills in taxes like Brickstreet and United Bank. Through the course of the conversation, it is not a stretch to imagine that all one of those parties had to say was, "If you could resist a news story about this or that concerning this or that negative factor, I would really appreciate the gesture and I could then find my way to be reciprocal in the future.
Quid pro Quo.
It happens a lot in local government. The only surprise to me was that someone said it out loud to an unknown on the telephone.
If true, wouldn't that tread on the First Amendment? Freedom of the press?
Or did they mean that their producers are restricting them? I interpreted that both ways.
WCHS-TV is owned by Sinclair Broadcast Group. Sinclair often sends out "must carry" stories for the TV stations and dictates some specific policies from corporate headquarters to their various broadcast stations.
Personally, I think news coverage was better when the fairness doctrine was still the law of the land.
WCHS-TV is owned by Sinclair Broadcast Group. Sinclair often sends out "must carry" stories for the TV stations and dictates some specific policies from corporate headquarters to their various broadcast stations.
Personally, I think news coverage was better when the fairness doctrine was still the law of the land.
That's what I was alluding to in my previous post. Go perform a Google search regarding Sinclair Broadcast Group and you'll understand that the idea of a 'free press' doesn't exist with them.
That's what I was alluding to in my previous post. Go perform a Google search regarding Sinclair Broadcast Group and you'll understand that the idea of a 'free press' doesn't exist with them.
Most media groups cater to their interests groups. And that is mostly local governments and sponsorships.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
