Cambridge Editor Leaving Paper
Scott Wachtler is not the first Editor of this paper to recognize the apathy of Cambridge voters toward misguided government priorities. (Scott Wachtler, "So long, Cambridge -- thanks for the stories," Cambridge Chronicle, November 1, 2012) His unique perspective as editor of the local paper gave him access to public officials, readers, and voters. Cambridge voters do not care about corruption. Not all voters, but many of them. Cambridge was a different city before rent control was repealed in 1995. More voters attended City Council meetings and more voters spoke out about abuses of power, negligence, waste of taxpayer funds, and corruption. Seventeen years later the demography of Cambridge is changed. Fewer working class voters. (I know, Harvard University professors see themselves as working class.)
When concerned citizens confront officials with violations of state laws and city ordinances, the typical response from public officials is "Will you shut up!" Today Cambridge residents prefer to give money than to confront abuses of government officials. They do not want to get involved. Wealthy academics and academic wannabes dominate the population in Cambridge in 2012. One study showed that only 25 percent of the City population has been in the city for more than 5 years. The few citizens who do care about corruption are derided, ridiculed and humiliated by public officials, journalists (with exceptions), and wealthy citizens. It is revealing that critics of the Cambridge Chronicle ask "Are you trying to be like the Herald?" The Boston Globe does not do reform of state and local government unless or until corruption is exposed by other media. The Kennedy cult Democrats run Massachusetts for many years. Kennedy supporters are more highly concentrated in Cambridge and at the Globe, than elsewhere in the Commonwealth.
Middlesex County government was dissolved due to corruption. In the 1940s Cambridge was so thoroughly corrupt the form of city government was changed to the current Plan E. But that did not end the problems. It all depends upon who runs the government. In England they have a term "rotten borough" for jurisdictions like Cambridge, that are corrupt no matter what is done to combat it.
Wachtler was up against more than the usual resistance to scrutiny by public officials. Cambridge voters do not want honest government. They prefer easy access, relaxed rectitude, and optional law enforcement. One journalist revealed after some hard hitting reporting of government negligence, his boss told him, "We have to live with these people." He did not want to offend "these (government) people." Like Scott he left that media venue.
A few years ago Walter Cronkhite lamented at Harvard University's Kennedy School that once the salaries of journalists were raised to high levels the quality of reporting dropped. Journalists now earning millions of dollars a year want to get invited to dinners given by and for the people they used to cover when reporting. So they write positive stories and eliminate the negative. One other journalist explained the reason they do not criticize officials in government, at corporations and universities is because they do not want to offend their "sources." It is not a good time for journalism or for free expression in the United States.
http://www.wickedlocal.com/
So long, Cambridge -- thanks for the stories
By Scott Wachtler swachtler (at) wickedlocal.com
Cambridge Chronicle
Posted Nov 01, 2012 @ 08:00 AM
No comments:
Post a Comment