Yesterday, the Morning Call ran it's second exposé on incumbent spending. In the first report we learned that Julie Harhart was one of the biggest spenders in the State House. Yesterday's edition dealt with hiring outside consultants at even more expense to the taxpayers. As a blogger who values brevity, I have issue with the length of these multi-page series. Do voters who choose the same incumbents election after election really read 10,000 word articles? As a candidate and voter in the November election, I have a bigger problem with the absurd timing of the series. The first installment appeared two weeks after the election, but 23 months before the next one. The articles are too late to help the voters in the recent election, and too early to be meaningful for the next one.
Mike, I thought the story of an incumbent playing a corpse in a play rather ironic. Julie Harhart has been an actual corpse in the Statehouse for over a decade. And Yes, isn't it nice how they waited until AFTER the election?!
ReplyDeleteThis is funny.
ReplyDeleteI mean, funny as in..oddly timed, and of zero value to the voter.
What hacks.
I don't mind the length and think the piece was well done. But your right the timing makes zero sense.
ReplyDeleteAbsolutely useless to voters who will long forget this... When the time comes once again to cast votes most will go to polls thinking the problem is everyone else's legislator. Not theirs.
Hey!
ReplyDeleteNobody said doing propaganda was easy.
So, I think we all need to lighten up on the esteemed local newspaper.
PS - Happy Chanukah, Comrade Molovinsky.
Sincerely,
Col. Viktor Tikhonov
Soviet Red Army (ret)