First off, I do not write the comments that people post on this blog. I try to delete those that are lurid, obscene or make vicious allegations that I don't know to be true. But sometimes I hit the wrong button and even those get posted. If that happens, let me know (tell me exactly which comment on which thread, please!) and I will take action.
The pieces that I write on here are often exactly what we print in the newspaper and in every case, they meet the same standards. That's not to say that everything on here winds up in the paper, of course, but much of it does.
Though a few people seem offended when I post silly little tidbits, like Don Cassin's bumper stickers, I'm going to go right on doing it. I think Cassin was funny and so was Mayor Art Ward's response. So I wrote it up. I won't apologize for thinking that humor has a place on any blog.
Finally, if you don't like the comments, don't read them. If you don't like the blog, don't read it. But telling me I'm an idiot, however true it may be, won't get me to change what I'm doing. For that, you need to make a reasoned arguments, not just toss insults.
*******
Copyright 2008. All rights reserved.
Contact Steve Collins at scollins@bristolpress.com
47 comments:
Steve all I can say is BRISTOL! Need I say anymore?
Fair enough, Steve. But face it, sometimes you and Jackie seem to intentionally choose headlines or quotes that are meant to be controversial, overstate the impression of controversy, or provoke a response without substance. For example, the story about Ward being on TV is good, but the headline said he was appearing on the "idiot box" which is a term only us old folks used in the old days but not anymore, but more importantly, the phrase would lend itself to foolish remarks connecting Ward with the word idiot, given the political environment we have now.
Another problem is the way stories misrepresent events you cover. I think it was Jackie's story on the recent BDDC meeting where Mickey Goldwasser was quoted extensively, where he said that West Hartford and Westfarms mall are afraid of us for what Bristol is going to do with our downtown, and that we are going to make Bristol's downtown better than West Hartford. I mean, come on, be serious. There was a lot of good comments at that meeting, yet what Jackie chose to report made Bristol citizens seem like simple minded, unrealistic buffoons.
There is a tendency for reporters to zero in on the most potentially inflammatory or interesting aspects of a story even if they have no special relevance, especially when covering boring local political meetings, but that does a disservice because it usually misrepresents the nature of the meeting and it prevents people from participating for fear of being singled out. With the BDDC story, Jackie could have given a rundown of all the proposals that came up, and then put Goldwasser's comments in context by saying that he had even bigger hopes for what could eventually happen to Bristol.
Steve this blog is more fun than a barrel of monkeys. Love reading all the dirt people dish and hearing about the cat fights. This blog is much better than the Natl Enquirer because we know most of the people involved. Keep up the good work.
But telling me I'm an idiot, however true it may be, won't get me to change what I'm doing. For that, you need to make a reasoned arguments, not just toss insults.
But it's OK for you to just toss in the insults because they aren't "coming from you".
Sorry, but I do think of TV as an idiot box. I don't watch it at all -- except for the Red Sox -- because almost everything on it is awful. It was not meant in any way to slur the mayor or direct any comments.
Some people think our job is to report what happens at meetings. It isn't. It's to tell stories that are interesting. So focusing on something other than what's interesting would be a terrible mistake.
Jackie and I both feel far more responsibility than most reporters to go beyond just that. But I recognize that some will never see that.
Steve: Just wondering if reporting BOTH what happened AND what was interesting might be possible?I believe your readers deserve that.
To the anonymous poster at 6:09 on Jan. 13:
Steve and Jackie put their names on their work and it's out there in the paper and online, everyday, for the whole world to see. If you think it's so easy, why don't YOU do it?
Gossip column! Gossip column! Gossip column!
Tim, As you well know, we do.
Tim, just wondering if chewing gum and walking at the same time is possible?
Come on, Steve. Lurid? Sounds like you're holding out on us. I'm totally in the "gossip column" category. This is a boring place to be in wintertime... Well, anytime, actually. Bring it on!
With all due respect to you (and to Jackie, if she feels the same as you, which I think you indicated), you are political reporters, and the only political reporters for the only newspaper in town, so if you feel it is more important to report what is interesting rather than what is important, then you should not have these jobs. Because your first responsibility is to report that which is NEWS, not that which is entertaining. Entertaining tidbits are great, but not at the expense of the real news. If your focus is on what you find interesting, then there are other newspaper sections or other publications that can accommodate you better. If the bulk of Bristol politics is too boring for you to report, and it's only fulfilling if you focus on what you consider interesting even if it's irrelevent in the big picture, then ask to be transferred. I say this respectfully, but maybe it's not such a good idea to have a husband and wife, both with similar journalistic approaches, be responsible for covering the vast majority of Bristol news. Maybe by living out of town you feel you can be more objective, maybe you think it makes no difference, but I think it also leads you to be more reckless.
I enjoy most of the stories you write, and like jokes and reading about colorful characters as much as anyone, but honestly I don't value these articles all that much. My main interest is knowing what's happening in my city because I'm too old and too busy and my body too achey to make all the meetings, even though I attend more than probably 90% of the population. A good article should tell the reader the substance and the important details of what happened and the context. The other day Steve you talked about the decline of newspapers. Well, I think this is one of the reasons.
I can assure you that you will never again see a reporter in Bristol who cares as much about politics and government as I do. The entire thrust in my business is to move away from this kind of stuff and focus on scandal and celebrities.
So be careful what you wish for.
And, just for the record, Jackie's opinion on these things is not the same as mine. She's more old school, which is good.
Oops, make that scandal, celebrities and crime -- with the "best" stories combining all three.
corrected
First of all, most people who are anti-blog here do not have any sense of what a blog is. It is useless without the writer's perspective.
Second, most people only think what they have to say is important at public meetings. Some are so vain as to either script their vapid statements or have someone ghost write them.
Good statements at the BDDC meeting. Come on.. we are in our third administration with almost zero planned for the mall site. why, everyone says the same interesting stuff over and over.
Goldwasser's comments may seem a bit outlandish and may have been used because the writer has fled drab Bristol for toney West Hartford ( a town that could face worse problem than Bristol's as Hartford moves up the avenue) ...but at least he is thinking beyond...let's recreate 1950s Bristol and the splendid but probably obsolete Post Office everyone thinks is so charming. Why not go back to the cheaper health services then, when the local docs were so charming but any form of cancer, for example, was a death sentence etc..
Finally, most people do not understand freedom of press or the quasi-journalistic world that blogs live in.
Interesting discussion.
Just for the record, we didn't leave Bristol because it's drab or move to West Hartford because it's toney. We moved to West Hartford for the schools.
Steve, they can't possibly pay you enough to put up with this barrage of insults.
Who is Jackie?
do'h!
If you all think you can do such a whiz-bang job of writing for a newspaper, then why don't you just pull a Dave Lepore and start one of your own? It was chock full of all that happy crap that people like Tim Gamache claim that everyone wants to read. All the "positive news." Guess what? It tanked. Nobody wanted to read it. It stunk. It was boring and poorly written and didn't tell any of the real news that the two so called "political" (I say professional) reporters at the Bristol Press give us day after day. You all better appreciate what you have now or you'll be wishing for the good old days when Collins wrote for the paper.
Steve,
You're right people left for West Hartford because of the schools. But the "toney" atmosphere has something to add to it. Let's face it people are superficial enough to move to a new neighborhood because it looks nice, safe, or wealthy.
As someone who has grown up with the computer (learned off an Apple IIe and a Tandy) blogs are just the next step in its evolution. Good print journalism is hard to come by...and you and Jackie are certainly much more valuable than the community gives you credit for. I think the bad rap comes more from the negative reputation the Press has brought on itself over the years.
That being said...whatever this city decides to do with the downtown it needs to be done for this community. Everyone in this community and not just one part (whether its the "good old boys", chippins hill, federal hill, etc).
West Hartford is overrated anyway. And since I've speant so many years hearing about this post office then heck why not put it back and see what happens.
I don't usually get involved in these blogs but I think it's considered by some to be a gossip column. That may be but it is those people that post wise and personal remarks on here that make it a gossip column. And to Steve's credit(although I wouldn't do it) he is trying to make it interesting but you (some) enjoy being nasty not informative.I suggest that they all go read the national enquirer and let this blog be what it should be. An informative place for people who are interested in local government. My god just read some of these postings!
You can't post any opinion without someone responding in an insulting, nasty manner. That's the nature of this beast.
I think it's wrong that the Bristol Press supports and advertises a blog that moderates and posts information about people without verifying if any of it is true.
It's irresponsible to the people that live here and have been supporting the Bristol Press for years.
I don't allow any comments I know to be false (and, for that matter, I kill some comments I know are true but are so racy or invasive of privacy that I won't let them go). I remove comments when someone shows me they are untrue. But the standard of checking up on the veracity of every fact would essentially make it impossible to have comments at all. I don't see how that would benefit anyone.
As I've said repeatedly, if the comments bother you, don't read them.
When a blog is created under the auspices that it is supported by the local newspaper, there is a natural assumption that the information on it is accurate. If it wasn't, why would the Bristol Press allow it to be posted?
By telling people, "if you don't like it, don't read it" doesn't stop others from reading the information on here and thereby creating the rumors that are created by the untrue posts.
If I don't like it so I'm not reading it, how can I tell you that the information is wrong?
The Bristol Press is supporting the means and opportunity for the creation of rumors within this town. It's irresponsible.
Bristol deserves better than this.
Nearly every newspaper in America -- indeed, nearly every news outlet of any sort -- has comment sections that work exactly like this one except most have less supervision than this (since I have to approve every post).
For many years, I took the same position as the poster who thinks this stuff shouldn't be allowed. But I can see that either we do it with some supervision or someone else does it with none. This is the better option.
Bristol deserves better than this.
January 14, 2008 10:31 AM
`````````````````````````````
Bristol taxpayers deserve better than the goombas running the town .
Then why don't you take the high road Steve and be the better journalist who only allows posts that are newsworthy, intelligent comments that don't degrade another person?
But then again if you did that you would be rejecting 98% of the posts you get.
This is a local hometown newspaper Steve, you guys should follow a different standard that doesn't degrade individual community members and start rumors. The courant is statewide. CNN is international.
You aren't going to find someone in Hartford buying the Bristol Press. Heck, you won't find someone in Plainville buying the Bristol Press.
"Bristol deserves better than this.
January 14, 2008 10:31 AM"
I agree...this stuff gets posted here by Bristol people who in turn want to destroy each other. At the same time Collins sits in his white tower and laughs at us all.
Steve, do you make enough at the paper to shop in tony West Hartford?
You never see much of what people want to post. I weed out the worst. But I understand some people are more sensitive to criticism than others. I can only do so much without stifling the discussion so much that it wouldn't exist at all.
If you want a more elevated discussion, post better comments. I don't kill any comments that are halfway intelligent and don't slam someone else.
And the idea that hometown newspapers should let the internet discussion about local events drift to websites other than their own? That's like signing your own death certificate. Really.
OK ... Steve ... one more time ...
When did you say the dates were that the articles appeared about Art Ward's DUI? You know, those archieved stories?
I'm not sure what relevance the DUI stories have to this discussion, but they appeared in the Press in July 1997.
Steve, You know all too well what it means to the discussion!
Anonymous said...
Then why don't you take the high road Steve and be the better journalist who only allows posts that are newsworthy, intelligent comments that don't degrade another person?
But then again if you did that you would be rejecting 98% of the posts you get.
````````````````````````````
````````````````````````````
Is this person suggesting radical censorship to prevent other people from expressing an opinion that is every bit as important to them as anyone elses ?
Maybe a re-location to a more agreeable area would help . China , Russia , Iran come to mind .
Yes ... like the headline: "TV Alert - Ward to appear on the idiot box - Sunday"
This is REDUNDANT!
I suspect everyone would rather that this blog contain more than just my little stories and my thoughts. It's a lot more interesting when it contains a range of opinion.
I'm generally not too keen on censorhip. But, of course, not many journalists are.
As long as I get the full news, I don't care about the fluff or the "interesting" stuff, if it's there fine. But when the fluff and the petty sidelights becomes the news, then there is a problem.
When I read a story in the Press often I get only a very basic sense about what happened, no substance. But usually I see plenty of stupid quotes and comments by people who don't know any better saying things that are mostly irreleveant or uninformed and printed only to inflame or make the story seem more interesting. That's poor journalism. Sorry Mr. Collins.
If you have a specific complaint about any story I wrote, let me know what it is. One of the great things about a blog is that you can tell me directly where you think I've gone off track.
In all honesty, I've been stunned at how rarely anyone offers any constructive criticism, or even unconstructive criticism, of anything I write.
I've been in this journalism racket a long time, but I recognize the value of hearing from readers because all of us can always do better.
I wish there was more feedback for me and less snarky comments about other people.
Steve, I give you a lot of credit for letting this discussion go on. You could easily delete a lot of these comments if you wanted, but you put them up. Good for you. I will try to give some specific suggestions when I can. But as I said before, I'd like to see a more substantial coverage of city meetings, greater focus on telling as much as possible of what happened and its significance. There could be 10 useful ideas expressed at a public hearing, but you print a quote from 1 or 2 of those guys, and then 1 quote from the village idiot or attention seeker. Hardly representative of the meeting or the public.
You do understand that most stories are about 12 to 16 inches long, which makes it virtually impossible to mention more than a few highlights from a meeting. I tend to break things up into a few different stories that don't necessarily run the next day so that I can get more of the substance into the paper. But if I were to try to get "10 useful ideas" into one story, each of them would get about a sentence, with no real context to any of it. So we do what we can with the space and time available.
But your point still has validity and I'll think about it the next long, boring meeting I have to sit through!
To the poster who wrote regarding the late Dave Lapore's paper ... you are boring yourself! I am appalled that you even had the nerve to write such a horrible thing. I thoroughly enjoyed his paper and thank God we had it, because it was the only piece of positive news we had at that time and have had since that time. The Press rarely focuses in on the positive stuff, which is such a shame. This may seem like a revelation to you, but people DO want to hear the other side of things and they DO want to hear the follow-ups to what happened to somebody even if it isn't what they had hoped.
I've written this before on the blog. Steve, you need to write both sides of the story AND also the conclusion to the story. Also, if it was front page news the first time, make it front page news when the outcome has been divulged otherwise it's not unbiased journalism and believe me, the outcome will be just as newsworthy as the initial indictment!
What we have here, fortunately or unfortunately, is an example of one thing that is wrong with our society.
People can mouth off, anonymously and without attending meetings because they now have the opportunity to do so, at a distance.
Also, what we see here is a demonizing of Steve Collins because he is the initiator of the articles. We see Steve being demonized because he is now a public figure, just like we saw Zoppo, Stortz, Ward and others demonized because they chose to get involved and put their names and their selves on the line.
I would imagine it is not a comfortable feeling, especially when it is difficult if not impossible to fight back, to fight the lies and distortions.
We saw L. Defilipi get hassled: why? Because she chose to get involved.
Until we in Bristol become a little more gentile and appreciate the efforts of others, we will continue to deter more good people from getting involved.
I thank Zoppo, Stortz, Ward, Defilipi and all the others. I may not always agree, but I do appreciate their efforts.
.....4:43 - you accurately summarized the gist of everything that has been written on this blog site. If everyone contributed unbiased, objective, informational, well intentioned, constructive comments and suggestions to the issues which are posted, I truly believe that positive results would be the order of the day versus the chaos resulting from today's negativity.
Post a Comment