Another Print Editorial Take on Citizen Journalism
Some editorial boards are merely bemused or irritated with us, some are cautiously optimistic about the effect of an engaged citizenry:
Another set of eyes on government
Count Pittsford Supervisor Bill Carpenter as the latest subject of a piece of online citizen journalism posted on the popular YouTube Web site.
The video – “Pittsford Follies, Vol. 1†– shows Gerry Minerd, a Pittsford woman labeled as the “damsel in distress,†commenting at a recent Town Board meeting on the board’s practice of not posting attachments and additions to minutes of board meetings on its Web site. Carpenter, at times interrupting her commentary, repeatedly asks her how many board meetings she has attended.
This, of course, is the video Itchy reported on about a month ago. But the MP Messenger Post editorial goes on to kind of compliment those of us who aren’t paid for doing all the crap (we’ll take a better Monroe County & Western New York in lieu of payment).
Criticize the politics behind the posting of the video, or criticize Carpenter as the schoolyard bully all you want. But applaud citizens getting more involved in local government and if it took this video, or subsequent news coverage, well, so be it.
Online media, like it or not, is going local. The plus is another set of eyes watch the doings of government officials, and responsible bloggers and YouTubers can be an effective check and balance – just like a healthy democratic society is supposed to have.
Critics, like those in Pittsford, are correct in pointing out the dangers of viewing such works without a critical eye. But a video like this also has given residents a legitimate issue to talk about – is Pittsford town government as open as it can be?
Citizens do need to weigh all the facts, or as we say in the traditional print business, to get the other side of the story.
Part of being an informed citizen is having all the information at hand, whether seeing it with your own eyes at a board meeting or weighing the facts as seen and read through traditional and online reporting.
Thanks MP Messenger Post! We like you too.
Related posts:
What does MP stand for?
Messenger Post
… and I do not recognize the term “Messenger Post” any more than I recognize MP. Is there some further elaboration that might help me understand who/what they are?
By the way, when I click on the link, I go to MPNNow.com, and I didn’t scrounge around further to see exactly who or what MPNNow.com represents. You would think it might be a helpful thing that a website whose name is partially an acronym would somewhere obviously provide a link to what that acronym stands for, but I guess I am wrong. Clicking on the logo doesn’t explain anything. I guess I have to scrounge around deeply into the website, and I wasn’t willing to do that.
Paige, Rocwiki is your friend:
http://rocwiki.org/Messenger_Post_Newspapers
The question Bill Carpenter asks in that video is actually quite scary. Is there some sort of prerequisite number of meetings to attend before one has permission to stand up and make a comment? What about people who just moved to the area–are they allowed to comment and question? And what about the person who has lived in one place for a very long time and suddenly becomes aware of an issue that demands attention?
The problem with your “take” on the video is that it assumes that the resident was just the “average citizen” raising a point for discussion. I think you know quite well that Mr. Carpenter was reacting to the question because he knew the questioner came in with a political agenda, not just a simple request for more information.
It is certainly ok to take steps to score political points (like making videos of the reaction of a town official to critical questions). I think, however, that it is unfair to take Carpenter’s reaction out of the political context in which it was made, in an effort to make him appear “unresponsive” or “mean” to a “citizen”.
I have sat through scores of Town Board meetings in the Town of Gates during the past five years. The Democrat leader (and candidate for Supervisor) almost never fails to raise questions (which is, of course, her right). But like the questioner in your video, she rarely, if ever, asks those questions to get an “answer” or to obtain “information”; her purpose is to raise rhetorical questions which forward her political agenda. Occasionally, members of the Town Board express skepticism or criticism of her and her questions. That’s just politics; its not rudeness, bullying, or unresponsiveness. Characterizing it as such reveals your partisan bias.
On the other hand John, you assume this person has a political agenda. Doing so, you only show your own resistance to citizen journalism, be it video , blogs or otherwise.
Without people being able to stand up and question, wether you agree with them or not, goes against the very foundations of our democracy.
I might just have to think of that next time. Thanks!
“Occasionally, members of the Town Board express skepticism or criticism of her and her questions. That’s just politics; its not rudeness, bullying, or unresponsiveness.”
1 Question: Does she pay taxes? Have you forgotten who “they” work for? What difference does it make if a person asks 1 Question every ten years, or 10 Questions every 1 year? You work to serve. Do your job and you’ll have no problems.
…”its not rudeness, bullying, or unresponsiveness”
Yes it is. And it’s arrogance to - you forgot that one.
Each member of the Town Board is also a taxpayer.
Obviously, government officials have a duty to serve their constituents. That includes answering their questions, even if they include criticism.
On the other hand, being a government official does not require one to be silent in the face of an opponent’s political agenda. If you read Lee Strong’s posts re: Gates politics set out in RT on 8/18 by ‘bythepeople’, you might have noted a reference to an exchange between Supervisor Esposito and Tom O’Hare. Mr. O’Hare’s questions may have seemed to be simple inquiries to unititiated meeting attendees. The Supervisor pointed out that Mr. O’Hare had not identified himself as a candidate for the Town Board. His “questions” took on a different connotation in that context.
My point is that when the purpose of the “citizen” making inquiries is political, they should expect a different reaction than from the government official than would be given to a resident making a simple personal request for information or action.
I have no resistance to citizen journalism. I have a blog and I read numerous blogs of various political stripes.
Neither do I have any desire to stifle dissent. I am simply pointing out that being an elected official does not require one to sit silently and accept politically motivated criticism.
The original post on this topic was intended to portray Supervisor Carpenter as trying to stifle an average Pittsford resident who was just trying to make a simple request for a more transparent local government. In fact, the questioner appears to be a person with a political agenda and the video is a political tool being used by Pittsford Democrats.
Its perfectly legit for the Pittsford Dems to criticize Carpenter and/or his policies. I just think its unfair to criticize him for responding in kind.
I don’t think I understand you correctly.
What I think you wrote is this:
“Gerry Minerd may be right, but she is a political activist so we shouldn’t listen to anything she says.”
That can’t be right. No matter what other activities any citizen gets into, she should be treated equally when she goes before her elected representatives.
Gerry Minerd has a valid point, and you’re saying Bill Carpenter is right to be sneering at her because he objects to her extra-curricular activities.
Guys - the point of the post is that citizen journalist are changing the face to reporting and it is a good thing.
Now - I rewatched the video. As you probably know, I have produced some of my own on this site. The questioner (Minerd) asks about board minutes that are different. The ones posted on the web are different than the ones in the clerks office yet both are called the minutes. Sorry you can’t have that. The minutes should be the same.
So Minerd asks the question and the response? Attack the questioner. That seems to be the game that is played here and in partisan politics. So is that how it is done in Pittsford? Gates?
A simple thanks - here is why and we will get back to you would have gone a long way. That didn’t happen so now it looks like Pittsford is by a bully.
The town board works for the town of Pittsford and that includes answering the question.
I don’t want to beat a dead horse here, but Minerd did more than point out that there was a problem with the minutes. She implied that the Town Board was trying to hide information from the public.
Moreover, the video was not simple “citizen reporting”. It was a political effort of the Pittsford Democrats. As such, it was designed to portray Minerd favorably and Carpenter unfavorably. I note that the video cuts out as a councilperson was making a statement about responding to citizen questions. I would have like to have heard her entire comment, but it was probably not consistent with the “message” that the video (and Minerd’s question) was intended to convey.
It still boils down to the fact that most of the town board’s don’t feel they HAVE to address their constituents. “What we say goes” seems to be the status quo, and “How dare you question our motives” is supposed to send those who dare to ask into fear. In East Rochester you have to sign up in advance and list your topic and be approved to speak in an public forum. In Greece, they’ll run their planning board meetings until 2:30 in the morning to avoid people discussing Walmart. In Gates, they’ll limit the time you want to speak to minutes, and cut you off midpoint if you run over your time limit. Kudos for filming and displaying these meetings for all to see. It won’t be long and it will be controlled media, as the “west” and “east” sides are being merged to control cable access broadcast of town board meetings. I guess the “You Tube” method will be the new vogue to display their antics. Too bad people just keep giving it away and not fighting for what is theirs to keep.
John - beat away at the dead horse. If necessary we can change horses and beat that one as well.
The portion of the tape I was referring to is when Minerd made her statement and Pittsford (I’m assuming it was Carpenter - I can’t tell) government asked her how many board meetings she attended. Surely - that can’t be deemed a proper response from a government official.
If another official tried to make amends (I wasn’t there - neither apparently were you) OK - but that doesn’t excuse the first response from government which was attack the messenger.
Do you guys do that in Gates? The several board meetings I’ve attended personally or via the access channel I haven’t seen that in Brighton.
The following public interchange can’t defended - citizen speaking - Government official questioning the citizen’s credentials.
Classic attack the messenger and their credibility in order to avoid the issue. It doesn’t work in this case.
RE two sets of minutes. Why is that? Why would that solicit a response of attacking the messenger rather than answering the question.
We should expect more from our local government.
[...] debate over the efficacy of blogs and blogging continues, especially in the Rochester area. I took my own stab at defining the undefinable just prior [...]
Maybe not saying it’s right, but perhaps understandable that he’s irritated when activists show up with a video camera… Still he should have behaved himself a little better.
Too, there’s a LOT of video edited out. She hammered him for a while before he snapped.
“reveals your partisan bias…”
Is anyone here attempting to HIDE their partisan bias?
“it was designed to portray Minerd favorably and Carpenter unfavorably…” That’s very true.
For what it’s worth, they also cut out the part where Sandy Zutes got her knickers in a knot and demanded, (and got, though grudgingly,) an apology for a remark about “hitting with a hammer” or something along those lines. General silliness on both sides.
If you’re talking about my RT post, you are incorrect.
It read:
That can in no way be construed as “intended to portray Supervisor Carpenter as trying to stifle an average Pittsford resident who was just trying to make a simple request for a more transparent local government”
I went out of my way to be as fair as possible to BC and the board.
I wondered if there was more to the video.
And no, I don’t think any of us are trying to hide our perspectives.
Jiminy:
You are mistaken about the public comment period at Gates Town Board meetings. Speakers may talk on any topic, whether or not it is on the agenda, and there is no time limit.
John DiCaro….you imply the woman in the video is known as an activist to Bill Carpenter. OK…and is being known as an activist bad? You say the woman is politically motivated. Are you implying that Carpenter is not politically motivated. Are you also saying that as a political activist, the woman gets to be called out at a town meeting?
Suppose for just a moment the woman has an agenda and Carpenter’s comments put her on the spot…lets call it a draw in terms of political motivation. Does the woman’s questions/comments have validity? That should be the only question.
Hey John D…recognize you from the Gates blog.
You speak of the “average citizen” in your first comment. Think about the “average citizen” for a minute. He/she does NOT vote. He/she does NOT show up at town board meetings. He/she does NOT write letters to the editor. He/she does not visit blogs like this because he/she simply does NOT care enough to make the effort.
Now think about the activist. He/she votes. He/she writes letters to the editor. He/she shows up at town hall meetings. He/she CARES.
So, before you even make the slightest suggests that being an activist with a set agenda, think about what life would be like without activists. The activists put issues on the table. They give life and attention to issues.
And always remember, someone like Bill Carpenter is OUR employee. He answers ONLY to people like the woman in the video. Without the woman in the video, there would be only silence.
Sorry, I meant that the video was making the portrayal, not your post.
The City Council is the same way. It’s called a power trip. People who have just enough influence to squeak by and get a town position. Truth is, I have seen City Council meetings where they have “public forums” and won’t even respond to questions made by citizens. Town boards bring a whole new definition to the term “back room dealings.” Most of these people failed public speaking or just have too much time on their hands. Many just don’t have the guts to stand up to the citizen that voted for them. “Help me get into office so I can ignore you while I am on my power trip.”