News-Record.com

What makes Robby Perkins wanting to get back into city politics more interesting than Joel Landau or Greg Woodard--candidates with substantially new ideas--filing to run?

I experienced first-hand what Landau is complaining about--the propensity of the N&R to give more attention to candidates of the status quo and to give outsiders the short stick. In 2001, the N&R ran an article about Mayor Holliday's decision to run for re-election. I announced my candidacy for mayor at a public form with a note-taking N&R reporter in attendance. There was no story. Your election coverage was slanted then and appears to remain so -- slanted toward the known quantities.

That people aren't paying attention or that you are keeping your powder dry doesn't fly when we see you running stories about some candidates. That the candidates you choose to ignore are outsiders is more revealing than your explaination here.

Fair criticism, Roch. There's news judgment involved. We think more people would consider Robbie Perkins re-entering the elective politics as more interesting that lesser known candidates. It's partly the same reason you read more about Clinton, Obama and Edwards than about the other 100+ people who have filed.

I also stand by the assessment that it is early. While the candidates want equal time in the newspaper saying they have filed, their names aren't resonating with the people they are trying to reach. That's one reason why they aren't buying ads to get their message out. They know now is not the time to spend their money. I'd say now is not the time when we would spend our newsprint writing about each of the 33 candidates.

Giving equal treatment is also complicated by the amount of "news" people make. Given past experience, we know that many of the candidates who have filed will do absolutely nothing in terms of campaigning. They won't attend forums. They won't erect yard signs. They won't talk to the news media. And they won't get equal coverage. We will attempt to make a determination as to who is a serious candidate and who's not. It's probable that we won't give equal time and space to those candidates, for instance, who think city council funds the school system.

I do appreciate, though, the idea that newspaper coverage still has influence. :)

"voters aren't ready for it."

how do you know that, if it's ever been thus?

should we accept it as the way it must be?

you mention the timing of campaign ads. of course they wait to advertise -- they have budget constraints, and in any case they are marketing candidates, not necessarily interested informing voters.

that's your job.

seems that a basic web page could be put up right away, even if it's just the names of the candidates and links to web pages and media coverage.

you could even use a wiki to allow anyone to contribute to the page (although you would probably need an editor to OK published versions).

I only have anecdotes to undergird my belief that most voters are currently disengaged...and I don't have any evidence to the contrary.

As I've said, we are going to do this right, in the best way we can. I appreciate your and others rush to do more rather than less. (And the quick rush to judgment.) I don't see a huge need, and we have other things we're trying to do that we think are more pressing.

"I only have anecdotes to undergird my belief that most voters are currently disengaged...and I don't have any evidence to the contrary."

I don't agree about disengaged voters.

Important issues have created strong emotions among the Greensboro citizens these last two years.

I've heard more grassroots (and blog) discussion about this in the last two years than at any other time in my 15 years as a resident.

I agree that important issues have been raised.

I'm not saying that the issues aren't important. I'm saying that readers aren't all that ready to start parsing the candidates. (I haven't heard or read discussion about the candidates. I haven't seen many letters to the editor supporting or opposing candidates. I haven't gotten calls -- and I alwasy do closer to the election.)

I'm also saying that voters will have plenty of information from us when it comes time to vote.

But, John, your explainations still don't address why you've run stories about some candidates and not others.

No? We made a news judgment that AT THIS TIME readers would be more interested in proven, "known" candidates filing for races where their presence was unexpected.

While I know that some people disagree, I submit that giving Robbie Perkins or Trudy Wade a lead focus in news story in the middle of July does not give them an unfair advantage in an election three months away.

Again, before the election we will have the positions and record of every candidate who will give them to us.