Once upon a time, newspapers routinely offered political endorsements at election time. It’s a practice that has fallen out of favor with many newspapers, but the Asheville Citizen-Times continues to buck the trend.
In it’s Sunday, Nov. 4, editorial, the city’s paper of record gave its nod to newcomer Bill Russell and incumbents Jan Davis and Brownie Newman, saying the three men posed the best chance to bring balance to the Council, among other reasons. The endorsement did not say why the newspaper found the other candidates lacking.
Now is your chance to weigh in on the paper’s verdict. Do you care what the paper thinks? Will the AC-T endorsements make any difference in the way that you or others vote? And, should newspapers even be in the business of political endorsements?
Sound off, folks.
— Hal L. Millard, staff writer
I found it interesting that the Editors gave long, thoughtful reasons to vote for Newman and Jan, but their endorsement of real estate candidate Bill Russell was devoid of any substance.
They mention his potential and his fresh voice without discussing even one of his policy positions. They talk about balance without mentioning what views he will balance the council with.
It looks like a shameless pander to me. Otherwise they could have at least come up with one concrete reason to vote for the man.
When you read the article, try inserting Elaine Lite or Dwight Butner’s name for Bill Russell’s, and the article will read exactly the same.
Pathetic.
Are you mad because they endorsed Russell or mad because they didn’t endorse Lite?
As if anyone gives a speckled s*iT about what the Citizen-Times has to say.
I am surprised they even spelled the names correctly.
I don’t think folks who like to tout their objectivity and journalistic integrity should endorse anyone at all. But if you’re going to endorse, at least give a substantive reason.
I certainly didn’t expect a Lite endorsement, but I expected them to have some rationale outside of “potential” and “balance”.
Don’t forget, the “balanced” AC-T basically called for the lynching of Muslims after 9/11. And hey, isn’t there another news outlet that constantly boasts of “balance” while fueling just the opposite? Yep, that’s the AC-T alright: “fair and balanced.”
Apparently, someone gives a “speckled s*it” because their slate got in.
Brings to mind what my mother used to say, “No one ever went broke underestimating the American public.”
ashvillian, political pundit, you are not.
LOL, yup, somehow the AC-T called this election right. Although Gordon does have a point. Why didn’t they expound about Bill Russell? I guess it is obvious that he will always vote for developer/real estate interests, so why go into detail.
To celebrate his victory, Russell raised my car insurance rates. D’oh!