Newspapers have a responsibility to separate their news stories from their editorials. When, on July 6, the Berkshire Eagle ran their supposed news story entitiled “Airport upgrade intended for all,” they were neglecting this responsibility. First of all, what prompted this article. If you read carefully, you will discover that the news event that prompted the story was the fact that airport spokesperson Randall Christiansen had spoken. The story has nothing to report other than this man’s words. So what did he say that prompted the Eagle to announce that the airport is “for all.” He said, “There’s still a sense out there that pervades a small portion of the community that this is a rich playground for the rich and famous….” Nothing else in the story addresses this point. There is no supporting evidence offered to support the position that this is a minority opinion, and there is nothing in the story that explains how the expansion will benefit the average person in Pittsfield; and yet the title proclaims this revelation. Read more…
In some communities, public wetlands have been protected as community parks, riverfront areas, or other natural areas for enjoyment by everyone. These areas often become regional or even national attractions. Boston, Baltimore, and even Manhattan have all benefited by setting aside their natural waterfronts and wetlands for the public. In the matter of the expansion of the Pittsfield airport, the City of Pittsfield seems to be expressing a different concept; wetlands are “development opportunities” for a privileged few.