The opening paragraph alone is enough to make most readers believe that this "project" is a "done deal" and that it is all good as well:
CF -- http://www.twincities.com/mld/twincities/4696911.htm
"Intrepid St. Paulites headed for South Minneapolis will be looking at some major changes along their favorite routes in the next few years."
Is I35W a favorite route for anyone? For St Paulites? How do we know?
Might the article have pointed out instead that driving alone in a car designed for 4 or more passengers on I35W is the only options for many metro area people because they do not have transit options or livable, walkable, affordable urban communities in the metro area?
I think the article might have started out referring to the problem of urban sprawl; to the examples of Los Angeles and Atlanta, Seattle, and many other urban areas where freeway building has resulted in worse congestion, far worse pollution, urban uglification and then the far greater expense of trying to retrofit transit into the sprawled urban area after the damage of freeway-bound transportation has been done.
Instead, this article starts out as a blatant propaganda piece for the powers who want more traffic, more congestion, more petroleum addiction, and more urban blight typical of this obsolete car-centric urban planning. The project is prersented as window-dressing, with no reference even to the cost. There is also no reference to who will pay for the freeway window dressing, or when, or how.
Has Judith Yates Borger lost all journalistic credibility? Here she is no news reporter, but merely a mouthpiece for Tom Johnson and the Phillips Partnership.
Borger presents the various aspects of the projects as deeds that "will" be done, and concludes with the line "Construction should begin in late 2,004." The article is followed by a link to the Phillips Partnership website, but not one to STRIDE or to any source of information providing another viewpoint. Borger leaves the clear impression that this *will* be done, that any dissent is negligible, and that the political approvals needed are minor formalities.
Borger does absolutely no investigation of this proposed project. She does not present information about possible negative impacts of the project. She does not note how it may or may not fit into metro transportation priorities for the coming years. The article takes the viewpoint of the PR and "legal" firm representating the corporations who have dominated the project so far, and she has presented it as public policy.
Borger presents the Whittier Alliance as the lone urban opponents to the project, ignoring widespread opposition and concern from residents of many neighborhoods along I35W. Borger does not include any reference to KFNAB's formal opposition to the project or to STRIDE. Borger also does not interview anyone who offers alternatives visions to this proprosed highway boondoggle or offer an analysis of environmental or economic costs.
It is Orwellian when a proposal which will increase traffic congestion, pollution, petroleum-dependency, and other related urban degradation is so glibly presented as window-dressing that "St Paulites" can see along "favorite routes" -- and the construction of which "should" begin within two years.
This article reminds me of two quotes from Edward Bernays, "the father of the public relations industry" who said:
"the manipulation of news, the inflation of personality, the general ballyhoo by which politicians and commercial products and social ideas are brought to the consciousness of the masses....are necessary..."
and also:
"...manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country. We are governed, our minds molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of. This is a logical result of the way in which our democratic society is organized."
(cf http://www.counterpunch.org/jenson1012.html )
I believe Borger's article to be a blatant example of Orwellian manipulation of "news" to encourage people to be mere "consumers" of this particular project. People are not challenged to understand or evaluate the premises of the project, but to view it as a sort of cosmetic surgery for some (imaginary!) "favorite routes".
Readers are not at all informed. Rather, they are lulled into a sort of shallow consumerist mindset about a way of thinking about urban transportation which has been shown to be counterproductive in city after city.
This is the way destruction is sold to us now: war and destructive highway projects are "sold" to the American people. Both are packaged by PR firms, advertizing agencies, and dis-information disseminated through the so-called news media.
The people of our metro area need to oppose this destructive project, develop strong walkable, bikable communities, excellent mass transit, and a truly bioregional perspective to guide development.
"We the people" also need in-depth investigative reporting rather than the narrow and shallow "PR" channeling this PiPress piece exhibits.
-- Gary Hoover
King Field
In a message dated 12/10/02 10:55:33 AM Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Lisa McDonald wrote:
Boy after reading this version I think Tom Johnson's
new gig should be heading a pr firm. I've never seen
such a spin job.
David Piehl writes:
I agree - it read like a paid advertisement; evidence
that Tom Johnson has not wasted his marketing degree
or public relations experience!
No mention of the destruction of affordable housing,
destruction of small businesses, the "uglification"
factor, or any unsavory aspects - just the reference
to a "landmark" being built.
Well, Websters gives this as a definition of
"landmark": a conspicuous object on land that marks a
locality.
Above all - it WILL be conspicuous!!
David Piehl
Central
