I'd like to dissect not the topic of the editorial, but the way the editorial was constructed. I am concerned that the editorial focuses on politics and personal issues and not on the policy issues. The language and approach sparks a strong emotional reaction, whether in agreement or disagreement. Likewise, an editorial late last year published a sidebar with photos and phone numbers for a majority on the Council who voted against the wishes of the Pioneer Press, an approach I don't recall seeing really used elsewhere. While the Pioneer Press is certainly entitled to any opinion they like, I think a different approach would serve St. Paul better.
This current editorial draws no specific policy connections between the City Council's economic development policies and the departure of Dr. Verfaille. Were there direct tradeoffs between public works projects and biotech? How might additional city revenue change any tradeoffs? I don't know, and therefore I very honestly don't know whether to agree or disagree with the Pioneer Press. But I am sure the Council majority hasn't made painting streetlights and putting in tetter-totters their core priorities, as the editorial provocatively suggests. The lack of hard facts and topics in the editorial leaves us arguing based on only perceptions and emotions. As stand-ins representing larger concerns, streetlights and teeter-totters aren't strong choices linguistically, and unfortunately enflame the debate.
These dynamics go beyond just the Pioneer Press: St. Paul as a whole is a pretty divided city. I believe we native Minnesotans need to brush up on how to disagree: we can learn to make it factual, not personal. If we listen to other perspectives with an open mind, we all may learn something. And we can recognize that on some issues, we simply may not agree - that's what a healthy debate and political processes are for.
Even when disagreements is routine and opinions strongly diverge, we can learn to work together. The Pioneer Press could play a key role in fostering that spirit of cooperation - they have the ability as much as anyone else to set the tone for debates like this. Perhaps next time. But without an attempt at a civil debate, I think we miss opportunities, and our shared city suffers as a result.
At least that's the conclusion I come to.
Bob Spaulding Downtown
Pioneer Press Editorial - What's at stake as city confronts future:
http://www.twincities.com/mld/twincities/2005/01/18/news/editorial/ 10667442.htm
_____________________________________________
To Join: St. Paul Issues Forum Rules Discussion
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ____________________________________________
NEW ADDRESS FOR LIST: [email protected]
To subscribe, modify subscription, or get your password - visit: http://www.mnforum.org/mailman/listinfo/stpaul
Archive Address: http://www.mnforum.org/mailman/private/stpaul/
