Honest Coverage? the search for an honest broker of news
July 10, 2007 by f4denz.
So when can we expect the local media to be an honest broker of facts? When can we expect the local media to report news as news and opinion as opinion? When can we expect the local media to stop their very anti-RSL bias? The answer is simple, never.
So today the SL Tribune has an article labeled “Proposed Sandy soccer academy stirs SLC mayor’s ire” with a header of “Rocky says RSL breaking promises”, the article then goes on to try to tilt Sandy’s consideration of putting in an effort to land the RSL academy. This is viewed by the mayor, who has gotten 7.5 million from RSL for fields that once were planned as part of the RSL academy, but because of changes to the size and scope of the project by the mayor’s team, has lost out on being chosen as the location of academy. Dave Checketts made that clear a couple months ago, but now this is now news again? How funny, that when Dave asked Rocky and his group to sign a contract with terms that they had agreed to about the building of the complex and what went along with it that Rocky went to the press and claimed fouls. After all Dave had nothing in writing, so he was made out as the villain by local media, and the anti-RSL segment of the population started pointing fingers and whispering again. But now, Rocky goes to the local press and says but Dave agreed to this and that and now he isn’t going to deliver. I say, welcome to the grown up world Rocky, your own stupid actions have come back and bit you in the ass. I for one think it is about damm time, and could not be happier that Sandy understands that if you work with someone, you get closer to results than you do by pointing your finger at them and claiming foul.
Rocky, you have the 7.5 million build your sports complex and be happy, but please keep your nose out of RSL affairs. You lost that battle, you burnt that bridge, you screwed up, and anyone who has taken the time to research the actual events (not just take your word at it), knows that you are as much to blame for the total breakdown of everything RSL and downtown. You did not have to authorize your political friends rights to convert unimproved property to improved property, just so they could jack the price up on RSL. You did not have to turn your back on Dave and his wanting to create a partnership with the city on the sports complex and academy, but you did by going to the press with details that you know had been discussed. Please do not cry victim, because Dave and RSL would rather do business with Sandy, who has been an honest broker with them. Sandy has a long list of requests and demands, and RSL is willing to work with them because unlike you, Corroon, and the SLCC, they have been upfront and honest, interested in a solution and not just “what can we get”, as the members of the SLCC are.
I find it funny that people think that the request of the Sandy local government are fluff and bribes, they really should have heard the crap that each of the local SLCC members didn’t ask for but rather tried to demand for their support. There is nothing in the list that is not part of a good working relationship between the city of Sandy and RSL. How about the coverage of councilman Hatch’s plan to build a new theater in downtown, despite the fact that no one wants it, and no one thinks it would work, unlike his claims that downtown needs this. If it were a viable plan, private investors would fund it, like they have the vast majority of the RSL stadium project. I also love that he claims that RSL is taking funds from the ZAP funding, I suggest that Mr. Hatch do his homework, he knows better. RSL is getting 15% of the TRT tax extension (the extension was passed for this specific reason), so his solution is to divert sales tax funding. Perhaps if HVS, thinks building new theaters and facilities in downtown is such a great idea, they should put some money into the project. Oh wait, I know they want the bid on building a bloated and unwanted project to go to them. I see how this works, it is all about who gets their personal pet projects, no matter the cost to the public.
Of course none of this will be mentioned in the local media, see in my opinion they have been bought and paid for. Here is a clue, when is the last time you saw an article or op-ed piece that was about Larry Miller? When is the last time it was negative?
OFF MY SOAPBOX