Northwest Indiana Discussion

(Note to reader: for what it is worth this post is not intended as a reactive screed to vent at the Times. The issues herein raised are very disturbing, and most consequential. At least to me.)

About the only way to make practical sense of last Sunday's editorial column by Times M-E Bill Nangle is as a "shot across the bow" to the officials and citizens of Northwest Indiana. Bear in mind the Times is, ostensibly, a journalistic media corporation in the business of gathering and selling information mediated/formatted/packaged as local and/or regional items of news. Access to fair, objective, disinterested news reports is not a luxury, but necessary to remaining abreast of the contentions and narratives framing the public issues and resolutions in our democratic-oriented society. Thus reliable, trustworthy information is vital to the proper political status and exercise of governance by the citizenry; of a government derived from the powers conferred by said citizens upon their elected government officials.

But in light of the Times' inundating support for the SouthShore extension, one would be hard-pressed these past few months to recognize this in their coverage, as both 1st District Congressional Representative Peter Visclosky and the publication, resorted to a time-honored totalitarian-like tactic of overwhelming blitzkrieg of editorial and ostensible news coverage, the sheer blanking of which, appeared calculated to displace or marginalize any counter-persuasive critique or challenge, individual or collectively mounted from the Region itself.

The publication's propagandistic flooding of articles and editorials is alarming, as the aim of such an approach is not so much to inform readers, but undermine and/or more fully subvert the collective will of the Region's citizens, especially in the lack of ink devoted to constant in-depth coverage on the issues & questions raised in support of a referendum vote. Consequently, any citizen or local official's publicly voiced dissent or challenge to the demand(s) of Representative Visclosky, to ante-up funding for half of the currently estimated $571 million to construct the railroad infrastructure (nevermind the later costs of further subsidizing the new rail's operation) has been largely neutered.

What is both interesting and dangerous about Nangle's corporate manifesto is that the Times, as a journalistically-structured news organization that outright dominates the Region's news market, cannot, as Nangle so boldly asserts in his Sunday editorial position, unilaterally seek to determine or define what constitutes progress in the Region. For this would entail the Times engaging in the making of news instead of reporting it; a stand that entails further biased control of content and perspective. No matter how many ways you read Nangle's manifesto, henceforth Times articles and editorials will be inherently framed according to the corporation's unilateral and subjective preference (agenda) for what is and isn't progressively beneficial for the quality of life sought by Region's citizenry.

But who elected Nangle, Doug Ross, Rich James, or new publisher Chris White to predetermine and impose their agenda on the issues and policy decisions of our local government? I didnt see these names on any ballot, did you? Yet, to hear Nangle tell it, "Northwest Indiana stands on the threshold of positive change. The winds of change are clearly at work as we enter 2014. Many a progressive program is at work here."

Really? Let's ask the citizenry of Lowell, Dyer, and St. John or the southern lakeshore municipalities of Gary, Hammond & East Chicago for their input on the progress to be realized from the Illiana and SSX plans.

Nangle continues, "The question is will the region meet the obvious challenges or consider easier options and slide into complacency?" Say what! Obvious challenges? This is a rhetorical characterization to subsume the question of whether the SouthShore extension is an artificially generated demand, in effect a luxury item, because there is absolutely no common consensus this is the current position. Who is Billy Nangle to use the Times' market share to attempt usurpation of the collective voice of the People and unilaterally substitute his subjective opinion for any as yet-to-be authentically determined consensus of the voters?

Nangle adds, "Judging from past experience, Northwest Indiana is apt to see little change toward meeting our challenges. Too much waffling. Too little positive action." To hear Billy tell it, his is the only judgment that counts.

I ask, who died and made Billy Nangle the arbiter of the Region's prospects or progress? Who is Bill Nangle or the Times to unlaterally adjudicate or determine anything? Do note that these are naked assertions devoid of any substantive support. Nangle isnt advancing an argument to persuade. He's simply exploiting his advantageous media position, seeking to impose his views as dispositive. But all they register and reinforce is an agenda amounting to aggressive furtherance of the Times journalistic dominance over public discourse; an "agenda" sublimating the exploitation and potential abuse of its dominance of the news market. What other outcome is there in the bias of its news coverage and editorial positions - likely as not by slanting news coverage to promote the immediate and prospective merchandising goals of its corporate interests?

Nangle then unabashedly declares, "With this in mind, The Times has adopted its 2014 agenda of issues we believe vital to regional progress. During the year we actively promote change necessary to meet the challenges. We monitor progress." Judging from the propagandistic media blitzes of late, it has been very active indeed. But again, who is the Times to declare propagandistic war on the Region's populace and readers via its attempt at unilateral annexation of true public opinion and consensus?

Nangle ends this declaration for governing the control of public opinion and consensus with, "So, looking ahead, we offer an agenda we believe will help move the region in the right and positive direction."

In the "right and positive" direction? According to whom - Bill & the Merrymen he is speaking for at the Times? Surely, he jests? But no, he is serious. To read it entails scratching out one's eyes, to ensure against dyslexic perception, because not even the New York Times would dare to overtly assert such an indifference as the basis for commandeering public opinion. This kind of media aggression is unprecedented. The Times apparently has no qualm about abusing its access to newsmakers, in that it is now out to make news, not report it. It is now openly out to conform and bias its coverage/construal of events and collective decision-making consistent with its corporate and subjective agenda.

The problem is that in aggressively imposing its "agenda" to actively shape or determine what represents the Region's "right and positive" direction, again, to be determined by the backroom whip-counts of Big Brother Bill and the corporate officers/managers at the Times/Lee Enterprises, where do the Region's citizens now go to secure journalistically disinterested, objective, reliable information, let alone fairly impartial perspective? For henceforth, any and all news reports or editorials by the Times must now be recognized presumptively rebuttable, and deemed inherently biased, in addition to the normal problems attendant in meeting the standards of accurate reportage. Thus, given the scope and hubris of Nangle's manifesto, the net journalistic status of Times articles must default to a form of quasi-news; arguably more product than service. Tainted by Nangle's proclamation, they're admittedly something placed in the stream of commerce in furtherance of implementing an active agenda, as determined by the judgments of its corporate officers, about what is and isn't progressive for the Region.

Nangle's closing: "So, looking ahead, we offer an agenda we believe will help move the region in the right and positive direction. Our agenda is short and we believe to the point. The prioritized issues are..."

Just offering? The editorial column is entitled "We're PUSHING..." Futher down in his extended lead he adds, "...the Times has ADOPTED its 2014 agenda of issues we believe vital to regional progress. During the year we actively promote change necessary to meet the challenges. We monitor progress."

According to whose necessity, values or cultural standards? According to whose political, social and commercial interests?


****
An excerpt of Nangle's text:

WILLIAM NANGLE: We're pushing for positive changes in region
By William Nangle, March 16, 2014 12:00

Change is a constant. Challenge is forever. Chance is an option.

Northwest Indiana stands on the threshold of positive change. The winds of change are clearly at work as we enter 2014. Many a progressive program is at work here.

The question is will the region meet the obvious challenges or consider easier options and slide into complacency?

Statesman Patrick Henry said, “I know of no way of judging the future but by the past.”

Judging from past experience, Northwest Indiana is apt to see little change toward meeting our challenges. Too much waffling. Too little positive action.

With this in mind, The Times has adopted its 2014 agenda of issues we believe vital to regional progress. During the year we actively promote change necessary to meet the challenges. We monitor progress. We put a white hot spotlight on areas of difficulty...

So, looking ahead, we offer an agenda we believe will help move the region in the right and positive direction. Our agenda is short and we believe to the point. The prioritized issues are:

Neo, perhaps you can point out the specific state or federal law which prohibits a newspaper or any media outlet from promoting their own political viewpoints or opinions? Isn't the freedom to publish your opinion the essence of a "free press"?

you obviously didnt read the argument. it presupposes a free press. but dont bother, you wouldnt appreciate it anyway.

Reading and comprehending are two separate matters. Sparks may have gone through the motions of reading, but his comprehension meter registered zero. What's left to say? You've covered all bases and cleared them with a deep drive to center. Cap tip to you.

You havent argued anything, merely issued your proclamation. My riposte is directed at the Times' news agenda. I've raised issues and questions and posted my position in good faith. That you dislike how or what I write is utterly irrelevant.

Anyone dumb enough to be influenced by lousy writers employed by what is essentially a high school newspaper deserves to live in Da' Region.

At least High School papers are edited by an adult who catches and corrects all of the spelling and grammar errors...