We believe most readers look at the front section of their newspaper to find out what’s going on in their city, state and the nation. This morning’s paper used just under half that space for non-news advertising.
We understand that’s what puts the paper out. But for that reason, we marvel at the fact that an additional ten percent of that section was wasted on a laudatory good bye to Mayor Ballard.
The fifth paragraph of the story admits that he "...has left his successor, Democratic Mayor-elect, with a public safety crisis...." The next paragraph tells us "...criticisms never seemed to stick." Maybe that’s because true investigative reporting seems to have been banned by media management.
The business weekly paper has an even more syrupy - though less relative space - sendoff, quoting city "leaders" about the magnificent record of his honor.
One of the quotes is from the vice chairman of Pacers Sports and Entertainment. He tells us that as people got to know Ballard there was great confidence that "...this was going to be OK." What else might you expect to hear from the recipient of an additional annual gift of $16,000,000 taxpayer dollars?
A bit of an editorial in the same paper generated some additional thought. With regard to the paper’s subscribers, we are told: their average household net worth is $2.4 million; average individual income is $234,000; 40 percent have attained millionaire status. And 42 percent are owners or partners in a business.
Is it fair to wonder how many of those specific businesses are among the recipients of the corporate welfare so avidly supported by the paper. Which are getting those TIF dollars which ought to be supporting legitimate municipal functions? Have any of those folks become millionaires in the last eight years? Why are millionaires on the public dole at all?
Perhaps the most distressing thing of all is the apparent elation and hope with which both papers report that mayor-elect Hogsett can be expected to follow the same path.