vision2020@moscow.com: re: Media coverage of zoning issues

re: Media coverage of zoning issues

Kenton Bird (KBird@vines.ColoState.EDU)
Thu, 27 Mar 97 17:17:23 -0700

Visionaries:
Mark's response to Dennis' comment about the coverage (or lack thereof) of the
county's rural-residential rezoning process struck a familiar chord with me.
For a decade, I struggled with strategies for covering planning and zoning
issues in a way that would encourage readers to participate in the process.
(For newcomers to this list, I was managing editor of the Idahonian (predecessor
to the Daily News) from 1982 to 1985 and editorial page editor from 1985 to
1992.)
I think the only times we succeeded in covering planning and growth issues well
was when there was organized opposition to a development; having an organized
and articulate spokesperson for a point of view helped to focus the public
debate. (Case in point: the opposition to city involvement in a private golf
course proposed for north Pullman, near the high school, led by Joan Honican.)
This semester at CSU, I've heard several presentations by Steve Smith, the new
editor of the Colorado Springs Gazette. Steve is a big advocate of civic
journalism, aka public journalism, a philosophy that newspapers should be more
involved in their communities. I think one of Steve's strategies might lend
itself to the Latah County rural zoning issue.
Steve says journalists need to re-examine "framing," i.e. the perspectives they
bring to stories. A change in perspective often brings a different angle on
the story, one that might attract and engage more readers.
He gave the example of how the Gazette covered a school bond election last
November. The week before the election, the education reporter did four stories
on the issue: from the perspectives of students, teachers, parents and residents
who didn't have children in the schools. The goal was to show how different
segments of the community viewed the bond issue in different ways.
Steve wasn't entirely satisfied with the results; the first three stories tended
to cover the same territory. But I think the approach might work for the Latah
County zoning issue:
How about stories addressing the question of where, why and how rural
residential development happens from the perspective of:
* a landowner who wants to subdivide with minimal restrictions
* a farmer concerned about how rural development will affect his/her ability to
farm (pesticide use, noise, etc.)
* a city dweller who values Moscow's surroundings and wants to keep a distinct
border between city and country
* a county planning director who has to administer the land-division system
* an urban refugee who wants to buy 5 acres in the country, in the Moscow school
district, on a paved road that will let him/her be at his job at the university
or the incubator with a 10-minute drive from home. (You all know one of these
people.)

It seems to me that all of those are equally valid viewpoints. And in the case
when there is no clear consensus (or no sharply polarized views that allow a
pro-con coverage), the Daily News could make a contribution to the public
dialogue by interviewing people who represent those perspectives.

The other thing I believe would be helpful is a detailed story in advance of the
meeting that explains the reason for the public hearing, its significance and
tells citizens how to participate. One reason people don't go to zoning
hearings is that they are intimidated by the process. Anything the paper could
do to de-mystify the hearing would encourage participation.

Finally, I think planning commissioners need to look beyond daily newspaper
stories for ways to publicize meetings. In my experience of publicizing
meetings in Moscow, I get better response from fliers on bulletin boards,
letters to the editor, e-mail lists and word of mouth than newspaper articles.
And local government agencies serious about increasing turnout should set aside
money for paid advertising -- a small display ad has much higher readership than
a back-page brief or a legal notice.

Thanks for letting me chip in my two cents' worth to this discussion.
--Kenton

trahant@earthlink.net (Mark Trahant) Wrote:
|
| VizFolk:
| I usually don't respond to these sorts or barbs, but in this case
| we have
| covered the issue. Perhaps not as well as we should have, but we
| certainly
| have not ignored the whole process, either.
| Frankly, it's a tough one because it is not a story that is
| naturally
| interesting. It's process. Further, there is no consensus on the
| issue.
| There is a great division between property rights and future
| community
| quality - making it all that more difficult to chronicle with real
| people
| instead of bureaucrats predictions about the future.
| FYI. We have written at least 3 front page stories since the first
| of the
| year, Dustin Solberg's most recent acount of the 40-acre rule.
| Moreover, is the press the only responsible entity? I have invited,
| more
| than once, interested parties to visit our editorial board for a
| discussion
| of the issue. So far nothing. The invitation is always open. There
| is also
| a spot for letters, op-ed pieces and other contributions. Again,
| almost
| nothing. Finally, the attendance at the community meetings suggests
| that,
| for what ever reason, the issue is not connecting with readers.
| I write this because I care. Any ideas about how we can write this
| so it
| will engage people is more than welcome. It's worth trying a new
| approach.
| But I am not sure how to do that in a way that will matter. Thanks.
|

Kenton Bird
Department of Journalism
and Technical Communication
Colorado State University
Fort Collins, CO 80523-1785
Phone: (970) 491-5986 Fax: (970) 491-2908
e-mail: KBird@vines.ColoState.edu

This archive courtesy of:
First Step Internet