SOUND OFF
| Saturday, Mar 14 2009 10:14 PM
Last Updated Wednesday, Mar 25 2009 06:16 PM
Loading Stories
Advertisement
Reader: This is in response to reporter Courtenay Edelhart's recent review of the new Jimano's Pizzeria in Bakersfield.
How could she not be critical of the prices in this place? Almost $17 for a small 12-inch pizza and $33.75 for an 18-inch stuffed crust pizza? C'mon, get real!
I don't know if you or the owners of this place have noticed, but the economy is in pretty rough shape and is expected to get worse before it ever gets better.
Yet in her article, she seemed almost happy to pay almost $34 for an 18-inch pizza. A good steak and lobster for $34? Maybe. Pizza? Not a chance! Add a pitcher of soda and a salad (plus tax) and a family of four would spend close to $50! Throw in a pitcher of beer and now you're well over $60!
With these kinds of prices for pizza and in today's tough times, this place won't be around for long.
-- Rob Shugart
Jenner: Thanks for your comments.
First, Courtenay's piece was a column, and as such, she is allowed to include her opinion. She was indeed happy to find that a new local eatery was offering what she considers true Chicago-style pizza. She included a range of prices, as she did for the other new restaurant she wrote about.
She deliberately included prices because she knew that would be one of the first questions readers had.
We know these are tough times, and a lot of people are watching their budgets and making tough decisions about where to feed or entertain their families.
By the way, Courtenay is a single mother of two and watches every penny. But she's willing to splurge on her family every once in a while for hometown food.
n n n
Reader: I am disappointed in the tone and structure of a brief Web article in The Californian. In a brief summary your reporter chose to emphasize the identity of a shooting victim as a prostitute in the lead sentence.
The term prostitute has a negative connotation, immediately coloring the issue while in truth, the crime itself was a shooting, attempted murder!
I thought we had reached a level of enlightenment where the history or character of a victim is not on trial. This was a violent act, and clearly it was the intention of the shooter to take her life for very minimal reasons or provocation.
Why did The Californianchoose to ignore the true nature of the crime and instead exploit the opportunity to focus on depravity, suggesting through innuendo the victim deserved or inherently contributed to her own injuries.
This is unjust and reaches down to the lowest level of reporting.
In sentencing the shooter to 23 years, the court is sending a very strong message. Maybe the writer of this article should share some jail time with the shooter, as both seem to harbor the same lack of respect for women who are down on their luck.
-- Wade C. Eagleton
Jenner: We never want to punish victims. That's not our intent. But we're not going to cover up or shy away from the facts.
I'm not sure how we would have written that item without mentioning the fact that the victim was an alleged prostitute and the suspect was a disgruntled customer.
To leave that out would leave the readers with the impression a woman was randomly shot, raising more questions than we answered.
n n n
Reader: I am a subscriber to your newspaper on a daily basis. In reading Wednesday's paper I was a little bit disappointed when I got to Page A8 to see "Suspects in 9/11 attacks proud of charges."
In my opinion, this story should have been on the front page. I'm a little concerned about the fact that you felt that should be in the back and something about some students doing something with the gay marriage ban and something about Kevin McCarthy is on the front section.
Maybe those would have been appropriate to put on your Local section because that affects us locally, but this is a world issue and I think people need to see that this is going on.
Whoever designed that section didn't prioritize it the way it should be for our world as we know it today.
-- Michelle Timmerman
Jenner: We're a local paper and put stories on the front page that we believe matter most to our audience. Many times those are local stories.
We know we're still an important source of national news to some of our readers, but because so much of the national report is available through the Internet and 24/7 cable news coverage, we prefer to put stories on the front page that are not simply rehashes of old news that's been out on the airwaves or Internet for one or more news cycles.
The story about the effort to redefine marriage was of intense interest to many of our local readers, as was the story about our congressman, who is an emerging player at the national level of the Republican party.
And while it's shocking to hear the unrepentant views of the two 9/11 suspects, I didn't find it that surprising they would say that.
n n n
Reader: Just a note to state that I am of the same opinion as Vince Maiocco. When I read the headline above the photo of the guns my first reaction was that the paper was issuing a statement that Sgt. Scott Thatcher should have known he was facing a fool with a nondeadly weapon.
Reading the article does present the story as intended.
-- Jim Wilbur
Jenner: Thanks for the note. Certainly our intent was to express the challenge the officer faced when confronted with such a realistic looking weapon. Clearly our headline could have been sharper.
n n n
Reader: Thank you for the terrific service from your delivery department. I needed to read the paper last Saturday regarding a family situation, but unfortunately my American pit bull, Mr. Buddy, literally shredded the paper into confetti.
Your delivery department came to the rescue even though it was not their fault and promptly delivered another paper to my front door step with a smile, all at NO extra cost to me.
-- David Collins
Jenner: Thanks for the kind words. The people who deliver our paper and those who handle problems and complaints do an unbelievable job day in, day out. I know they'll appreciate the praise.
n n n
Reader: This letter is a thank-you note for the dedicated coverage of my pursuit of reasonable justice regarding repairs to damage to city property.
Without the attention of the media in this instance, my insurance company and, of course, the premium payer, would have been charged exorbitant fees. The judge of the Small Claims Court weighed the allegations and ruled, reducing the city's charges by half.
It is extremely important that taxpayers watch the guys downtown as they handle our well-being. This writer was challenged by the city management who seems to feel that its procedures are not subject to review.
It is assumed now that "routine repair work" might be subject to some professional review as taxpayers' funds are disbursed with little interest by their officials in their role in maintaining the substance of the city.
Typical contracts in this sector during the last calendar year exceeded $50,000 (many incurring a 15 percent "administrative fee"). These funds are lodged in an impressed fund that is routinely replaced by the city as funds run low. This is a convenient way to sidestep details that affect all taxpayers in our area.
-- Richard Jennings
Jenner: You are welcome, and thanks for the note.
We consider being a vigilant "watchdog" that holds government accountable is one of the most important roles we play, and I encourage all our readers to keep those kinds of stories coming so we can fulfill this part of our mission.
n n n
Reader: I am calling about the way you guys put out your paper. You put out the A section fine and then sometimes the Local section comes out in the D and sometimes the Classified comes out where the B section is supposed to be. It's just crazy, you know.
Who wants to read the headlines and then turn around to read the Classifieds and then the Sports. You want to go to the Local.
I don't now who's arranging the paper, but sometimes I get so disgusted the way it's published. I'm sure there's a lot of other people my age who feel the same way.
-- Armando Aguilar
Jenner: It's a challenging task to configure our press so all the sections have the optimal amount of pages and the color positions are in the right place.
For years we bent over backward to make sure the Local section was always the "B" section -- but even then there were many days when we'd have a second A section.
Because of recent changes we've made to the structure of the paper on some days of the week, we've found it harder to always force Local to be the second section. We can better control where the color positions and space for news and ads is by sometimes making Local the third or even fourth section.
We're not moving it around to annoy readers. Our hope is that readers will still find it, and we also hope you can accept the fact that it's not always the "B" section.
n n n
Reader: First and foremost, I would like to congratulate the 2008-09 Stockdale High School girl's soccer team and coaches for an outstanding season and qualifying for the Central Valley Divisional Championships -- Division 1. This feat was not easily accomplished and then to qualify for this championship in three of the last four years is an outstanding accomplishment.
Now, I would like to refer to the article written by Jeff Evans on the front page of the Sports section of The Californianon March 1, regarding the 2009 Girl's Soccer Division Championships.
I am deeply disturbed by the inappropriate and unprofessional reporting by Mr. Evans. Instead of starting the article with an acknowledgement of the Stockdale High School team for their skills and accomplishments, he chose to make two minor incidences the beginning focus of his article and then did not report them accurately.
1. It was negative to single out a player (by name) who was giving 100 percent to the game and was clearly justified in her attempt to clear her body from being held by an opponent. Mr. Evans reported that the opposing player was "bumped" by the Stockdale player making it sound as if there was illegal and unsportsmanlike conduct -- not true.
2. The Stockdale students, parents, community members who were ridiculed in Mr. Evans' article were not cheering bad behavior. I was in attendance and the fans were supporting the Stockdale team for how they played the game, the total scored and the skill shown by the player in overcoming her opponent to continue play.
I suggest that Mr. Evans may want to be more supportive of Kern County athletes who achieve at high levels of success, and at the very least, report accurately.
These athletes will soon be leaders in the community, and we should be giving them the positive recognition they deserve at every possible opportunity.
-- Linda Sargent
Jenner: I'm sorry you were disappointed in our report, but I think you're reading way too much into Jeff's story.
He used the example of the bumping of another player to show the kind of day the team was having. I don't think he necessarily needed to name the player, but he did not ridicule her or the fans.
We ask our reporters to keep in mind the fact that high school athletes are young people. We don't hold them to the same standards of performance as college or pro athletes.
But we do ask our reporters to honestly report what happens.
In my view, Jeff did what we asked. His report didn't trash the player or the fans. And it's not his job to "support" the team.
These athletes neither expect or need a cheerleader in the press box. Their "support" comes from each other, from their parents, coaches and fans.
And as your letter proves, there's plenty of that support.
