excerpt:
The Times' usual practice with the college board has been to send an unlucky reporter who knows little to nothing about the issues or the candidates to spend a day or two on a pre-election roundup. This time that story ran March 2, and it mostly lists names and lets the incumbents say why they should be reelected. Once again, L.A.'s most invisible elected powers escape real scrutiny. And like with Bell, which Times editors decided years ago to stop covering, people are shocked to discover that once the media looks away there are problems.They discuss this in the wake of the Times' six-part series on the fiasco of the college district 5.7 billion construction program — and in the context of tomorrow's election.
To read the LA Observed blog post in its entirety, click here.
No comments:
Post a Comment