The Vienna Times Responds
Recently we wrote about a conversation with The Vienna Times about the historic district. That post brought forward this feedback from the reporter in question:
"Your assertion that I had a "light bulb moment" based on our conversation following the Vienna Town Council meeting is self-serving at best. What I had was your side of an issue. How could you possibly know whether I see your side of an issue as solely "a matter of principle?" As I told you, if I write about the controversy surrounding Windover Heights Historic District, I will do so only after I talk to parties on all sides of the issues involved. I'm not in the business of writing about my "light bulb" moments--real or imagined by others--but only in presenting a fair and balanced summary of the facts."
Jerry Schanke
Vienna Times
A fair and balanced summary of the facts? Your opening question that night was about how much money was going to be made by the homeowner. After you had just listened to testimony outlining why the Windover Heights Historic District was unconstitutional, all you could do was accuse the homeowner of attempting to profit? Your interest level in property rights was non-existent. However, your entire tone and understanding of the event changed after the facts were laid out to you. The story you seemed to want to write for that week's paper never happened. Interestingly, as a Reston resident you had another light bulb moment when you realized, that unlike Reston, Vienna has NO written rules for their review board.
We are not sure how there are two sides to the story of an unconstitutional law and government corruption, but we sure wait to see that story. Lastly, to your personal accusation that our reporting was "self-serving", this site was simply reporting on the events and players in the Vienna historic controversy as accurately as possible. The take away? Why is the Vienna Times worried about what this site is saying to begin with?
Comments
Larry B should read this thread. Maybe his view that local papers are unbaised might change a little.
Posted by: Vienna Resident | April 25, 2006 08:17 AM
It never ceases to amaze me how far this Town will go to get what it arrogantly thinks it should have. I have been living in the Town of Vienna now for over forty-seven years, and have seen Vienna grow in many ways. One way it has not grown, though, is in regards to fiscal responsibility and ethical behavior. Let's face the facts: If you are going to support the Vienna Historic District simply because you have the support of a dozen or more homeowners within the district (what do they know that I do not know) and some citizens outside of the district who like the district because it makes them think Vienna is a nicer place to have such a district, I would say that you are ignorant of why America fought the war of independence. No wonder people nowadays don't know tyranny when it's staring you right in the face. I say, you might not like this site, or the writers who author these pages, but, you CANNOT and MUST NOT be party to any such organization, whether it be government or private group, that has in its main objective to erode the rights of its citizens. This will eventually lead to the Town being pulled into the courtrooms and unneeded dollars wasted when it could be and SHOULD be used where money is better spent. And all this to save face. I am appalled at the current Town Leaders who claim they are on your side, yet they let this behavior continue. They need to be fired, or at least, get some new blood into the government so that this will not be allowed to happen again!
Posted by: Long Time Vienna Resident | April 25, 2006 02:49 PM
I think you should change the name of this Website from HistoricVienna.com to "The Vienna NewsLine" or some such appropriate title befitting this site...with the intention of getting away from being forever branded by the misfortune and issues relating to only the Historic District. I for one, happen to like what you are doing here, although, I would have probably preferred to ruffle a few less feathers, but what the hell, if you did that, no one would be reading your site, now would they! Keep up the good work, shall I say, Vienna O'Reilly!
Posted by: Long Time Vienna Resident | April 25, 2006 04:32 PM
Vienna Resident: Thank you for the suggestion regarding reading this thread. I believe my earlier statement was "If I am reading something in the local newspaper I have a general belief that it is an unbiased report and will give equal time to both sides of an issue." Note that I stated "general" as in with some skeptism and "equal time to both sides of an issue". That was the point when taken into context of the original submission. I can "generally" believe, not "blindly" believe that a newspaper will print a fair representation of both sides of an issue and reserve editorials for the editorial section where it is clearly labeled. While it is done from time to time a writer who mixes their own editorial comments into a story and presents that story as factual will eventually find themselves doing something else.
Posted by: Larry Blakely | April 27, 2006 11:38 PM
Larry B: Thank you for your "Spin Zone" manifesto on the word "general".
Posted by: Vienna Resident | April 28, 2006 09:15 PM