It should be painfully obvious now why all of those reporters were being "let go."
P-I references are more confusing, but the Times article says "information from KIRO-AM."
That reminds me of the joke:
Q: Who's the best writer at the Seattle Times?
A: Some guy named "Associated Press."
The Slog is better because you added a full sentence to your coverage, in reprinting the stories that the Times and P-I reprinted from KIRO.
It's a good thing that the P-I let us know that, "None resisted being taken into custody." Stupid Times didn't tell us that.
So Lippens wrote the second one?
I am troubled by activists protesting that one answer to homelessness it to allow people to live in exposed, dangerous outdoor camps instead of treating their mental illness and/or addiction.
Nice snark Erica! You have found the right place to be.
News for Dan Savages war: for more info see his Oct. 2002 article calling for war on Iraq.
Newsweek: Soldiers Turning To Self-Harm To Avoid Going Back To Iraq
Army suicides rose last year, Pentagon says
115 troops killed themselves in 2007, the most since at least 1980
I have an idea. If those people were to work rather than protesting, they could actually earn money and get a place to live.
If I had less to do I would show up with a sign protesting the propensity of the homeless to poop in inappropriate locales.
Seriously ECB? Is this the best that you can do? If you actually read the local papers you might have noticed that both of these were follow-ups to earlier, in-depth articles. What's your point? Of course, I'm asking that question about more and more of the Slog posts...
Well, that is one way to get 20 homeless off the streets for a day or two.
Maybe we should only have one media outlet in the city. Perhaps if we only had access to one television station, one radio station, and one daily newspaper owned by the same monolithic corporate entity we would no longer be inconvenienced by excessive coverage of local stories.
StrangerDanger, these activists HAVE pushed for social services (more housing, treatment and mental health programs) to enable these folks to get off the streets. And local authorities do nothing, or worse than nothing -- they not only do nothing to advance and/or fund these particular ideas and help homeless members of our community, they decide to take away the only option -- camping -- that these folks have left. These folks protesting do not think that urban camping is the solution, they simply are acknowledging that it may be the only option for some folks, in the absence of any community or governmental support for more comprehensive solutions. Adding 20 shelter beds every other year simply doesn't cut it. We need something more holistic to deal with homelessness in our community, and until we do, we shouldn't be penalizing people who are doing their best with the little resources they have.
@4 FTW! Both of these stories sound like wire feeds.
We still care about homeless people? If we do here is a thought, when both the PI and Times go under the building can be donated to the state and converted into high end homeless shelters.
@15: The local authorities have done nothing? That's pure bullshit! The City of Seattle spent $40 million (that's right $40 MILLION!!) of taxpayer money funding homeless programs last year. That's over $16,000 per person found in this year's all night count. Add the tens (if not hundreds) of millions flowing into local homeless programs from the feds, state, county and charities - to say that the problem is a lack of money is naive and foolish. Perhaps the real problem are these same activists who are currently complaining. Perhaps as a society we should hold them more accountable for squandering and mismanaging the funds that they have already been given. Perhaps if they did a halfway decent job, there wouldn't be the need for anyone to live in the camps.
A rather unknowing post by the Stranger's news editor no less: the original feed was KIRO's, picked up by the AP; the Times ran the original, the P-I supplemented the original with its own reporting. Duh. Nothing to do today EB?
Ever notice how the writers who insist on using their middle initial are usually the most worthless?
Exhibit A: Erica C. Barnett
Exhibit B: Robert L. Jamieson
Comments are closed on this post.