Where was the editor?

When you read a ridiculous Page 1 story like the anti-mass transit piece today, you have to ask, Where was the editor?

Of course, I'm referring to the reporter's assignment editor, who is in on a story from the time it is conceptualized to the final editing before it goes over to the news copy desk for damage control and headlines with "mustard" on them, as Editor Frank "The Fish Stinks from the Head Down" Scandale is fond of saying. (I always wondered why he didn't ask for headlines with salsa [photo] on them? He's such a dull, uninspiring guy.)

Tom Davis' editor is Dan Sforza, a former reporter whose own mediocre job on the transportation beat is responsible for the low quality of reporting and writing we have seen from Davis for years. Just look at the lead paragraph of today's story:

Each community is known for its picturesque downtown and walkable streets that draw people away from the noise, crime and traffic of larger cities.

What planet is Davis and Sforza writing about? Englewood is supposed to provide relief from "noise, crime and traffic?" How much time has the reporter spent there? Has he heard the gunshots from the open-air police firing range? Did he miss the noisy, polluting freight trains that rumble through town frequently, causing traffic mayhem? Doesn't he read all the crime news in the paper day after day that portray North Jersey as a hotbed of criminal activity? What does this lead paragraph have to do with the reality of the suburbs we live in? And what does it have to do with a proposed light-rail system?

Unfortunately, the copy desks at The Record has been handcuffed for years. The news and feature copy editors are encouraged to write snappy headlines, so much so some of them have to resort to writing misleading heads, such as "The dog ate my turkey" and the one in the Business section the other day about New Jersey companies "taking flight." But they are discouraged from challenging poor writing and reporting, and in general, warned against changing copy without approval from the editor who screwed it up in the first place. The copy editors' supervisors long ago dropped quality concerns, and just shovel the shit as fast as they can.

Look at the sub-headline on the light-rail story:

Critics say light rail will bring
host of troubles to their towns

Yet, the story never says the "host of troubles" are the same problems the towns have grappled with for decades from the freight railroad running through the middle of their communities or that the light rail will actually improve the environment with much less noise and zero emissions.

You have to wonder at the motives of Davis and Sforza for such a distorted picture.

"The dividing line" main head over the story could just as well refer to the line between good and bad journalism, and we know which side The Record, Davis and Sforza are on.

See previous post:  
Anti-mass transit tirade, 12/19/09