When Greensboro was gathering its resources in pursuit of Google's proposed ultra high speed fiber optic internet access, I wrote to News & Record publisher Robin Saul and asked him if he would publicly go on the record in support of it. I suggested he could possibly do so on video, at a public meeting or with a letter.
He declined. He said he wanted to maintain "impartial objectivity." I told him I understood his position.
Why then is he serving on the Downtown Area Consolidated Plan Advisory Team -- a group charged with "bringing additional viewpoints and perspectives to the planning process" to ultimately "help spur new investment and economic activity for the entire center city area?"
Is offering his opinion on economic investment to this committee somehow more impartial than it would have been for him to support Google's internet access as a good economic investment?
It seems inconsistent to me.
[Addendum: While Saul's involvement with this committee is perplexing in comparison to his reasons for declining to support the Google pursuit, a broader concern of media personnel being involved with these kinds of efforts will include noticing that Rhino Times publisher Willie Hammer also serves on this committee.]
Where's the Hat Tip?
ReplyDelete