Can someone explain to me where the story is in
this? I feel like the WW and Tribune have repeatedly run stories lately with these scandal-suggesting headlines that just sort of peter out at the end... because, well,
really, there is no story. This sort of journalism seems like a perfect fit for the half-assed journalists working for Mr. Pamplin, but a Pulitzer-winning guy like Jacquiss? The idea that Adams might have to "deny" canceling the re-paving of 23rd so that he could fund analysis of a Bside streetcar is particularly odious when there have been previous news stories reporting on how 23rd businesses were practically begging them not to re-construct the street right now due to the amount of disruption (and, indeed, letters between the two parties are quoted). There may be good reasons why PDOT doesn't want to re-direct this money to a paving project, but no one from Adams' office is quoted -- just some hack from the OR Taxpayer's Association (wtf?).
I'm all for critical journalism, btw. It's not the information being shared in this case that bothers me (of course), but the tone and methodology of the journalism.
I guess it gets the Bojack Dipshit Gallery frothing at the mouth, which is always amusing.