The New York Times on Friday became the latest national news outlet to cover Vermont’s long-simmering fight over whether the state will host a squadron of F-35 fighter jets.
In an A13 story, Times freelancer Theo Emery doesn’t break any new ground, but he captures the irresistible drama of the situation: A divided city fights over whether to support “our guys” — as pro-F-35er Nicole Citro puts it — or those who would be bombarded by the plane’s noisy takeoffs. Vermont politicians line up in favor of the basing, while others decry undue political interference.
Etc., etc.
While the themes of Emery’s story may be familiar to anyone living in the Green Mountain state — or, at least, here in Chittenden County — it’s surely news to many of the Times‘ 1.87 million subscribers. No doubt that will further elevate this local fight into a regional story with national legs.
You can read the story here.
Got something to say?
Send a letter to the editor and we'll publish your feedback in print!
The F-35 decision-making process has never passed the smell-test,
any more than Leahy’s craftily worded non-denial denials re influence.
The Times does break new ground with the 2010 scoring chart,
but underplays the news, starting in the seventh graf.
But it’s more evidence that the Air Force “deliberative process”
was manipulated till it got the right answer for someone.
That both the Times and the Air Force can both refer to “qualitative” criteria
with a straight face, without ever attempting to explain those criteria is
something of a giveaway.
What is “qualitative” if it’s not subjective, and subjective is both
infinitely malleable and highly resistance to objective evidence.
The most hilarious part of reporting by the Times and almost everyone else,
is how few people acknowledge their own description of a scam.