It’s Friday morning. I’m riding in the passenger seat headed out with my husband to some meetings, checking my messages while I’ve got some time. One message grabs my attention. “Did you see this?!” Followed by a screenshot of a post from our local newspaper. It was a topic that spurred concern and questions in me, so I asked, publicly, which resulted in being met with privately messaged questions from an anonymous representative of the newspaper.
Below is a letter to the editor I submitted describing the situation and concerns surrounding it.
Letter to the editor:
Last Friday morning, the (county newspaper) shared on social media: “(local school district) has been approved and funded by the Illinois Department of Public Health as an official School Health Center! Beginning this summer, (local school district) will begin receiving funds to serve (town) students through a school-based healthcare plan. See Saturday’s (newspaper) for all the details!”
I immediately had questions. Maybe I could have waited until after reading the Saturday paper to ask, but news reported excitedly with exclamation marks as punctuation reveals it’s more than a report of what is happening in the community. The inclusion of excitement inferred opinion, thus bringing into question your ability as a news organization to ask questions and gather information for the reader. If you already have an opinion, more importantly, if you already believe everyone should share your opinion… will there be any good questions asked?
So, I decided to ask some preliminary “good questions,” sharing the following comment on the post: “1. What is an official school health center? 2. How does a broke state pay for more social programs? 3. Majority of (county) is still fighting too much government involvement in our healthcare and here we are welcoming in another program?”
The newspaper Facebook page privately replied to my comment, just mine. “Ms. Rogers….what is your connection to our county?” I initially replied, “I live in (the) County.” A few minutes later, I thought better of it. Why would I respond privately to your newspaper? Why are you questioning me? This is highly unprofessional; the person behind the screen didn’t identify themselves or give me any reason for asking. The unidentified representative of (the newspaper) just started questioning the one person asking questions. With the message yet to be opened by the sender, I unsent the message. They must have read it on their phone screen as, at 8pm I got another message reading, “Really?”. I didn’t respond.
I’ll respond here though, publicly. Yes, really. Really, I live in (the) County. Really, I have questions. Really, my family pays to receive the Saturday paper. Really, I am unimpressed with your ability to ask pertinent questions on behalf of county residents.
I have a few questions, too. Did you send messages questioning those commenting excitedly in favor? I’ll answer that one: no. Clearly, no, as it’s publicly visible on the page that I was the only recipient of a private message. Why does a local NEWSpaper care about where an individual asking legitimate questions is from? Moreover, why would they seem to care MORE about questioning the individual asking questions than asking good questions of legislators and educators on behalf of area residents? How informed might we be if the investigative effort put toward questioning a concerned resident was redirected to the issues being reported upon?
How informed might we be if the investigative effort put toward questioning a concerned resident was redirected to the issues being reported upon?
If the objective of your newspaper is in fact news, the questions I posed are absolutely worth hearing a response. If, however, your objective is promoting agendas, ideas, opinions, or programs, I understand your bristling at my comment. So, the ultimate question: what is the objective of the (newspaper)?
Back to the school health center. I understand there are needs in our community, but are those needs best met with another government program? Does the government usually make things better? Is the problem children not receiving healthcare? Or is there a deeper root? Is there more we could do closer to the source to attempt to strengthen families in our community? Have we ever made things better for children by further removing the role of parents or has society continued to get worse as we’ve increased the government and school role and decreased parental roles? Have we ever removed a program because lives are improving? Or have we only continued to see increasing reliance, neglect and need? Is there any harm that could come from this? Are we asking the questions that need to be asked?
It’s one thing to see a need and find a solution. It’s another to work to find the best solution. Often, we complain about government but then continue to allow them to answer every need. I mean, if we let government handle it, it’s easy! We just send our money off and let someone else deal with the issue. However, if we want better outcomes for the children of our community, we are going to have to start being the solution. Christians, we are going to need to do better, I’m not without fault here, I believe there is much we all could do for children and families right here in our county… outside of state or federal involvement.
Rita Rogers
Further Thoughts
Isn’t this just typical? It truly seems that the individual is under constant scrutiny, under the microscope of those either toeing the lines drawn or drawing the lines that are to be toed.
This situation was of particular interest to me, first, because it’s local, but also because we often see “mainstream media” (I’ve recently heard it called the legacy media… I might take up that phrasing soon) as incapable of asking the hard questions. We see them push out, presumably, what they are told to say with questionable funding and alliances as our rationale for their methods.
But what reason does a small local paper have? Isn’t it interesting? Most people currently need no reason, critical thinking and asking questions are, by most, to be avoided.
We are living in a time where what is said to be good and what is said to be bad is so widely agreed upon it goes unquestioned. The majority of society are like little bobble head dogs sitting in the window of a car constantly nodding or shaking our heads depending on the angle of the bumps we hit, the angle being the handed down narrative or solution and bumps being the issues. Couldn’t we at least pause in consideration of what we hear and see before response?
Our societal problems run deep, most of us know that but we act as if surface solutions are the answer. Does adding pavement over the top of a sink hole prevent collapse? Or does it remove visibility of the surface cracks while simultaneously adding weight thus speeding collapse? In other words, applying solutions that don’t reach the root of the issue can often give a temporary facade of improvement while hastening or causing additional problems.
We need to get better at looking at the whole of an issue. We need discussion… open discussion and good questions even and especially when they are uncomfortable, promoted in our community not discouraged. It would also do us well to understand, the discouragement of discussion and questions usually comes from those who do not want their answers and statements to be heard.
