The way it’s written – Convention Center Hotel example

I think it’s a fascinating part of our political process (and life in general) how two people can listen to the same thing and hear it differently; also how two writers can report on the same event and convey pretty much opposite impressions. Compare and contrast this report titled “Metro continues controversial hotel work” by an un-named reporter on the Tribune‘s web site, with this one by Ryan Frank in today’s Oregonian, headlined “Metro Council sidetracks hotel proposal”.

Ryan says of the Metro Council vote, “The council’s 7-0 decision delighted hotel opponents and left would-be hotel developers fuming”.

The Trib writes, “The Metro Council voted Thursday afternoon to create a financing plan for the potential development of a 600-room publicly owned, privately operated headquarters hotel across the street from the Oregon Convention Center”.

Both articles quote selected Metro Council members. Whenever I read quotations in the newspapers or see snippets on television, I always wonder what else the person said. Reporters and editors often choose one sentence from a five minute conversation, and even then a word or only one letter missed or changed can distort the original intent. I’d like to see elected officials issuing official statements after votes, explaining why they were for or against the proposal and what they believe the overall vote means. Or blogging about issues after votes as well as before, so citizens can ask questions and understand issues and votes better.

Because as evidenced by the way these two articles are written, sometimes it’s hard to tell.