We are a state that leads in transportation

--According to Bobby Stern, the executive director of the Oklahoma Association of General Contractors. I kid you not, read his op-ed column published by the Oklahoman. Apparently Fallin, Inhofe, Langford, and Cole are leading our state in transportation similar to the 1992 USA Olympic team. I need to get in contact with him regarding whatever he is smoking.

FACT: Oklahoma has the 2nd-most miles of bad roads in the nation.
FACT: OKC has the worst public transit of any major U.S. city.
FACT: Oklahoma leads the nation in diverting transit funds to other places.
FACT: Oklahoma doesn't invest jack squat into public infrastructure.

Careful with words

I think everyone needs to be a lot more careful than they have been in choosing words to describe buildings. We've seen a lot of examples lately where words have been used to degrade old buildings as worthless, particularly by people who are just very uninformed.

Take the Daily Oklahoman's editorial board for example. I'd like to say it's the intent that matters, although I'm not sure what the intent is, and I still think the article does damage because people do read the paper. A column touting the recent big developments downtown had this to say about the SandRidge Commons debacle, in a sentence immediately following Devon: "Another energy company, SandRidge, has its own big plans for downtown — provided it can assuage preservationists who wish to see some decrepit old buildings left alone." First of all, I will mention that calling it "big plans for downtown" following news of Devon Tower gives off the false impression that this is a development that will have a similarly sized impact, when in fact one adds about 50 floors, when another subtracts 50 floors from downtown. The myopia of this editorial is especially evident when you consider that in the same text they praise the historic rehab work that has been done in Bricktown, and they say this of Steve Mason: "An area that was once a stretch of abandoned and dilapidated buildings is now thriving."

So without insulting the intelligence of the average Oklahoman reader, are people really supposed to believe this? So the Oke's position on old buildings is that if they've been restored, that's awesome..but if not, they're decrepit and need to go. I think it's at this point that a reader of average intelligence should question the double standard that seems to put old buildings at a disadvantage, which is a shame considering the intrinsic value that they old, similar to a well-aged wine. As for the word decrepit, one could argue that is true that the buildings could be in better condition--BUT I would contend that decrepit is one of the strongest words you could possibly use to describe a state of disrepair, and what is the point in having a newspaper that is using colorful, vivid descriptions of the state of disrepair which some great buildings happen to be in. It's as if the Oklahoman is actively working against these buildings by invoking these descriptions, using the word "decrepit," which is comparing it to this..the top Google image result for the word "decrepit."


Perfectly describes the KerMac, Braniff, and India Temple, right?

I also see here in the Medical Business District Masterplan Final Report on page 18 it refers to "the success that is being had by housing developers in the downtown office core (mostly converting obsolete office towers) and in the adjacent Deep Deuce and Triangle sub-districts." Since when was the Park Harvey Tower obsolete? Granted, it is much better as apartments, and has been nearly 100% occupied as apartments--it was also nearly 100% occupied as an office building, almost completely by attorneys (due to its location across from the Courthouse). So obsolete? Seems like a strong word to use when you can be easily proven wrong..and I'm not aware of many more office towers that were converted to residential at the time of this study (since there has been the upper floors of City Place).

Also, in an article about the struggle a few years ago to save the historic Gold Dome at 23rd and Classen, this was printed in the Oklahoman: "'They (the building owners) have a building that is functionally obsolete,' said Dennis Box, an attorney representing Walgreen Drug Stores." I've said it before, but if the Gold Dome is "functionally obsolete" (implying that it was beyond bringing back) then maybe "functionally obsolete" is the new cool.

Jenni Carlson at it again

Apparently my favorite Oklahoman columnist, Jenni Carlson, is upset about the alleged lesbian softball stereotype..just read her recent column. Uh-oh...she's at it again: Writing columns about awkward subjects that have nothing to do with sports and going places where she should not even go...

I wonder what a typical morning meeting of Daily Oklahoman sports columnists is like:

Editor: Okay guys, I need your columns in by 6 today.
Berry: Alright chief, I got a doozie today for ya..on implications of Big 12 break up!
Editor: Awesome, Rohde?
Rohde: Uh... I dunno chief, let me think for a minute. Okay I got it, I'll do a column on how OU is the greatest ever and how everyone else sucks.
Editor: Perfect, after all--that's all we write about here at the Oklahoman, right? Now Jenni..Jenni, what are you going to write about?
Jenni: How about how black people seem to like chicken?
Editor: Uhh....
Jenni: Okay, okay..what about what football positions people of different races are genetically engineered for?
Editor: Huh? Are you serious?
Jenni: Okay, fine--I know I got a lot of flack about that one last time I did it! How about...how softball players are thought of as lesbians??
Editor: Whatever, just don't get featured on Jon Stewart again..

Who the hell does she think she is? And yes, it's unfair that there's a lesbian stereotype with softball--but she missed the point. The Wall Street Journal used the stereotype against Obama's recent Supreme Court nominee by putting on the front page a photo of her playing softball with her hair rolled up in a bun, and there is no way they were oblivious to the ongoing rumors that Kagan, unmarried and child-less, is a lesbian. This is why sports writers should stick to sports, politics writers should stick to politics, and arguments about genetic engineering should be left to Dr. Mengele..not the sports page of the Oklahoman...

Another Oklahoman mention

Wow, looks like I was honored to have another mention in the Daily Oklahoman in an article written by Steve Lackmeyer, about how social media and blogs have transformed the downtown discussion. I am incredibly lucky, as critical as I have been of the status quo and the powers that be, to be included in several articles in the state's main newspaper.

Steve wrote..

"Those reporting include Doug Loudenback (www.dougdawg.blogspot.com) and Nick Roberts (www.downtownontherange.blogspot.com) — both established bloggers who also are frequent contributors to www.okctalk.com.

The solicitation of bloggers is a project launched by Michael Scroggins, spokesman for the transit authority, and Kristy Yeager, spokeswoman for the city. Some might question whether such arrangements will ensure nothing but favorable coverage.

But if history is a guide, some of the bloggers, most notably Loudenback and Roberts, have written extensive coverage, both glowing (Loudenback was a big proponent of the NBA effort and Ford Center tax), and negative. (Loudenback wrote critical coverage of the MAPS 3 campaign and Roberts has been critical of Core to Shore development plans.)"

So yeah, a very good mention altogether. I'm still scratching my head and trying to figure all this out. People think I'm an established blogger with a track record.. quite an honor, and especially to be included in Metro Transit's forums on streetcar planning.

The reality is that I am no more than a citizen journalist. I read the same news that everyone else reads. I'm familiar enough with downtown, and know its players well enough that I know where to look to find out the scoop on things. My life is primarily consumed by class and the city I currently live in, which is not OKC. Whenever I get a day that slows down and I have time, all I do is put together some quick research and write up a post that conveys generally the same message as every other post on this site.. OKC needs more infill, more density, smarter planning.. and less distractions from the real issue. I am committed to being a part of the urban movement in OKC, as exciting as it has become.

There is no reason that dozens of readers couldn't do the exact same thing that I do. That's what I'm getting at, and I hope that will eventually come of this.

Famously 3/4ths Inackuratt

The charges against them
Who does The Oklahoman's Jenni Carlson think she is? I think she's some kind of OSU beat writer, but who wants to be a boring ol' beat writer these days when you can write on more interesting things..like genetic differences between black and white football players. Read her article prior to the Sun Bowl, about Stanford's Toby Gerhart.

What is the article title?

One of a kind: Toby Gerhart succeeds at a position white players don't play

Here's one excerpt from the article:

"The theories are many. Some believe young players are funneled toward certain positions based on stereotyped characteristics, a practice called stacking or slotting. Others say young athletes’ economic backgrounds go a long way toward predetermining what position they’ll seek. Then there is the controversial theory based on genetics and the idea that blacks have a speed and skill advantage on whites."

Was Dr. Mengele not available for comment on the genetics idea? We could have included Catholic and Jewish lacrosse player comparisons and really had us a field day.

Does anyone remember her article on former OSU quarterback, Bobby Reid, getting relegated to back-up behind Zac Robinson.. the article said, "maybe Bobby can go home, 'n his mama make him some chicken." Now this? Those "racial sensitivity" seminars at OPUBCO must really be paying off.

How does Jenni Carlson keep her job? Look, I'm sure she's a nice girl and not a racist and all, but I just don't understand why The Oklahoman or "the garbage editor" keep sending blatantly racist articles to publication. And it's not so much the fact that you're offending someone of a certain race (because chicken is delicious, honestly), it's just showing how out of touch the paper is when your headlines, let alone the body of the article, are clearly "racially insensitive."

And look, I get it--there's a point to be said that white players only play QB these days. But if you're going to make a point that could be construed as racially insensitive, here's what you need to do: word it in a way that is not racially insensitive (as a bunch of journalism graduates you should know how to "word things"), and secondly, not in the TITLE. The Oklahoman fails to do either with this article. And some things are interesting for coffee talk, but not for publication. Genetic differences between blacks and whites are not something that the John Birch Society Newsletter would even care to publish, and a major U.S. newspaper shouldn't either.

Maybe it was just a slow news day?

And let's look at The Oklahoman's incompetence in an overall review. I honestly don't even know where to begin here.

The most obvious starting point, and surprisingly the one that doesn't bother me at all, was the blatantly biased coverage during the MAPS3 campaign. For background, check out Doug's post on the topic. Look, I've said before to others I'm not a "means justify the ends" fundamentalist/principles kind of person. I believe in results, getting stuff done, whatever works, and I think fundamentalism is actually a cruel, depressing ideology. What does bother me about the blatantly biased coverage however was that if they were going to try and tilt the balance, A, don't be blatantly obvious, and B, don't write stupid crap that nobody is gonna buy.

Perfect example: 11/22/09 article on the proposed convention center.

"If the planned downtown park is the Xbox under the MAPS 3 Christmas tree, Roy Williams also wants you to appreciate the dress socks your grandmother bought you.

The proposed $280 million convention center is the largest part of the $777 million MAPS 3 plan. Williams, president of the Greater Oklahoma City Chamber, said most people consider the convention center a project for business owners and out-of-towners."

Seriously? Dress socks? If you're reading this and you're hoping to get some interesting insight on why you should vote for the convention center.. you get "dress socks." $280 million dress socks, no thank you. That is bad biased coverage. Good biased coverage could have been..anything else. It's called "lacking imagination." Words and stuff.

Then the article, to attempt to be fair, quotes a UTSA professor who studied economic development and believes that the convention center arms race doesn't mean increased convention business. Then it quotes Roy Williams with a horrible comeback, something like, "Well we believe our market will be different." A better comeback: "You're right that being in the convention center arms race doesn't mean a TON of increased business, but not being in the convention center arms race DOES mean a TON of decreased business." That's a good comeback. "Well we believe we'll be different," isn't, and that's what upsets me--biased coverage intended for The Braindead. NEWSFLASH: The Braindead don't read newspapers, even The Oklahoman.

I just used that particular article because that's an epic example, indicative of all of the MAPS 3 coverage, which nobody can deny was incredibly biased, regardless of which side you were on. Everybody knows it. The chairman of the Yes for MAPS campaign was none other than Oklahoman publisher David Thompson.

Sharing in the blame
That's not to say that they were the only ones putting out unbiased coverage. The Gazette, who wrote about The Oklahoman being biased (do they ever miss an opportunity?), was also fairly biased. Granted nearly everything the Gazette published on MAPS was head-and-shoulders better than the crap in The Oklahoman, and much more intuitively written. With the Gazette though, keep in mind who their readers are: typically the more educated, more cultured, and more urban. The kind of people who are going to be ALL about MAPS.

TV news was also pretty biased--against MAPS. News 9 wasn't so bad, and their stuff wasn't an insult to my intelligence, but the others..yeah. They kept catering and pandering to the Not This MAPS crowd, and putting up this retarded front of "balanced" coverage. When you're going to incredible ends to put up balanced coverage, guess what, you no longer have balanced coverage because at some point there isn't anything new to say.

Every time the YES campaign had a press conference with NEW information ended up just being another opportunity for the NTM crowd to get face time rehashing the same tired and worn lines that defined the latter part of 2009 for them. For all intents and purposes, they could have just recorded the same guy saying the same thing and just replayed a recording of that for the "NTM response" portion of any segment. Surely though, in journalism, you don't have to rehash a worn mantra in response if they don't have anything new to say?

Moving past MAPS, here's another example of a really bad article in The Oklahoman, an article about shutting down a mental health clinic in Norman. It doesn't specifically say in the article, but I'm guessing that the budget is $7.3 million?--for a facility with 60 beds?? That's $122,000 per bed, I don't get it..yeah that needs to be closed. Then the article cites that the facility gets "100 calls a day" but only gets 550 patients a year (over $13,000 per patient)? Obviously those calls aren't exactly important, probably including personal calls and everything, so who knows. I'm just saying there are a handful of obvious question marks that I think were lost on whoever wrote the article.

Another thing missing from the article is the other side. Where is the official's comment (who even designated the budget cut?), surely his/her perspective would be newsworthy. Why does some legislator think that we need to cut out a $122,000/per bed mental health facility? This is nothing but reaction without getting to the root cause of what's being talked about here. So yet another instance where The Oklahoman fails to truly inform the reader.

Another thing I'm upset about? Everything that The Oklahoman isn't writing about. It's almost gotten to the point that, to borrow the famous NY Times slogan, it's "All the news we see fit to print." Here's a shining example of that: lifestyle center proposed at Memorial and County Line Rd, that I have been the only one talking about. I'm just a little shocked right now that nobody thinks it's incredibly newsworthy that the Planning Commission recently approved a lifestyle center for far-northern portions of Canadian County, closer to Piedmont or Kingfisher than Downtown OKC. Not even really surrounded by the kind of neighborhoods you need to support such a retail endeavor. Nobody thinks this is a development wake-up call?

A few bright spots
I don't think I could fairly describe the situation without mentioning a few bright spots at the newspaper. There are a few people in charge who truly do know what they're doing, and not all writers are that bad either. Going back to the Gazette article, it's true that The Oklahoman was offering paid volunteer time for people who wanted to help with the YES campaign. And in the interest of full disclosure, even the Gazette, who relishes any opportunity to make The Oklahoman look bad, couldn't make the paper look too bad.

It turns out that immediately after the email went out offering paid volunteer leave, Newsroom Chief Kelly Dyer Frye sent out an email to anyone in the newsroom telling them to disregard the memo. The News & Information Center has a political policy that it does not participate in promotion of issues they are covering.

And Thompson's response, aint half bad either.

"Our policy does not allow newsroom employees to engage in political activity, but as good corporate citizens we have many non-newsroom employees who may wish to volunteer. We offer our employees three paid days annually to do volunteer work. Periodically we offer opportunities company-wide, and have for some time. Below, please find a copy of our News and Information Center policy."

He is right. Criticize them as you want for a small handful of examples of stories that were bad, The Oklahoman is a mainstay among Oklahoma City's "good corporate citizens." If The Oklahoman does not pride itself on its journalism ethics, it can at least and always pride itself on its prominent role in the community and in making a difference as a "good corporate citizen." This is certainly unusual for a newspaper, but take it for what it is. Most newspapers are the other way around, not priding themselves in having "good corporate citizen" status, but rather priding themselves on journalism ethics and being distant from local politics.

Would I rather work for the Boston Globe or The Daily Oklahoman? I think probably The Oklahoman, believe it or not. If working for them in a non-news capacity means you can still participate in community affairs, you get benefits like 3 days off paid volunteer time to be out in the community, and you work for a company that stands for moving the city forward, that isn't always a bad thing. Yeah, I called Jenni Carlson a racist, but she does have some good articles upon occasion. If The Oklahoman is willing to let its columnists express themselves, even when sometimes it may be a bit controversial and uncouth expression, that generally isn't bad. It's up to the individual columnist to protect their reputation. The paper would be much better served though by trying to find an opposing viewpoint to print side-by-side, but sometimes that's asking too much.

Time to change
This is all not intended to be an attack suggesting that people get their news from other sources than The Oklahoman. There are no other sources than The Oklahoman for mainstream print news in OKC, so people need to realize that first and foremost. Move past the irrational " boycott The Oklahoman!!" and let's have a dialogue that focuses around improving the newspaper our community relies on for news and information.

1. Let's demonstrate that we are above potentially racially insensitive headlines on the front page of the sports section, whether you think actual harm to anyone is done or not. Business community leaders don't get away with that, sports columnists shouldn't either.

2. It might not be a bad idea to consider shifting the focus of the newspaper, but either way, it's worth discussion. Should the newspaper focus on being a good part of the community, or focus on journalism ethics? Which does OKC need more--a corporate beneficiary or a reliable, ethical newspaper? Believe it or not, the answer is not obvious. Like I said, it's worth a discussion.

3. The "good people" need to be rewarded. Since I named names on who the "bad people" are, it's only fair that I name names here, too. Guys like Steve Lackmeyer, who knows downtown better than anyone else and strives to maintain his ethics, people like the Newsroom Chief, and other journalists who know what they're doing.

4. As far as sports writers go, keep in mind that even sports writers are subject to racial sensitivity just as the rest of us are. They can't get away with saying crazy things. Also it might be a good idea to STOP having OU beat writers cover OSU stuff and vice versa, let the columnists specialize on ONE school. Let Jenni Carlson JUST cover OSU. And please, let John Rohde JUST cover OU. As an old Sooners guy, it's embarrassing to see the stuff he writes about OSU. Cowboys friends of mine tell me he doesn't even know what he's talking about.

5. Last and most important, acknowledge that your readers are far more intelligent than the average people. Reading a newspaper these days typically means you are way ahead of the curve. The people that read your newspaper want to get the scoop, not opinions or heresy, on the issues that matter. It's bad to have reporters who write articles that feel like they're talking down to the level of people who typically DON'T read the paper.

The newspaper has demonstrated a huge commitment to moving the OKC community forward to the next level. This is evident in everything they do, from their coverage intended to win votes for MAPS, to their sponsorship of events, to encouraging employees to make a difference in the community, to being a sponsor of NBA basketball in our city. But the next thing The Oklahoman can do for us is provide the community with a newspaper fitting of a "Big League City." That doesn't mean we want liberal bias as opposed to conservative bias, that just means we don't want bias. We want the news, reported ethically, and that's it. The community has a commitment to encourage The Oklahoman to change course and follow this new path. We're all in it together. My intention is not to write a scathing review of The Oklahoman and offend anyone. The intention is to point out some issues, offer solutions, and urge us to move forward as a community. And I don't intend to do that without acknowledging the beneficial role The Oklahoman has played in our community in the past.

And now after so many words and such a serious subject, here's some comic relief..hide, it's crazy Mike Gundy! He also wants "to talk about this article here."

Hey, I was featured in the Oklahoman..

Been getting some good press. A reader mentioned to me that I was in the Daily Oklahoman, featured on their Monday Morning Quarterbacks section that highlights interesting blurbs. The other four blurbs are such venerable media institutions as a far right-wing syndicated columnist, the USA Today editorial board, a Reuters.com blog, and a National Review article.

The blurb highlighted my NW 9th Street column.

Letter to the Daily Oklahoman

I've never really been the type for writing letters to newspapers, but I thought I'd give it a try. I feel like I'm doing this 50 years prematurely, but I suppose you can never start too soon. Writing letters to newspapers, that is. Will they even publish it? Who knows, I'll be surprised, but the worst they can do is reject it. I went a little bit over the word limit, which is 250 words.. which makes it really difficult to make a few cohesive points. Obviously if I really wanted to have my say appear in the mass media I should become a columnist, considering I could probably write a lot better than Ann Coulter and the rest of them. Anyway, here's what I wrote..

Currently our fine city of 547,000 people is at a crossroads as we mull over a potential 3rd installment of MAPS, the highly successful Metropolitan Area Projects. Now that Oklahoma City is a “Big League City” we are competing with an entirely different and much more competitive class of communities, so our thinking and understanding must evolve as well. Since the decline of downtown at the hands of suburban sprawl, downtown has always been relegated to some special place where somehow providing the infrastructure necessary for it to blossom is entirely different than providing infrastructure necessary for anywhere else in the city, like the Quail Springs and Westmoore areas. These rapidly growing areas of the city add hundreds of residential unit’s a year.

In 2008, OKC, Norman, Edmond, Midwest City, and Moore were alone combined for around 4,000 housing permits. However that number could have been much higher had the economy not stalled nearly 3,000 residential units in the downtown area, proving that downtown OKC can be a viable community with just as much growth as suburban OKC. According to a market study of 14 peer cities, each of these cities had around 5% of their metropolitan population in their downtown. With 1,262,000 accounted for in Metro OKC, that means there should be 63,000 people living in downtown, or slightly more folks than Moore. But as it is downtown has no grocery store, no elementary school, crumbling streets, pathetic infrastructure, and next to no mass transit.

Are we taking downtown seriously, even after the MAPS euphoria has hit, or do we just treat downtown like the pet project of a popular former mayor? Let’s be real here. Having a viable community in the heart of OKC’s central core can be an impetus for metro-wide growth, but it’s just a joke as long as suburbs continue to be selfish with infrastructure. MAPS 3 should address downtown’s crippling infrastructure needs first and foremost and provide a lynchpin for achieving a critical mass of development. This should be the priority long before Chamber of Commerce and City Council pet projects.