No, Arlington is not a ‘news desert’ — and the Globe should have done some checking

Thank you! As an Arlington resident, a big newspaper reader (in paper form if available), and someone who works in politics, I’ve read YourArlington for years. I’ve been troubled by the Globe’s lack of follow up and research in numerous areas in the last few years. They seem to find or create a narrative and then write the story to support that narrative. I would never have said that 5 or even 3 years ago but now I see if fairly often and it’s disturbing. I take everything I read there now with a grain of salt, but I guess I do that with most sources now. And what a shame that is.

Inside Arlington is an interesting concept, but it has its limits. Public meetings are full of nuance, and a live human is important if we want to understand the story.

For example, Inside Arlington’s report of the last school committee meeting contained the following language, “The committee discussed the need for a policy on nutrition and wellness, and approved a job description for an administrative assistant. It also discussed the need for a meeting to discuss the budget and the implementation of a new literacy curriculum. The Wellness Department plans to incorporate academic conversations into classes, align with the district’s strategic plan, use inclusive language throughout the curriculum, and research a new health curriculum with a focus on skill-based learning, inclusivity, and social-emotional learning.”

There was a presentation by the Wellness department, but the action items of the meeting included adopting a new wellness policy. The AI doesn’t understand what it means to have a first reading of a policy, and that a motion to approve under a second reading means the committee is approving a new or amended policy.

YourArlington has the content of a good weekly newspaper. ACMI.tv, available on YouTube, gives people the opportunity to go into the archives to watch public meetings. Inside Arlington is an interesting addition to the mix, but it doesn’t replace the information already available to folks interested in public meetings in Arlington.

Just found this on an unrelated Google search, and thought I should chime in, since the controversial quote is mine.

“News desert” is clearly not a black and white term. Local news coverage ranges from nothing, to someone posting articles to a blog every once in a while, to full fledged local coverage like Boston Globe. To me, the litmus test is whether there is capacity to do in-depth investigative journalism, particularly in keeping local governments accountable. Perhaps my line is not the same as yours, but I stand behind my statement.

Inside Arlington (our site) was never meant to be a true local news. Like its subtitle says, it’s an “experimental news digest”, whose purpose is to showcase what AI is capable of today using Arlington as a testing ground. Our non-profit, Nano Media (https://nanomedia.org), want to provide this kind of technology to local news outlet everywhere. We’re not competing in Arlington: we want to complement YourArlington and have offered that they can republish our content.

Our AI is never meant to replace humans, but it is a productivity tool that can tip the scale of economics such that local media can be viable again and expand coverage and do more with less. To us, success is more and more journalists at work in local news.

We’re all working toward the same goal, which is to revitalize local news and ultimately make our democracy stronger.