Big changes at Bay Windows

Bay Windows editor and FOMN (Friend of Media Nation) Susan Ryan-Vollmar is leaving the weekly newspaper and taking a top communications job with the Blue Cross Blue Shield of Massachusetts Foundation.

Susan, with whom I had the pleasure to work at the Boston Phoenix for a number of years, will be succeeded by Laura Kiritsy. Like Susan, Kiritsy will edit both Bay Windows, which covers the gay-and-lesbian community in Greater Boston, and an affiliated neighborhood weekly, the South End News.

Here is the press release:

Bay Windows and South End News co-publishers Sue O’Connell and Jeff Coakley are pleased to announce that Laura Kiritsy has been named editor-in-chief for both newspapers. Former editor Susan Ryan-Vollmar will formally step down next week to take a position with the Blue Cross Blue Shield of Massachusetts Foundation.

Kiritsy has been with the company since 2000. In 2002 she was named Associate Editor. Kiritsy’s tenure has been distinguished with important coverage of Beacon Hill politics. During the 2004 Constitutional Convention — the first of many to deal with the issue of civil marriage rights — Kiritsy broke the news of state Rep. Cheryl Coakley-Rivera’s decision to come out publicly. She also broke the news of state Rep. Gene O’Flaherty and state Rep. John Rogers’s decisions to oppose any attempts to amend the state constitution to ban the marriages of same-sex couples. Her ongoing coverage of the New Hampshire presidential primary received national attention.

In 2004 she was awarded the Sarah Petit Memorial Award for Excellence in LGBT Media by the National Lesbian and Gay Journalists Association. She also holds three awards for excellence in coverage of social issues and general news from the New England Press Association.

“Laura is uniquely qualified to edit both of our newspapers,” said co-publisher Jeff Coakley. “Her work is a critical component of what we do, and we’re looking forward to what she will accomplish with both papers and their websites.”

“Her weekly column on politics is a must-read for local activists and political insiders,” said co-publisher Sue O’Connell, who added that Kiritsy planned to continue writing the column.

Kiritsy said she was “honored” to be named editor-in-chief of Bay Windows and South End News. “I look forward to continuing the tradition of commitment to quality community journalism that has long distinguished both papers.”

Ryan-Vollmar was editor-in-chief of both papers for three years. During that time Bay Windows and South End News won 14 editorial awards from the New England Press Association including a special award for Bay Windows’s extensive coverage of the civil marriage rights debate.

“Susan Ryan-Vollmar raised the bar on what could be accomplished by a small, independently-owned publication covering a crucial local issue — gay marriage — that also held national importance,” said O’Connell. “Her work on the historic same-sex marriage battle was the best in the country.”

Bay Windows is New England’s largest weekly newspaper serving the gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender community. South End News is a general-interest newspaper serving the South End neighborhood in Boston.

At the Phoenix, Susan was instrumental in overseeing Kristen Lombardi’s groundbreaking coverage of Cardinal Bernard Law’s involvement in the pedophile-priest scandal, as well as the Phoenix’s own coverage of same-sex marriage.

She also excelled in finding my ledes, usually buried about three-quarters of the way into a 3,000-word piece.

Susan’s move is a huge loss to the local media scene, but also a great opportunity for Laura, whom I do not know well, but who’s clearly accomplished a lot in the past few years.

Not mutually exclusive

Dean Barnett writes in today’s New York Times:

The Mitt Romney I got to know was warm and likable. He had an electric intelligence. He was unfailingly decent. He was totally committed to his family. He treated everyone with respect and kindness.

If you’re like most politically attuned Americans, you probably don’t agree with my description of Mr. Romney. You may consider him to be the personification of political ambition. You possibly believe he will say anything to get elected president. You might even consider him one of the least honorable politicians in the country.

I’m not sure why Barnett thinks that these two propositions are mutually exclusive. I’ve never thought Romney was anything other than a smart, good person with a terrific family. He’d make a great neighbor. Sure, he has these weird delusions that he and his father marched with the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr., but those are harmless.

On the other hand, I’m not sure I’ve ever seen a presidential candidate as eager to reinvent himself on every issue in order to pander for a few more votes. The latest: his ridiculous promises to reinvent the auto industry in Michigan, which just so happens to be holding a primary today.

Mitt Romney: Nice guy, pandering pol. Not the first, but more blatant than most.

Fake outrage over a non-issue (II)

A New York Times/CBS News national poll of Democrats and Republicans shows that the constant drumbeat over illegal immigration simply isn’t registering.

According to the underlying data (PDF), just 5 percent believe that immigration is the most important problem facing the country — well behind war and Iraq (a cumulative 22 percent) and the economy (20 percent), and slightly behind health care (7 percent).

When asked what kind of change they most want to see the next president bring about, reducing illegal immigration (4 percent of respondents) was again well down on the list, behind improving the economy (20 percent), dealing with the war in Iraq (14 percent), improving health care (6 percent) and helping the middle class (5 percent).

Just to reinforce the point, John McCain — perceived as taking the least draconian stand on illegal immigration of any Republican presidential candidate — now gets the highest favorability ratings.

As Globe columnist Joan Vennochi points out, even though Gov. Deval Patrick is taking a political risk with his not-quite-proposal to extend in-state tuition rates to illegal immigrants, Patrick is well aware that immigrant-bashing has proved to be a loser of an issue.

Herald columnist Peter Gelzinis makes the same observation, writing:

Do you think Gov. Deval Patrick would be floating the idea of lowering state college tuition rates for illegal immigrants at this moment if Mitt Romney’s $40 million “illegal alien” screed had carried him to victory in Iowa and New Hampshire?

I don’t think so. Deval may be a moonbat, but he did manage to graduate from the same law school as Willard.

Gelzinis also notes that Patrick’s Republican opponent for the governorship in 2006, Kerry Healey, made a huge deal of illegal immigration. Healey, of course, became the first Republican candidate to lose a governor’s race in Massachusetts since 1986.

Politicians make a huge mistake when they confuse what they hear on talk radio with what most average Americans have on their minds.

Original sin and the Big Dig

The importance of Sean Murphy’s story in yesterday’s Globe is that it reinforces a gnawing fear many of us experience every time we drive through the O’Neill Tunnel — that today may be the day all hell breaks loose, and that we’ll be buried alive under tons of water-logged dirt.

Am I being overly dramatic? Perhaps. Officials whom Murphy interviewed seek to assure us that the ongoing mini-flood inside the tunnel is no threat to safety. But when we learn that “state officials acknowledged there is already surface rusting on 10 percent of the massive steel girders in the ceiling,” it’s hard to believe those reassurances.

The picture I take away from this is that of government officials knowing they have a potential catastrophe on their hands and having absolutely no idea of what to do about it. Even if you could close it and start over — and think about the incredible disruption to the region’s economy — where would you ever find the money?

The original sin was revealed in this 2004 story, by then-Globe reporter Raphael Lewis with an assist from Murphy. A watertight tunnel required a proven, two-layer approach — a tube within a tube, essentially. But once the tunnel designers realized they didn’t have room to do it right, they decided to do it wrong, and to brag about how smart and innovative they were. Thus we have a single tube, leaking from the sides and the top.

Moving forward, the incentives are all wrong. Especially during these early years of the Big Dig, the odds of catastrophic failure are no doubt pretty long. Officialdom has every reason to kick the can down the road, reasonably secure in the knowledge that we can get by for now. If Gov. Deval Patrick were to take drastic, disruptive action without a compelling reason, he’d be excoriated for creating a one-man recession.

Yet who knows what the truth is? It’s likely that even those studying the tunnel most closely don’t know whether it will last 25 years, the timeline in Murphy’s story, or 25 months. (And how do you like that 25-year figure? If it had opened in 1982, which doesn’t seem that long ago to me, we’d be looking at replacing it now.)

Even though the problem was unrelated to the leaks, we’ve all known since Melina Del Valle was crushed to death that something had gone horribly wrong with the Big Dig. In the absence of any good ideas for fixing it, we’ll all be playing Massachusetts Roulette every time we drive through it.

There may come a time, if it hasn’t already arrived, that the Big Dig will be viewed as the most blatant example of government incompetence in our history. And before you start sharpening your ideological swords, it’s unclear whether the problem was too much government or not enough. Certainly there should have been far more oversight of Bechtel/Parsons Brinckerhoff, the private partnership given carte blanche to design and build the project.

What a disaster.

Photo (cc) by Scutter. Some rights reserved.

Hoyt’s mixed bag on Kristol

New York Times public editor Clark Hoyt’s column on the hiring of William Kristol is disappointing, but entertaining nevertheless.

It’s disappointing because he quotes the most unhinged, illiterate e-mails the Times has received so that he can claim that at least some Kristol-bashers are nothing but ignorant haters, and because he blows right past the criticism that Kristol “is an activist with the potential to embarrass The Times with his outside involvements.” Well, yeah. That’s disqualifying, or at least it ought to be.

But Hoyt is right on the money in flogging Kristol for publicly urging that the Times be prosecuted for committing the sin of journalism against the Bush administration. And he’s touchingly naive in saying that Kristol’s refusal to talk to him was “an odd stance for someone who presumably will want others to talk to him for his column.”

Does Hoyt really think Kristol is going to do any reporting?

Last word on the Bradley effect?

If you haven’t read John Judis’ analysis at The New Republic yet, you should. Judis has looked at the numbers from New Hampshire and found that 57 percent of those voting in the Democratic primary were women — substantially more than the 53 percent that had been predicted. Change that assumption, and you’d have had poll numbers within the margin of error. Quod erat demonstrandum.

Where are those college students?

I just got an e-mail from a long-time correspondent who reminded me of something that the cable pundits should have known Tuesday night. Remember when they were saying that Obama still had a chance because the college towns hadn’t reported? Well, guys, the semester hasn’t started yet.

I overlooked that because classes started at Northeastern last week. But we’re on an unusual schedule. Very few other schools start until next week, or in some cases even later. Shouldn’t the folks who make the big bucks have figured that out?

Fake outrage over a non-issue

The talk shows are already going nuts over Gov. Deval Patrick’s statement that he may issue an executive order allowing illegal immigrants who live in Massachusetts to pay the in-state tuition rate at public colleges or universities (Globe story here; Herald story here).

But Lt. Gov. Tim Murray, appearing this morning on Tom Finneran’s show on WRKO (AM 680), said at least twice that such immigrants would be eligible only if they can document that they are in the process of seeking legal status. He also said there would only be about 400 or 500 eligible kids.

Not a big deal. Then again, we already know that anger over illegal immigration is one of those phony issues that doesn’t extend much beyond Talk Show Nation. Just ask Mitt Romney how his tough-guy talk played in Iowa and New Hampshire.

More on the (Tom) Bradley effect

Over at Hub Blog, Jay Fitzgerald has a good post linking to two commentaries by pollsters. In the New York Times, Andrew Kohut argues that a subtle version of the Bradley effect may have made Barack Obama’s support in New Hampshire look stronger than it was — lower-income white voters who might tend to reject a black candidate are also less likely to answer polling questions in the first place.

But John Zogby, in the Huffington Post, says (at least I think this is what he’s saying) that the pollsters didn’t get it wrong so much as they ran out of time. Uh, OK.