Emily Costello has an must-read post on the TAB Blog about efforts by the paper to interview the anti-development advocacy group Newton Villages Alliance.
Newton Villages Alliance to TAB: We’re too busy saving Newton to talk to you
by Greg Reibman | Jun 20, 2014 | Newton | 32 comments
So much for Jerry’s optimistic post that NVA was stepping into the sunlight.
I posted something similar to what I’m saying here on the Newton Tab Blog. I agree with a lot of what the Alliance is saying and I have never seen better photographs of Newton’s villages than those on their website.
That said, it’s never a good idea to duck the media and even worse to say publicly that you are doing so. I think I can understand why some of the organization’s members and supporters may not want to become visible because of the sensitivity it raises with other positions of things they are doing in Newton. But I wish enough of them would let us know who they are so these unrelated issues can be put to rest. You don’t get a message out when the blogs and newspapers are focusing in on secret membership lists and ducked media interviews.
I don’t believe for a moment that this is some dark or sinister cabal that is acting as some kind of fifth column to stop development here. I know all of the people whose names have publicly surfaced and I have high respect for the integrity, intellectual honesty and trustworthiness of all the them. I have worked with and kibitzed with many of them over the years. The reverse of a cabal is probably true. It’s far more likely that they are trying to fashion a set of coherent positions on a set of specific issues, projects and communications strategies that a diverse membership of free spirits can agree on.
@Bob: Much, if not all, of what you are saying is probably true. Still, the media relations here is so poorly coneceived that it makes me wonder whether David Cohen is the mastermind behind it all.
Three posts to a David Cohen comparison! I thought Greg would come out of the starting gate with it, but Gail does not disapoint!
We’ll call it Spector’s law.
Spector’s Law: “As a Village 14 discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving David Cohen approaches 1.” The corollary to Spector’s Law, of course, is that whoever invokes the comparison automatically loses the debate.
THM – Oh no, you didn’t.
Oh and Ted and Adam, this Spector’s Law thing is cute but not applicable. David Cohen’s fear of the media was a hallmark of his final term. And it wasn’t just the TAB. He once declined to talk to the New York Times for a story that ended up running on page one.
Noses. 😉
I’ve yet to hear any reason why a group that makes a website and writes some letters to a local editor needs to supply birth certificates and phone numbers. I don’t see any attempts to overthrow Newton in a website admiring trees and suburban living. And I don’t think anyone is writing serious checks to accomplish a coup.
@Hoss. Agree totally. My point is only that it’s not wise for any group to let those outside the group, particularly those that don’t share your view of things, define who you are, what you stand for, and how open and inclusive your group is. We have seen a lot of commentary about ducking the media and secret membership lists, but little about the substance of what the Newton Villages Alliance is really advocating. That makes the group and its members particularly vulnerable to the charge that they are made up of reactionaries who oppose all kinds of development and change. I don’t get that from reading their website, but it’s what’s likely to stick in the minds of a lot of people.
That’s what happened to Howard Dean and his campaign in 2004 when they didn’t quickly get on top of what happened at his concession speech in Iowa. The media began reporting incessantly that Howard Dean uttered his now famous scream after losing the Iowa Caucuses. The inference by most of the media was that Dean had become unhinged and angry after this loss. Bruce Henderson and I know two people from Newton who were in that room. There was never a scream. It was simply Dean trying to get his voice over a raucous crowd of supporters that went wild when he entered the hall. He couldn’t calm them down and that’s when he went into his spirited spiel. Anyone who looked at that scene on television knew he was laughing and trying to buck his supporters up. The media people there knew this, but it didn’t matter because all the pundits were talking about was the scream and yell. Ask most people today and the only thing they remember about Dean was the scream, not that he was absolutely correct about what would happen in Iraq. I don’t want to see that happen to the Alliance, or any group for that matter whether I agree with them or not.
Bob Burke, once again well said; you are the voice of reason at V14. It is a true shame that current societal behavior in the US does not have the same high level of respect for our elders that is associated with the Native American culture. By not listening to our elders, we put ourselves in the position of needlessly repeating our mistakes due to ignorance.
Bob Burke — I’m not sure if the Tab intends to publish an article similar to their thread on the Blog but they as a news source have already passed the boundary of what I would call acceptable reporting. Instead of reporting an event, they made the event by making calls and not getting an answer. I don’t like it that a news source is trying to investigate reasonably passive members of the community. And not to be too negative — but the Tab newspaper seems so lacking in resources that they now never report on the courts. Not well spent time.
Oh well, Newton life goes on.
BTW Bob Burke — this is what Howard Dean did> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wvsboPUjrGc
That was Steve Ballmer, former CEO of Microsoft. I think it’s what happens when eggheads try to rally a crowd.
Hoss, NVA is claiming to represent 1,000 members of the community. That’s hardly passive, and if someone claiming to represent such a constituency doesn’t respond to a request for an interview, that’s newsworthy in my book. Hey, it’s a free country. You know, Democracy is for the cool kids and all that. NVA can do whatever it pleases, but if they wish to be a credible force in local politics, a little transparency is in order, otherwise no respectable politician should listen to them.
Adam — Actually, saying that only 1,000 people support trees and maintaining a reasonable human footprint on the restricted space we have does seem to me modest and not aggressive. I’m not sure we can find one elected member in Newton that disagrees with the concepts of what NVA is preaching, it’s how the concepts are executed is where one disagrees.
Nice try, Hoss. That’s exactly the point. NVA is clearly taking a stand on things like Austin Street (though it looks like the web site is morphing — what happened to the rants on specific projects? Now I only see “green” votes?) 1,000 people can sign up because they feel passionate about trees — I do — then have their name (er, anonymoously) used to reject Austin Street or make claims about development causing our traffic woes. That’s not right.
Hoss and Bob:
It appeared that the group was defining itself in the contentious TAB OpEd by Kathleen Kouril Grieser of May 30, “All Villages at risk of development”. Forget Howard Dean. If Kathleen KG was representing the group then they were taking a very different tack than creating a passive communication organ. The TAB was doing their job when they tried to clarify what the identity and intent of this new group- a potential political player- was.
Well, I did see a fresh hole in my backyard yesterday. I thought it was a woodchuck… I’ll keep my eye out for guerilla tree plantings.
@Hoss: We’ve all seen how Super PACs and anonymous political ads have done a disservice to state and national political discourse. Newton couldn’t possibly benefit from anonymous political groups either.
You say: “but they just want more trees!” I agree with Adam and Terry, that’s not all they’re saying.
More to the point, this is about the precedent, not the positions. The notion that they’re too busy to explain themselves is ridiculous.
This is not the first time we’ve seen something like this before in Newton. And I didn’t like it then either. A number of elections ago, there was a “citizens group” that did a direct mail campaign for a slate of school committee candidates. The TAB (unsuccessfully) invited them to explain themselves too. After the election we learned that this group’s funding came nearly exclusively from the candidates themselves.
NVA has made it clear that they plan to be involved in local elections. Will we see NVA sponsored attack ads in TAB on urbanization-adoring aldermen?
Please note, I’m not suggesting that this is some secret cabal with a hidden agenda. But I shouldn’t have to say that. They should be the ones clarifying their intentions. Not being willing to explain — or identify — themselves does them and our city a disservice.
You are at serious risk of losing your sense of humor, Greg. Maybe you’re not getting enough catchup.
Perhaps we should have called it Reibman’s law 😛
@Terry. I never meant to imply that the Tab wasn’t doing its job. The paper clearly was and they had an obligation to press the Alliance to detail the substance of its positions. My complaint was that the Alliance hurt themselves by not going forward with an interview and laying their positions and where they are logistically right on the line. I know the Tab is now a very scaled back operation and they can no longer be on top of everything in the City. But I do think they try to be fair, open and as responsive as they can be with the resources at hand.
You can’t be too careful about your ketchup.
NVA can keep its leadership under wraps and avoid the media. It just hurts their cause in my eyes. Anonymity means a lack of credibility.
It’s clear that the development cycle and City Hall’s plan to sell affordable units has hit a perfect high point. That all means that similar groups will form overnight with each proposal,. We shall see if this NVA group has the staying power. It feels like every time someone appears before a BoA committee or writes a letter needs not only to supply the traditional name and address, but in addition full roster of those probably agree with the message. I dont know where this special policing power of opinion came from. As long as no one is doing anything verbally or physically harmful, I don’t need to know who they met with. It just utterly insulting that some people want to assess an idea by the person expressing it. What school taught us those principles?
Village14 and other similarly focused blogs serve a vital community purpose in keeping communications lines open and promoting community wide debates on the issues. Housing development in Newton is at a crossroad right now with compelling cases being made from both sides of development. Elected as an Alderman at Large in Ward 3, a Ward that is in the line of fire for developers, I have to view development from the community’s perspective. At the same time I have to look at the vision for the best interests of the city. I recognize some of the contributors to this blog as attendees at community meetings, and hopefully all contributors attend some of the meetings. I have been to Myrtle Baptist for the Curve St, and Crescent St discussions, I have attended meetings in Newtonville about Austin St, and Court St, and I have been to the recent meeting on the Turtle Lane Playhouse, and Rowe St. These are open meetings with very concerned residents voicing great opinions and ideas on what they feel is in the best interest of their part of the city. There is no doubt that that residents would like to see the city do a better job of maintaining their neighborhoods and quality of life. Some items to debate are this scary alpha numeric combo called 40B, proposed moratoriums on demolition, and zoning that doesn’t seem to line up with goals. The developer aside, I really didn’t hear a lot of positive comments on the need for 150 housing units on Rowe St. You really want to promote acceptable affordable housing on Rowe St, then lets look at 10 to 20 units and find a developer that is in business for the residents of Newton. The other 130 units are traffic congestion, over crowded schools, etc. The only winner here is a developer taking advantage of a an established neighborhood for his own personal gain.
A moratorium on demolition again requires realty over sentiment. I have a case at 88 Adena that could be remedied but may now be tied up with demolition issues on a vague historic question. Showcasing that homeowner rights cannot be trampled on for the lack our ability to roll out a consistent zoning plan. The residents of Newton deserve consistent guided programs that preserve the quality of life but also look to the future.
You may not agree with me, but I didn’t invent these ideas, I went out to the community and heard what they have to say!
@Hoss — I don’t know what TAB you’ve been reading.
If there’s been one theme in the paper over the past six months it’s been development. We’ve aggressively covered proposed building projects week after week with stories on Austin Street, Court Street, the medical marijuana dispensary, Chestnut Hill Square, Riverside, Wells Avenue, the N2 corridor, Turtle Lane, Rowe Street, and so on.
Not that there’s anything wrong with court reporting. Some of my best friends are court reporters.
Emily Costello — You write editorial pieces about Newton life, right? If we conclude that the writer is not from Newton, does that say anything about the content of the articles that you wrote? What’s up with calling out folks as if they’ve spent millions on advertizing and had years to organize? In fairness, that is what I asked, not about anything you responded to. Ok?
@Hoss: Huh? Are you saying that only someone who lives in Newton is qualified to write about Newton?
I have only a few complaints about Newton Villages Alliance.
1) the name. There was already an entity that used Newton Villages, and NVA should have picked a different name to avoid confusion.
2) The straw men arguments often employed by their more public actions (such as the op ed in the tab). I’ve discussed these in previous posts, but I like my discussions a bit more fact based.
3) secrecy. Hard to take them seriously if they don’t at least show who is on their board.
All that said, I’m happy to have them add to the discussions. I just take everything they say with a grain of salt, as the saying goes.
Greg Reibman — I tried to say the opposite.
Cohen and out.