The Reading Eagle is mum on Reading's Main Street woes

The state’s Main Street program helped West Reading become a regional place to shop, dine and meet friends.

What’s up with Reading’s Main Street program, which helps municipalities get state resources for economic development?

The Reading Eagle has the latest news, but it’s hard to find, in the third paragraph in a story by a stringer in the middle of the B section:

“[Reading Community Development Director Lenin] Agudo and Community Development Manager Crystal Edwards said the nine-member Main Street board hasn't had a quorum since its inception in 2010 and currently has only four members.”

How the city is handling the state designation seems like news to me. But the local newspaper ignores issues such as this.

KeystoneEdge has a big story about how leaders in Philadelphia and Pittsburgh are using art to develop their cities.

“Across the state, artists help rebuild and unify up-and-coming neighborhoods.”

What’s going on with Ricktown, Reading’s proposed arts district?

The newspaper is mum.

It appears the paper gets pressure to have big front-page stories when these efforts begin, and pressure NOT to report on them when they fizzle.

I think the public needs to know about such failures and why they happen so the problems in leadership and planning can be fixed.

These are examples of how a lack of good journalism is contributing to Reading’s stagnation compared to other cities in Pennsylvania.

The newspaper should police the police in Berks County

Police are happy that a state Supreme Court ruling makes it easier for them to search vehicles, according to an article in Monday’s Reading Eagle.

Could you think of a duller slant for this story?

In their efforts to make the paper as boring as possible, it seems, whoever OKs the story angles consistently ignore the issues. Not only does that make for biased, one-sided news articles, it violates the first rule of narrative, fiction or non: explain the conflict.

The conflict in the police-search story is obvious. Considering anybody’s ability to search me or mine, start with the Fourth Amendment and work down from there. I’m very suspicious of laws that make it easier for government-paid people with guns to go through my glove box.

“With the ruling, there's no reason to get a judge out of bed just to sign a warrant in a case in which, for instance, an officer smells marijuana in a car stopped for running a stop sign,” police reporter Steve Henshaw writes.

Reasonable people would say there’s no reason to wake up a judge in this case, with or without the latest ruling.

I can understand why police reporters want to be gung-ho crimefighter. If the cops don’t like what they write, the cops clam up. But the editors should flag this.

Why not talk to a couple of defense attorneys and civil-rights supporters to balance the comments from the district attorney and three (count them) police leaders?

I can see why the idea would perhaps not occur to Editor Harry “Follow the Rules” Deitz.

But questioning expanding police power is one role of watchdog journalism.