It's always fascinating to see how national newspapers portray an hot local issue. We call it parachute journalism, and it is most common for local reporters to chortle and roll eyes at how the national outlets either misunderstand or take a swing and miss. When reporters have dropped in to cover the 9th Congressional District race, they've many more strikeouts than home runs, mainly because, in my view, they arrive with preconceived notions of the voting values and public policy priorities of African-American voters in Memphis.
So when I saw the link to The New York Times article, "Memphis to Vote on Dissolving Its School System," up went the fact-checking antennae and my internal editor readied its seek-and-destroy missiles for firing. No need, as it turned out. The reporter, Campbell Robertson, provided a nice, succinct outsider's view of both sides of issue.
On the strategy of Memphis City Schools board members like Martavius Jones and Tomeka Hart on surrendering the charter: "So, facing the possibility of a suburban special district, the city played its trump card."
Robertson points out Collierville State Sen. Mark Norris describes the state legislation he's proposed as merely an attempt to create an orderly transition: "He contends that it is more like a takeover, and that another, more comprehensive set of school consolidation rules should apply. These rules require a planning commission, and a majority approval by suburban voters as well as city voters."
But Robertson provides this kicker: "That voting arrangement, as it happens, would effectively doom the city's plan."
Go read the whole thing. It's instructive and benefits from being able to look at the issue from 40,000 feet, if you will, and not worry with whatever developments are happening immediately on the ground.
So when I saw the link to The New York Times article, "Memphis to Vote on Dissolving Its School System," up went the fact-checking antennae and my internal editor readied its seek-and-destroy missiles for firing. No need, as it turned out. The reporter, Campbell Robertson, provided a nice, succinct outsider's view of both sides of issue.
The surrender . . . was a pre-emptive strike, a way to head off a plan by the separate county school system that could have led to a drastic shortfall in city school revenues. With no Memphis school system, the city schools instead would become the county's responsibility.Robertson included some potent phrases that helped boil down the issue for a national audience getting its introduction to Memphis's version of city-suburban tensions.
Opponents of the move, an unlikely coalition of suburban residents, Republican state lawmakers, a Memphis teachers' union and several of the city's black ministers, see it as an unnecessary provocation, one that could end up hurting schools countywide.
On the strategy of Memphis City Schools board members like Martavius Jones and Tomeka Hart on surrendering the charter: "So, facing the possibility of a suburban special district, the city played its trump card."
Robertson points out Collierville State Sen. Mark Norris describes the state legislation he's proposed as merely an attempt to create an orderly transition: "He contends that it is more like a takeover, and that another, more comprehensive set of school consolidation rules should apply. These rules require a planning commission, and a majority approval by suburban voters as well as city voters."
But Robertson provides this kicker: "That voting arrangement, as it happens, would effectively doom the city's plan."
Go read the whole thing. It's instructive and benefits from being able to look at the issue from 40,000 feet, if you will, and not worry with whatever developments are happening immediately on the ground.
Leave a comment