It's interesting to see the extent to which The Post-Star has come under attack lately. Not for doing its job poorly, but for doing it at all.
Most recent accusations tend to ignore substance — presumably because the accusers know where guilt really lies — and focus on shooting the messenger with lazy phrases like “bias,” “agenda,” “useless” and “fake news,” without further elaboration.
Say what you will about Ken Tingley or his reporters, and I've not always been kind to them, but everything they write is signed with their own name. This is not true of many of the keyboard Rambos who threaten them online while cowering behind the veil of anonymity.
We're also frequently seeing public officials refuse to comment to the paper, and then subsequently bash the daily for not reporting on their side of the story. It's happening so often that it's impossible to believe that this isn't an intentional tactic designed to play into the anti-media hysteria.
The main “agenda” I've seen in recent months at The Post-Star is against sleaze, cronyism and childish actions by politicians of multiple local governments. My question is, why doesn't everyone have an “agenda” against these things? I'm no apologist for The Post-Star. I've often criticized it in the past, including in its own pages. But those were honest criticisms, based on standards of journalism in the public interest, not because it wasn't adequately tribal on behalf of my preferred politician. The Post-Star is the only outlet for serious oversight journalism in the area. The journalism needs to be better. Most of its critics want the journalism to disappear altogether.
What is happening is not about any particular local official. It is a transparent campaign to muzzle accountability for local government practices of questionable integrity. Don't allow it to happen.
Brian Farenell, Glens Falls