I have no background in journalism so perhaps I misunderstand the true meaning of “news.” On Aug. 8 one of the four front-page stories included a decidedly non-news story and appeared to be more of an editorial regarding gun control, better suited for the Opinion page.
In brief, the article “Election observer shows up with gun: Some workers later voice discomfort; county code mum” referenced a certified election observer who apparently “did nothing illegal” having his sidearm with him while observing the ballot handling. The gist of the story was that the fact that he had his weapon with him made some of those present “uncomfortable” and that Clark County Auditor Greg Kimsey was going “to discuss this with the Prosecuting Attorney’s Office to see what our options might be.” Options for what? The reporter specifies that no law, codes, or guidelines were broken, so why was this given front-page status? If officials are concerned about safety, then take steps to implement or change the applicable codes or laws but please refrain from offering us, as news, someone feeling uncomfortable or offended for whatever their reasons.
Incidentally, Page A2 included a story on the president signing a new veterans health care law. Now that appears to me to be a news story better suited for the front page.
Ed Gillis
Vancouver
