I received Anders Ibsens email this morning, and noticed the part about the #zeeckbags. I wrote the following response: Thanks for your email. I appreciate that you and the council have attempted to solve the problem of the News Tribunes littering. But I have to say that opting out just not acceptable. What the News Tribune is doing IS littering. If any other person threw unwanted trash on my lawn itd be a criminal offense. And in fact if we deliver the same red bags back to the News Tribune, apparently theyre going to have us arrested for trespassing and for littering ---You have heard that they posted no trespassing signs and have actually hired an off-duty police officer to make sure no one delivers their little treats back to them? If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck its a duck. That the News Tribune obviously believes that its trash further reinforces this. Its trash! I dont want the News Tribunes trash in my yard. Or anyones. The fact that theyre a so called community newspaper does not mitigate in their favor. And as an aside, the News Tribune is not in reality a newspaper - it hasnt been since the Baker family sold it to McClatchy. Its now just one of many McClatchy rags that regurgitates stale national news and a tiny bit of local news. Plus has a lot of advertisements. That does not a newspaper make. Opting out is not an option. The News Tribune must put an end to their littering. Just say no! Mike P ### Shortly thereafter, I received this email back: I definitely sympathize and agree Michael. The only problem with outright banning the behavior is that newspapers, according to state law, are legally exempt from littering ordinances due to 1st Amendment protections. Since there is the bare minimum of news content in some of these advertisements, we would run the risk of a suit on constitutional grounds if we took the blunt approach like that. Opting out is absolutely not a long-term solution, but its a very small step in the direction we all want: ending this unwanted blight from neighborhoods. Well continue looking for options to move us even further in that direction, while at the same time not putting the city in a legally shaky (and costly) position. I hope that clarifies. Please call if you ever want to talk more about this. Best, Anders Ibsen ### I know the council doesnt want to get sued and they probably feel theyre safeguarding the interests of the public, but calling the #zeeckbags news protected by the First Amendment is clearly in the realm of science fiction. So I will not look to politicians for any relief (not that I ever had any real faith in the political process, anyway). If this is the approach the city council is going to take then I think the only rational course of action - which others are already suggesting - is to go after the advertisers. That is the weak spot.
Posted on: Thu, 27 Feb 2014 06:04:23 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015