More mixed messages

On Sunday, the local daily Post-Star took a break from their routine and actually praised people (a practice usually reserved for Mondays only). Kids, actually. The paper ran an editorial praising kids who participate in SADD, Students Against Destructive Decisions.

SADD was originally called Students Against Drunk Driving. The group was formed as a recognition of the fact that only acknolwedging the reality of teen drinking will mitigate its negative effects, as opposed to the 'burn the witches' hysteria of The Post-Star. This approach has saved lives.

I too applaud SADD. Peer pressure is what's need to reduce teen drinking in much the same way it's reduced smoking. This is far more effective than self-righteous floggings by a newspaper editorial (Did the paper really need to mention a certain Fort Edward basketball player's name more than one or two times? Wasn't a mention in seven consecutive stories voyeuristic and gratuitous considering the circumstances?)

Anyways, the paper praised SADD. In an accompanying box, they indicated they were going to start recognizing the achievements of young people who have 'done something positive to improve their school or community.'

Maybe the paper realized that the Inquisition is not, in and of itself, sufficient. Maybe they realized that they can't simply tell kids to say no, they have to give kids something to say yes to. If so, then good for the paper.

But the very next day, what appears on the front page? Yet another non-urgent wire service story. For a paper that likes to pat itself on the back for the prominence it claims to give to local coverage, it sure gives a lot of its front pages to minor, national wire service stories. I have no problem with front page wire stories about Iraq or health care. But front page wire stories about dogs jumping off a bridge in Scotland (last August) or about San Franciscans who trade rent for sex (last month) are more worthy of The New York Post than the region's main daily. Just because you don't win Pulitizer Prizes doesn't mean you should have no standards.

What was the topic of this front page wire service story? 'Virginity pledges rarely make a difference.' So one day after promising to praise and feature worthy local teens, the paper chooses to run an article implicitly criticizing young people and highlighting their failings.

Is the paper trying to send mixed messages or is there just nobody there who notices these things?