A scolding for Skolnick: Traficant’s letter was news

Opinion: September 2, 2009 at 12:00a.m.

EDITOR:

I’d like to take exception to David Skolnick’s Aug. 28 column, “WYTV’s trick play fooled only the viewers.” Mr. Skolnick attempts to discredit a recent television news report by WYTV’s Stan Boney. Mr. Skolnick appears to proclaim himself the “voice” for all TV news viewers in the metropolitan area by indicating that viewers were “fooled” by Mr. Boney’s report of a correspondence he received from imprisoned former Valley Congressman Jim Traficant.

First, I don’t think Mr. Skolnick or anyone else at The Vindicator is in a position to serve as the spokesperson for this area’s television news viewers.

Secondly, someone at your newspaper should inform Mr. Skolnick of the simple yet profound definition of news. That is revealing information ... something that is considered new to the vast majority of an audience or readership. The fact that this is the first narrative from Jim Traficant to a local news outlet since his imprisonment is, indeed, news. To learn that his experience as a high school football player would still inspire and motivate him indicates that Mr. Traficant must be in a frame of mind that reveals he has survived the prison experience in relatively good mental condition. And the fact that he intends to talk exclusively to Stan Boney sometime after his release from prison is also news. If it happens, Traficant will likely offer Stan much about his prison experience and more. That’s called good “follow up” reporting.

Mr. Skolnick writes that Stan’s report and Traficant’s letter “are perhaps only mildly interesting to viewers.” As a former TV news director and editor may I suggest to Mr. Skolnick that before he speaks for the TV news viewers in this area that he gets out of the office and onto the street (where you find most good reporters) and solicit some opinion of Stan’s report. He could then offer some context with his newly discovered reactions and data from the people who matter most (news consumers) and we could then form our own opinions along with Mr. Skolnick’s.

I worked for over 20 years with Stan Boney, and he is one of the most talented and dedicated journalists I’ve ever encountered. I suggest you keep watching him. You might learn something.

TOM MOCK

Austintown

We’ll celebrate if we want to

EDITOR:

Mr. Tom Humphries’ op-ed article on Jim Traficant was an aimless, contorted personal opinion and he is entitled to it. But, let’s be fair to Traficant, to his many friends and acquaintances and the thousands of Valley voters that supported Jim in his multiple elections to Congress. There are still many standing by to support him again. The outstanding factual book, “Target: Traficant,” by veteran AFP correspondent M.C. Piper, explains how the FBI and Justice Department, both guilty of many cases of high level corruption, were out to crucify Traficant. Is it remotely possible they were upset because Jim beat their best Harvard educated attorneys in court? In Washington, there has been much dishonesty and a grave breach of public trust.

Humphries has tried to be dogmatic and tries to reassure us that Youngstown is on its way to recovery, thanks to a few local politicians and a few amorphous programs. Tom, perhaps, had better realistically assess our irrefutable issues. Forbes magazine has called Youngstown “America’s Fastest Dying City.” Education in our school system is contemptible. Youngstown’s population has diminished double digits every year since 1960. In 1960, Youngstown had 166,688 citizens. In 2008, it was only 72,925. There is double the national average of violent crimes in our streets. Urban decay and deterioration are advancing. In spite of these dismal statistics, we are thankful to Humphries for his optimism and public efforts. He faces Herculean tasks, but he really should leave the etiquette of celebrating Traficant’s homecoming to anyone who chooses to do so.

ANTHONY DeGIDIO

Youngstown