Letter to the Editor: The Nikkita Oliver Dissent Piece Was Ill-advised and Counterproductive

Comments

1
Agreed.
2
That's the price of doing business when you employ "journalists" like Sydney, Heidi, and Anna-- you're enabling people who truly believe the world runs on their feelings.
3
Letter to whoever wrote this:

No one gives a shit that your baby centrist feelings were hurt.

Sincerely,
Go Fuck Yourself and Don't Vote.
4
@1 - really? I mean...the editor's note would suggest...ah fuck it.
5
But obviously I'm conflicted. http://www.thestranger.com/slog/2016/10/…
6
well said and so true
7
those running forums for poetry should dis endorsements only in poetry, which for ian is slam poetry which means abundant line breaks, so if humble—nay, hard-forged—ian wanted impact (as he has no point), it should have been presented as for instance:

An
endorsement-in-part
does not honor
this
civic responsibility;
it is
a
weak-sauce
attempt by
a
cluster
of
in-house advocates
whose candidate
couldn't
convince the full board
to cape
for
their
own agenda,
in the
tone and
structure of
an
actual
Stran
ger en
dorse
ment.
8
I had the same reaction when I read the dissent. I'm glad for the way this writer expressed it. Thanks for being open to intelligent criticism. Hope it helps you to avoid this kind of hand wringing in the future.
9
This looks like workplace harassment.
10
For all your nightlife advertisers (and anyone else you may have forgotten about) to see.
11
Don't be ridiculous. Why on earth would you expect the SECB to be completely and blissfully in agreement on a single candidate out of a field of 21 (!!) candidates? Of course there would be differing views. And if it is okay for the Supreme Court to publish dissenting opinions, why can't the Stranger?

And you can't take a Stranger endorsement too seriously in any case. If you look back in their archives, they have for example endorsed a republican vomiting frat boy for the 7th District. Stranger endorsements are to be taken with a grain of salt and a sense of humor.
11
Truth bomb
12
Dear Ian. SECB's narrow majority endorsed Carey. Its significant minority endorsed Nikkita. SLOG readers understood--easily. Sorry it gave you such upset. #notsorry.
13
@11 Reverse - what exactly is the purpose of the board if not to agree on a decision? If everyone goes their own way, the board itself is useless bloat. The point is, as voters, you get 1 choice - you don't get to vote 6 times for candidate A and 5 times for Candidate B. By making two partial endorsements, you aren't doing anything of service for the voter which is the purpose of the endorsement to begin with.
14
Agree with the writer. SECB ain't the Supreme Court. So dissents shouldn't be allowed on endorsements. SECB should either own a singular endorsement or not endorse anybody. If writers want to endorse somebody else, let them do it as civilians on their own blog or facebook profile.
15
Correct. Make an endorsement and stick with it.
16
i
never had
more than one

opinion.

no one
should.

including you.
including, you.
17
The Stranger offered a dual endorsement for Clinton and Sanders, too. It's a little insulting that Ian assumes Seattle voters are too dumb to make a political decision without handholding from the Stranger, especially when we have weeks to look over the ballot and research. Though, considering Ian didn't do any research before writing this thing, perhaps he's assuming that the rest of us are as lazy as he is.

I liked the dissenting endorsement, though. It lets you separate the reactionaries from the revolutionaries, which is nice since a fair amount of the Stranger's "alternative" image is due to branding, rather than holding contemporary alternative political beliefs. I'll bet both camps appreciate that in the long run. Thanks for running both, Stranger editors.
18
Is The Stranger, an "Institution" by now, running out its precious bodily fluids? Maybe we need an alternative "newspaper" to serve the community rather than just titillate it...hmmmmmmm? i remember when The Weekly was "cutting edge." This too shall pass. The Dan Savage era (as good as its anti bullying high was, some years back) of The Stranger that is,,,,
19
@18

Spoken like someone who, well, doesn't remember The Rocket.

And hasn't heard of Crosscut yet, either.
20
@19 What do other publications have to do with The Stranger's overall politics and marketing?
21
@19, whoops, thought that was for me. Stepping away.
22
What a weird letter.
Why was it published?
Stranger compounding poor judgment with bad judgment.
23
Translation: The Clintonites are pissed that we're pushing left.
24
Brightest minds and best-informed reporters? Is this a letter from 2006?
25
Endorsements are for voters that want to jump on the hippest bandwagon anyway.
Just vote for whoever the fuck you want!
Do people actually NEED TO BE TOLD WHO THEY SHOULD VOTE FOR????
Why can't they figure it the fuck out by themselves???
26
@17 Agreed. If the SECB is really just a cliff notes for your ballot then maybe it's a good idea to point out that even the wonkiest, most engaged people in the city are split on this and if you take a second to think about any race, this is important. Knowing plenty of disengaged people who just blindly follow the SECB, I'm glad the dissent was posted. Moon got the endorsement, Nikita didn't, no one is confused about that. Don't get salty that people on Facebook are outspoken about Nikita and excited for her despite that. Trust your electorate a little more.
27
"The world is a comedy to those that think; a tragedy to those that feel". As long as Seattle exists there will be no shortage of laughs.
Horace Walpole Letter to Anne, Countess of Ossory, (16 August 1776)
28
Stranger oldsters to younger generation: "Get off my lawn!"
29
The largest support of a candidate amongst stranger contributers were in favor of nikita, get over it. This isn't the first time your centrist feelings will be hurt.
30
@19 Sure, The Rocket was music, though, and Crosscut is pretty skimpy...
31
No clue why it was so wrong to have a dissenting endorsement. I don't seem to remember an article from Ian Martinez around the time Dan Savage provided the dissent for Brady Walkinshaw.
32
My bad, Dan. I missed it! I hate being wrong on the easy stuff like that.

I *don't hate* pansack's poetry. They should come to Rain City sometime.
33
100% agreed. (And the post-endorsement Savage/Herz pissing match about the least consequential race of 2016 was a real low point for The Stranger.)

1. Devise a decision process for endorsements.

2. Stick with the results of (1)

3. Let individuals dissent to their heart's content--but as individuals, elsewhere.

The "minority report" approach just undermines the whole process. Once you go there, why not just have each journalist/board member write their own endorsements? Either you're a corporate, collective entity or you're not.
34
This letter should have been allowed under "I, Anonymous." It has an eerily similar vibe -- "I saw a thing yesterday and I imagine other people will be as worked up about it as I am!"

As to the content: if the Stranger does a two-fer endorsement all the time, then the endorsements carry little information. But if they do it occasionally, then it succeeds in signaling, hey, there are multiple candidates we might vote for, for different reasons.

Remember the presidential endorsement? Bet you thought that was the ultimate in saying nothing -- endorsing every one of the Dem candidates? And yet it said something that turned out to be important: they're both fine, and destructive bickering is pro-Putin.
35
it's a top 2 primary--seems like an endorsement covering 2 people is appropriate here. Now when the general electrion rolls around, then agreed that SECB should pick only one candidate (or no candidate/write in recommendation depending on who the 2 candidates are) and state its position clearly.