I estimate that the Enterprise reasons it is news that, at a time when most workers and small businesses are struggling, supporters of the grifter-in-chief would opportunistically open a “store” to blindly hawk items celebrating himself as a cult figure under the guise of a “fundraiser for a re-election campaign.”
Placing an article below the fold last week highlighting the pop-up in North Falmouth as news was yet more proof that a chink in the armor of a local press to present substantive issues of the day has dropped the ball. Instead of viewing this critically and in a balanced way, the Enterprise has seen fit to elevate the occurrence as a tacit endorsement.
The first we heard of the inflatable likeness of the inflated ego in the White House standing guard over a pop-up store at a strip mall in North Falmouth was when we were standing on Falmouth Green for the 153nd weekend in a row protesting against this disastrous administration as a group called Move to Remove.
And though you have had 152 weeks to publish something substantive about the efforts of the 20 or so stalwarts who appear every Saturday to exercise their First Amendment rights, there has mostly been the sound of crickets from the Enterprise.
Are you not writing about Move to Remove because you fear advertisers who support the president will cease making ad buys?
Here was a chance to present two sides 100 days before a critical election because, as is clear in other places like Portland, Oregon, and Seattle, Washington, protest is important news.
If you wanted to do a story regarding how public presentations of national politics are unfolding in the town that would be informative, with passionate results and with a useful purpose.
But this inflatable figure and its toxic air-filled interior are not news; you have continued to enable the way outrage is editorially given credence to become newsy. The North Falmouth pop-up is a calculated, financially driven distraction that only serves the amplification of an administration who spin lies, ignorant delusions and antisocial behavior as political agitprop to incitement. One point perspective considering only the sensational is simply lazy reporting and lazier editorial oversight.
In a time when many seek cohesion and connection as a community, you highlight what reads as essentially a front page advertisement loosely masquerading as a local public interest story. Your article appears as a perversion of your charge to publish as a free press, not to implicitly give preferentially partisan coverage.