I was inspired to offer this mild response to the reporter, David Nitkin...david.nitkin@baltsun.com
Mr. Nitkin,As a watcher of the railroad industry for most of my life, I was extremely disturbed by the tone of your article regarding the movement of hazardous materials by rail. It is so full of half-baked arguments, and so free of logic, that I couldn't help but contact you to make you aware of how foolish your bias is.
First, you note that the AAR reports the movement of 1.8 million car loads of hazardous materials annually. Given the extremely low incidence of accidents, wouldn't you agree that the safety record for that volume of traffic is pretty safe? I dare say more people are killed in drug violence in Baltimore than are hurt by hazardous rail car related incidents nationwide.
Second, where do you suppose most of those hazardous shipments are going? Despite the Sun's best efforts to kill off the industrial economy of Baltimore by endorsing higher taxes and the election of morons, it does still exist. WR Grace, Unilever, and dozens of other businesses use those chemicals to support the local economy. So guess what, they HAVE to move to and through the city. What do you suggest as an alternative? The idea of relocating industry to open countryside would certainly raise the hackles of the environmental protection crowd, and it would take a thousand years of court battles to make the first move. Better to just shut down all industry and seek handouts from the government, eh?
Third, the sob story from Mr. Peterson, who obviously must be blind or stupid or both, makes my breakfast rise in my esophagus. He bought a house next to railroad tracks that have been there for 180 years. What did he think moved on those rails? The circus train? Toys and candy for the good little boys and girls on the other side of the mountain? His complaint is completely empty to me, and should be to anyone who hears it. Sorry about your luck, Mr. Peterson, but you get what you pay for.
Fourth, you suggest in your closing paragraph that trucking offers more flexibility for the routing of hazardous materials around bridges and city centers. Oh, good idea. That's just what we need. Think about it, 1.8 million rail cars is the equivalent of about 4 to 5 million trucks. I'll feel much safer knowing that these materials are now being hauled by a sleep deprived truck driver who's tooted up on benzadrine 16 inches away from my mini van.
Fifth, Mmmm, real time reporting of exactly where every hazardous shipment is as it moves through the nation's rail network. Brilliant. First, let's take the most fuel efficient form of transportation we have and bog it down in endless paperwork and red tape to satisfy some bunch of useless and expensive bunch of bureaucrats. Then, let's post this sensitive information on-line where anyone who ever thought of blowing up a carload of chlorine can now know right where and when to do it. This idea is so stupid it defies all reason.
Sixth, you claim that the railroads are reluctant to do this because it will add costs to their bottom line. Mr. Nitkin, whom do you suppose will bear those costs? They will get passed right down the line to you and me in the form of more expensive goods we use every day.
In your crusade to stir up unwarranted fear, you completely fail to analyze what you are reporting. It is completely irresponsible to put such tripe into the public discourse, and I encourage you to consider ALL the facts, not just the ones you believe to be true.-- Lee Weldon
I suggest that those of you who are industry insiders offer your insights to the imbeciles that edit the Sun.
Route of the Alpha Jets www.wmrywesternlines.net
Go here for my rail shots! http://www.railpictures.net/showphotos.php?userid=9296
Building the CPR Kootenay division in N scale, blog here: http://kootenaymodelrailway.wordpress.com/
Well said Lee, this reporter was on a "crusade" to stir the pot of fear, the minivan think is very well put, i would much rather have 1.8 millions railcars then 4 to 5 million trucks. This letter is stating the truth and nothing but the truth.
Tjsingle
trainboyH16-44 wrote:Well said, you really put him in his place.
Not to throw water on this parade, but here's what happened what that reporter read the e-mail. He may have got part way through it. He may have skimmed the whole thing. Doubtful, but maybe. But when he finished it, he deleted it. End of story. Any time you e-mail a reporter, whether it be for a paper or for a TV station, you have to also e-mail their bosses. A reporter will never forward an e-mail damning his or her story.
Find out who the managine editor is at the paper the reporter works for. If it's TV, also e-mail the news director AND assingment desk editor. I work in TV. An e-mail to a boss will get some reasction. An e-mail to the reporter will get deleted.
JOe H.
trainboyH16-44 wrote:That's right, you're in the business, aren't you Joe?
I'm a photographer at the NBC affiliate in Columbia. Although you couldn'te tell it from my spelling in my last post, I also used to write a fair amount of stories at my last station. Another good tactic is to just call the boss of the person you think did a lousy job. It may take you a few transfers to get to her or him and after that, you may play phone tag, but you'll usually be able to get through.
I think since I've been here, we've done all right with train stories except on one or two cases. It gets frustrating because as a photographer, I have almost no say anymore in how a story is covered. I'm one of many folks there and you will be surprised what a reporter goes through behind the scenes to get his or her story aired. The final script usually has to go through one extra pair of eyes, the news director, a senior producer or an assisstant news director. You will be surprised how a story can change in the course of a day, too.
Joe
"I like my Pullman Standards & Budds in Stainless Steel flavors, thank you!"
Actually, I received a reply from the reporter the following day. He snarked at me for accusing him of a bias, which of course he denied, then he conceded that the railroads have a very good safety record given the volume of materials they carry every day. He went on to say that CSX has actually been very pro-active and cooperative in making sure hazardous movements are made safely, and that movements are held up when circumstances warrant, such as when there are sporting events at Camden Yards, or when the Pope said mass at Nationals Stadium.
I wrote him back to ask why these positive issues were not covered in his article, but the whiney home owner was given such priority. I didn't get a response to that.
Naturally, the paper has yet to run a follow up piece correcting his negligence.
Lee
wm3798 wrote:. I didn't get a response to that. Naturally, the paper has yet to run a follow up piece correcting his negligence.
Well of course, you hardly ever make money for praising something. :rolleyes:
wm3798 wrote: He snarked at me for accusing him of a bias, which of course he denied,
How would you react if you got an e-mail from someone you never had seen or spoken to before telling you that you have a bias? Probably wouldn't like it. You'd probably actually say that no, in fact, you don't have a bias. Again, all you've done so far is to trade e-mails with a reporter from a newspaper. If you want action, you have to go above them. Trust me. I know.
Having edited a newspaper and dabbled in local politics, I think I know who's buttons to push and when.
Since this exchange a couple of weeks ago, there have been a couple of articles in the paper that discuss similar issues regarding the railroads, and they've been a lot more even handed.
The editors only control what ends up on the page. My goal was to make the reporter think a little more thoroughly about what he was giving to the editor in the first place.