This post has been read 2749 times!
Update November 2, 2013- The surrogate trashcan DowntownExpress newsrack was removed by somebody.
Update October 27, 2013- Yet another DowntownExpress newsrack has appeared on North End Avenue, within yards of four others.
September 26, 2013- Letter from North BPC resident Dean
There are now four of these newsracks right outside the BPC library, including one on each end of this small park. With free copies inside the library and most buildings, why do they need to clutter our sidewalks?
Exclusive: Misleading Downtown Express story about draconian cuts to BPC cultural events
The newsrack scourge inflicts North End Grill now
Daily throw-away papers plague South End Avenue
A growing cry to remove free newsracks
I and others whom I know — other downtown neighbors, other lawyers, other civil libertarians — like public newsracks, which are entitled to First Amendment protection. It is s-o-o-o important that the written press — all the news that’s fit to print — remain readily accessible.
Frankly, it seems a little self-serving for online media to object to print newsracks.
There is no need for 5 Downtown Express newsracks to be within 50 yards of one another, and for them to be full of Shake Shack trash, when they are also on display inside the library ten feet away
Marcella: you’re quoting a newspaper that doesn’t pollute the streets like Downtown Express. Why is Downtown Express not responsible for keeping the streets clean like everybody else? You ignore the egregious number and the complete disregard for the neighborhood in front of the public library. How can you possibly defend 3 of 5 boxes at the front door of readily accessible copies in the library?
You are also assuming that these are “newspapers” and provide unbiased information, which is not the case. If you have ever attended a BPCA board meeting or a CB1 meeting and then see how those meetings are covered or “not covered” you would be astonished. I have read articles in Downtown Express and especially the Broadsheet that refuse to mention the most salient parts of the meeting if it didn’t look favorably upon their advertisers or financial backers.
It was as if we had attended two entirely different meetings. I as so shocked and disappointed; still am.