Letters to the Editor

by the Readers

Box Crunch

Bruce Schimmel's column about the city's new restrictions on downtown news boxes ["No New Newspapers," Loose Canon, Sept. 11, 2003] was right on target. The city's preposterous decision to grant sidewalk access and visibility to some publications but not to others is shortsighted and possibly unconstitutional, since it favors some people's freedom of speech over others'.

Vladimir Putin would love this new law, which uses the pretext of public order to further entrench tired old publications at the expense of rambunctious new ones. Philadelphia's daily and weekly papers, so quick to invoke the First Amendment in their own defense, have in this case effectively conspired with the city government to deny that right to other local publications -- the monthly, the new and the as-yet-unborn. The ordinance, titled "Boxes for the Distribution of Printed Material," might more accurately be labeled "The Philadelphia Crybaby Millionaire Publishers' Protection Act."

The new Philadelphia Independent, banned from downtown sidewalks by the new law because it currently publishes monthly, is for my money the freshest local media voice since the Welcomat (now Philadelphia Weekly) and the City Paper arose in the '80s. But the real victim of this legislation is not the Independent; it's all Philadelphians who yearn for greater variety on their media menus.

Paul Levy of the Center City District, the well-intentioned prime mover behind this outrage, has devised many thoughtful and even ingenious improvements in Center City's quality of life. But in this case he has missed the big picture. He appears to have given no thought to the new law's effect on potential publications, as opposed to existing ones.

Philadelphia's unique appeal lies not in its orderly streets but in its continuing role as one of the world's most nurturing incubators for new ideas. Those civic boosters who value neatness over the messy exchange of ideas already enjoy a viable option: They can move to Singapore.

Dan Rottenberg

Former Welcomat editor
Philadelphia

’Tude Conduct

Thank you for an excellent article ["You Can't Go Back To School Again," Daryl Gale, Sept. 18, 2003] that was both enlightening and disturbing. I was impressed by the dedication and professionalism of the school officials and teachers you featured, and by their perseverance in the face of what appear to be daunting challenges each day. I was disturbed by the blatant disrespect and poor attitude so many of the students seemed to have -- a problem that more money and initiatives won't necessarily cure. I really hope [School District CEO Paul] Vallas sticks around -- I think he's been a breath of fresh air for the district, one that it sorely needs.

Keep up the good work.

Andrew R. McIlvaine
Horsham

Clueless

After reading ["Skin Deep," A.D Amorosi, Sept. 18, 2003] I wonder if Matt Titus is as shallow a business person as he is a human being. Obviously, some people work out because they want to look good. But other motivations exist as well, such as improving health and relieving stress.

Also, Titus mistakenly assumes that an individual gets judged solely on the first visual impression. He may be "good-looking" as the author describes, but after reading his opinions and philosophy, my second impression is that the first impression doesn't matter -- Titus is a foul-mouthed egomaniac with no clue.

Rob Rishel
Manayunk

-- Respond to this article in our Forums -- click to jump there