Overall I'd say it's pretty decent but this level of doubling down on 'making fetch happening' is actually concerning. Considering this is the city of Atlanta politics, most people would expect what were not going back to some of the less than desirable parts of the past.
There is a way to still get the intended result without some of the moves surrounding the project-but considering the way this project came to be, that timetable and a lot of the details being mostly skirted, no one should be surprised.
It's interesting too because many people (myself included) engaged civically at City Hall for the first time. So democratic strength increased.
But the final vote def gutted a lot of trust in the institution. I think it'll do good in catapulting more people into running for office. Unfortunately, I think there will be a downstream effect of people rejecting local politics because "politicians don't listen anyways".
Hope more people run and engage, but only time will tell
You write in section 3: "APD also wins because public opinion is slowly moving in their favor". Can you cite a source demonstrating this? You only linked to an article about a poll's bunk methodology. There have been multiple polls, including more than one this year. Which demonstrate that 'public opinion' is moving towards APD?
Your analysis completely ignores the factor of direct actions against police and construction companies, which have prevented the facility from being built for over a year. Do you believe they're irrelevant? If so, why, especially when another Week of Action is scheduled for the end of the month? This is also tied to your non-mention of the flatly anti-police, radical left elements, who are critical of not just cop city but liberals within the movement.
In section 7B, you name seven (or more, depending on how you count) local media outlets that covered cop city critically, and only one, AJC, that mostly didn't. (You also got ACPC's name wrong despite mentioning it twice.) How can this be summarized as "Local media doesn’t cover police critically"?
In terms of section 3. I've been reading and following this project since the beginning. Reading most of the articles, listening to radio programming, listening to podcasts, and watching local news for the better part of two years. This is a summary of two years of observing that...In terms of shaping opinion, that is in relationship to correlating polling from 11 Alive and the questionable polls circulating from the supporters of the project. The other way is looking at distribution of these platforms, their audience and the audience of their audience. This is also looked at headlines, language of articles/videos, where there any opposing viewpoints, and would I rate the coverage as neutral/non-partisan, neutral/partisan, and non-neutral/non-partisan.
In terms of the actions of those who've opposed the project, they are important but they are excluded from this piece and are a part of an unpublished piece. That piece if it does come out, will be later this summer.
This framing "This is also tied to your non-mention of the flatly anti-police, radical left elements, who are critical of not just cop city but liberals within the movement." Is very partisan leading as a narrative and wouldn't help in explaining those other factions of people not in support of the project. It would be a disservice to not fully explain those differences in a fuller, more contextual, separate piece.
In 7B, this is in reference to the same methodologies I used above in the first paragraph. As well as talking on background to people who work within the local news industry. The organizations that I listed in that paragraph were those who over the last two years have covered the topic without overtly pro-sentiments or neutral/partisan, language and framing, ex: a piece on the story only using APD/APF cooperation, press releases, non-critical analysis and/or examination of contradictions or opposing viewpoints. This also is a part of a larger project of analysis of local news coverage, news coverage including crime reporting.
I called ACPC by how its colloquially mentioned. I will change it.
What do you think this means for the health of democracy in Atlanta?
Overall I'd say it's pretty decent but this level of doubling down on 'making fetch happening' is actually concerning. Considering this is the city of Atlanta politics, most people would expect what were not going back to some of the less than desirable parts of the past.
There is a way to still get the intended result without some of the moves surrounding the project-but considering the way this project came to be, that timetable and a lot of the details being mostly skirted, no one should be surprised.
It's interesting too because many people (myself included) engaged civically at City Hall for the first time. So democratic strength increased.
But the final vote def gutted a lot of trust in the institution. I think it'll do good in catapulting more people into running for office. Unfortunately, I think there will be a downstream effect of people rejecting local politics because "politicians don't listen anyways".
Hope more people run and engage, but only time will tell
A few things that don't make sense here.
You write in section 3: "APD also wins because public opinion is slowly moving in their favor". Can you cite a source demonstrating this? You only linked to an article about a poll's bunk methodology. There have been multiple polls, including more than one this year. Which demonstrate that 'public opinion' is moving towards APD?
Your analysis completely ignores the factor of direct actions against police and construction companies, which have prevented the facility from being built for over a year. Do you believe they're irrelevant? If so, why, especially when another Week of Action is scheduled for the end of the month? This is also tied to your non-mention of the flatly anti-police, radical left elements, who are critical of not just cop city but liberals within the movement.
In section 7B, you name seven (or more, depending on how you count) local media outlets that covered cop city critically, and only one, AJC, that mostly didn't. (You also got ACPC's name wrong despite mentioning it twice.) How can this be summarized as "Local media doesn’t cover police critically"?
Hey there,
In terms of section 3. I've been reading and following this project since the beginning. Reading most of the articles, listening to radio programming, listening to podcasts, and watching local news for the better part of two years. This is a summary of two years of observing that...In terms of shaping opinion, that is in relationship to correlating polling from 11 Alive and the questionable polls circulating from the supporters of the project. The other way is looking at distribution of these platforms, their audience and the audience of their audience. This is also looked at headlines, language of articles/videos, where there any opposing viewpoints, and would I rate the coverage as neutral/non-partisan, neutral/partisan, and non-neutral/non-partisan.
In terms of the actions of those who've opposed the project, they are important but they are excluded from this piece and are a part of an unpublished piece. That piece if it does come out, will be later this summer.
This framing "This is also tied to your non-mention of the flatly anti-police, radical left elements, who are critical of not just cop city but liberals within the movement." Is very partisan leading as a narrative and wouldn't help in explaining those other factions of people not in support of the project. It would be a disservice to not fully explain those differences in a fuller, more contextual, separate piece.
In 7B, this is in reference to the same methodologies I used above in the first paragraph. As well as talking on background to people who work within the local news industry. The organizations that I listed in that paragraph were those who over the last two years have covered the topic without overtly pro-sentiments or neutral/partisan, language and framing, ex: a piece on the story only using APD/APF cooperation, press releases, non-critical analysis and/or examination of contradictions or opposing viewpoints. This also is a part of a larger project of analysis of local news coverage, news coverage including crime reporting.
I called ACPC by how its colloquially mentioned. I will change it.
Tell me more.