LAST week I was accused of allowing a “beat up” to go to print.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
Sensational stories make for great reading in this sparkly new age of Internet immediacy and social media referrals.
However “sensationalising” an article that stands on its own for newsworthiness is not something I condone.
Calling the development of a Woolworths in Bermagui “controversial” – the phrase I was called out on – is hardly sensationalising the issue.
I’ll readily admit the development application itself for the most part abides by all Bega Valley Shire Council zoning laws and planning instruments – given the conditions recommended to the developer.
However, the BDN didn’t call the DA controversial. We wrote the development itself was.
Whether you take the view it’s a vocal minority or not, there is opposition to the proposal and the division in the community and among councillors by definition causes controversy.
While we’re at it, what is it with those phrases “vocal minority” and “silent majority”?
I reckon I could count on one hand the number of letters to the editor written in support of the Bermagui Woolworths.
And I can’t think of anyone – aside from the proponent – speaking at the numerous council meetings in favour of the development.
I can’t deny the proposal has quite a good split between those for and those against in the BDN’s online conversations, but there is also no denying that every time it comes up on the BVSC agenda, the public gallery is full of those against.
If there is a “silent majority” out there, you may want to make yourselves heard at some point.
The “vocal minority” has a running head start on you – with a community group complete with media spokespeople, several public protest gatherings and a currently deferred hearing in the Land and Environment Court.
And that’s what we mean by a controversial development.
Comment below or email me on ben.smyth@fairfaxmedia.com.au.