A profanity filter is employed. Please use a valid e-mail with your message and a valid name if at all possible. Please keep to the posters subject.
RICHMOND WATCHDOG OPEN FORUM
 Subject: RE: R&T Informer compared to R&T Times
 
Author: Trevor Clarke
Date:   10/30/2001 11:45 am WEDT
I can't find the paper now (from a next door neighbour as my wife had thrown it away!) but I do remember that it had the headline 'Pay more taxes, receive less services' on its front page. On page 2 & 3 under 'Focus on Borough Finances' it provides a calendar of the lamentable financial situations reported and a spotlight on the social services. On another page it reports of the substantial pay increases to councillors from something like £1,700 to over £11,000 and from around £2,500 for the council leader to about £19,500. (Not unreasonable in itself as the previous rates were miserly but another act of arrogant defiance in view of the financial and service shambles that they must accept responsibility for).

The point here is that the Informer is doing its best to report on what is really going on and it puts the R&T Times to shame. Criticism of their editorial covering up is fully justified.

Is it pure coincidence that the social services paid for a front cover advertisement that hid the front page headline? Unfortunately, many people throw away immediately if the front page doesn't grab the attention.

Another regrettable fact is that many do not receive the Informer, especially in the Whitton area and few newsagents sell the Informer. As the Richmond Comet is a total waste of space and really a Kingston paper masquerading under a Richmond title, it would be a great service to the Richmond Borough for the Informer to be available to purchase alongside the R&T Times everywhere, rather than the Comet. Perhaps they could expand their letters page as well and take on the R&T Times - who get way with it due to no real competition.

Eve McGowan will then reach the wider and interested audience that her excellent reporting deserves.
Reply To This Message

 Topics Author  Date      
 Richmond & Twickenham Comments   new  
Owl with the View 10/28/2001 4:21 pm WEDT
 RE: Richmond & Twickenham Comments   new  
Trevor Clarke 10/28/2001 10:06 pm WEDT
 RE: Richmond & Twickenham Comments   new  
Richard Meacock 10/29/2001 6:26 am WEDT
 RE: Richmond & Twickenham Comments   new  
Richard Meacock 10/30/2001 10:40 am WEDT
 RE: Richmond & Twickenham Comments   new  
Richard Meacock 10/30/2001 10:40 am WEDT
 RE: R&T Informer compared to R&T Times    
Trevor Clarke 10/30/2001 11:45 am WEDT
 RE: Richmond & Twickenham Comments   new  
Anthony P Berend 10/30/2001 11:22 pm WEDT
 RE: Richmond & Twickenham Comments   new  
Knowledgeable 10/31/2001 7:32 am WEDT
 RE: Richmond & Twickenham Comments   new  
perplexed voter 10/31/2001 10:18 am WEDT
 RE: Richmond & Twickenham Comments   new  
R H 10/31/2001 11:29 am WEDT
 RE: Richmond & Twickenham Comments   new  
Trevor Clarke 10/31/2001 11:38 am WEDT
 RE: Richmond & Twickenham Comments   new  
Eve McGowan 11/6/2001 9:22 am WEDT
 RE: Richmond & Twickenham Comments   new  
Trevor Clarke 11/6/2001 11:15 am WEDT
 Water Tight?   new  
R H 11/7/2001 11:05 am WEDT
 running order   new  
Bob Parslow 11/30/2001 4:15 pm WEDT
 Reply To This Message
 Your Name:  
 Your Email:  
 Subject:  
  Submission Validation Question: What is 40 - 12? *  
* indicates required field
     

Sexist, Racist, Rude or unnecessary messages will be removed. Tolerance to anonymous messages will be at the discretion of the administration body. Anyone who insults the owner of this forum will be barred for life. No adverts permitted.