Well thank goodness that detail was included. I don't think the sign shop that manages 1 million signs could have done the job without him.
But in all seriousness...is it too much to ask the NY Times to have a human interest article about the freaking sign shop without it incorporating partisan politics?
I realize that politicians are going to take photo ops, but you don't have to cover it.
Nope. Premise is backwards. Why does the mayor belong in a story about the intricacies of printing road signs? Is the mayor a road sign enthusiast? Did he create the road-sign printing system? No? No relation at all, other than seeing an opportunity to inject himself into a story?
Yeah, maybe don't include it, then.
> showing up as a mascot for a random human interest story is the primary function of a mayor.
That's certainly what politicians try to do. You, as a journalist, are not required to take the bait. Sometimes it's just cool to have a nice little story about the people at the sign factory.
https://thekidshouldseethis.com/post/nyc-dot-sign-shop
I wonder if anything has changed with how they make signs since 10 years ago. I can't access the NYT article.
> This instance only stands to you because it makes you uncomfortable.
It doesn't make me uncomfortable. I think it's stupid. That's different.
> Own up to the specific reason for that instead of acting like the existence of "politics" in a general sense is somehow evil.
Politics are not evil. Including them in everything, when they don't need to be included, is just bad journalism.
bookofjoe•3d ago