Editorials

Yet another chapter in the ongoing saga of “why are we all gathered here together?” Today it seems to me that it’s time to add a new tagline to what is commonly called the masthead, though I believe the real pros call it the flag. 

When the winter holidays begin, I always resent anything that takes me away from going to parties and hanging shiny stuff around the house. Once upon a time I was in the “not until after Thanksgiving” camp, but not anymore. As my eyes age I resent the way the darkness comes earlier and lasts longer. Adding a bit of extra night lighting (only LED of course) suits me just fine. Starting on the autumnal equinox is perhaps pushing it a bit, but how about starting holiday cheer when daylight saving ends, now apparently on or about Halloween? Most of the major religions (and irreligions) have some kind of festival involving lights as the night gets longer. 

This is a coy way of saying that I’m going to be slacking off for a while. And that this piece is probably getting out a bit late this week. 

Now that the election is over, Berkeley news is thin on the ground. Not surprisingly, my all-volunteer army does not consistently volunteer to go to dreary meetings of the planning commission or the zoning board. The Berkeley City Council and the Zoning Adjustment Board can be viewed online if you really care, and no one, least of all the city management, pays much attention to what’s happening on the other commissions. 

Increasingly, it’s obvious that most of what theoretically happens in public in Berkeley is actually a done deal by the time it shows up at a civic meeting. The Deep State has arrived in Berkeley. For an explanation of what that term means, see an excellent essay by Mike Lofgren which first appeared on Bill Moyers’ web site, Anatomy of the Deep State. The idea originated in Turkey, but he applies it to the United States today. He says in a footnote that he uses the term to mean “ a hybrid association of elements of government and parts of top-level finance and industry that is effectively able to govern the United States without reference to the consent of the governed as expressed through the formal political process.” 

It works for small entities like Berkeley too. 

If you have infinite patience and exactly the right kind of computer set-up, you might be able to watch the last meeting of the Zoning Adjustment Board by clicking here. If you can’t do that, the redoubtable Emilie Raguso tells you on berkeleyside.com what happened at ZAB on one key item, what’s in store for the block which now houses the Shattuck Cinemas: Locals question Berkeley Plaza impact on theater, view. 

But the Deep State aspect of the discussion isn’t covered in this otherwise competent story, though it has often been observed here and elsewhere, including on Berkeleyside. The name to search on is always Mark Rhoades, formerly the city of Berkeley’s Director of Planning, who’s now gone through the revolving door to become what’s called in the story the “project representative” for many schemes. In San Francisco they’re “permit expediters”, or more rudely, “fixers”. There’s a bunch of ex-government planners working this territory in the cities I’m familiar with. 

And if you want to get an idea about how little “the consent of the governed as expressed through the formal political process” counts in Berkeley, check out the comments on the story. The saddest one: “I voted against R, but 300 units does seem too big and will make an already busy area even more congested….” 

Well, yes. But you did get a lot of glossy developer-funded mailers that gave you a different perspective, didn’t you? Surprise! Too bad you won’t get what you voted for. 

A cynic would say that Berkeley gets what it deserves and deserves what it gets. I don’t really believe that myself, but I’m afraid that it’s getting harder and harder to counter the machinations of the Deep State with information and citizen participation. Richmond miraculously did it in the recent election, combatting Chevron’s multi-millions in propaganda with well-informed foot soldiers, but that doesn’t happen often enough. 

Chevron’s shady dealings do show up as clouds of black smoke, so they’re easier to spot. In downtown Berkeley, it may take five years before we figure out that, e.g., Patrick Kennedy’s sleazy operation has killed the Fine Arts Theater, though he promised to preserve it in order to get his permit. Like the Cheshire Cat’s grin, there’s nothing left of the Fine Arts but the marquee. 

Around here, we have spent 15 or 20 years of our supposed retirement trying to shine a light into a few of the corners that hide such nasty things. These days, without reporters on staff, we mostly rely on what comes in “over the transom”, pieces that people, most of them not professional journalists, submit on their own initiative. Getting the word out this way is good, better than not doing it, but it’s inevitably more in the category of opinion than of news. If people didn’t already care about the topic they’re discussing, they wouldn’t bother to tell us about it. 

Much of what’s online these days, whether it is or is not called “news”, is in that category. Daily print-based journalism was seldom really impartial even in the old days, but now on the internet it’s even less so. 

Many topics have been simply off limits. It’s encouraging that a major paper like the New York Times is finally reporting some part of the truth about what’s happening in Israel/Palestine, but even cautious truth-telling in that sensitive area has been a long time coming. 

The advantage of publishing information that comes in clearly marked by an interested party is that community members often know things that the Deep State thought were hidden. Whether it’s Edward Snowden or some guy who works at U.C. Berkeley as a gardener, insiders often speak more truth than the designated institutional spokespeople. Outsiders can provide yet a third take on the facts. 

But we do appreciate the lowly press release, as long it’s clearly labelled as such. When I first started news reporting, I was shocked to learn how much of what you see in conventional dailies, now even more than then, is just rewritten press releases. 

Why not just run them straight, I thought? There’s no reason to believe that a clearly written press release on the latest production from the Shotgun Theater, for example, is anything but honest—no reason to write it all over again with a few different words. 

What we haven’t done very well since we’ve been online is presenting quick takes on happening events. This is partly because I insist on real people signing their real names—my grandmother used to say “consider the source”. We do have a great line-up of regular columnists, and others send opinion emails which run in our Public Comment section, but it’s cumbersome 

With help from a tech-savvy friend of the Planet whose services we could never afford if we had to pay for them, we’re working on a quick comment system for shorter observations which should be unrolled in a week or so. It will be moderated, because you’d never believe (or maybe you would) the crazy stuff we get. We will always appreciate thoughtful observations, signed by real names, from people with whom we disagree—in fact we’d love to get them to start a lively dispute. Just nothing about End Times, please! 

So what should the new tag line be? How about “An intermittent journal of opinion and news about Greater Berkeley and beyond, updated irregularly, almost daily”? Or do you have a better idea?