It is Sunday, a day of rest – at least a respite from the flood of those over-sized postcard political mailings that cram my mailbox.
Mostly, these political communiques are from the warring sides in the Frank Burns-Amy Bradley battle for a state representative seat from the 72nd district.
They come in two sizes, 6-by-11 inches and 8 1/2-by-11 inches, but follow the same format.
They take kernels of truth and embellish them into figurative corn fields.
They show their candidate in vibrant color and the opponent in dystopian, washed-out tones. The opponent photos also appear to be of someone just awakened from a deep sleep, or released from prison.
Many questions arise, beginning with the obvious: Do these work?
A quick internet search turns up lots of positive opinions. But examine the search results closer and these also are input from people who do these campaigns and are soliciting more business. Not exactly unbiased.
I did find an independent report – admittedly dated as it was September 2017 in The Atlantic – that said mailers, TV ads and even door-to-door canvassing “almost never change people’s minds.”
This was a story on a research paper compiled by political scientists.
Due to confirmation bias on my part – this was exactly what I had thought beforehand – I’m going with the assessment from The Atlantic report.
Back to Amy and Frank: The Bradley people say Burns has allegiance to Philadelphia, not this area, but these assertions sometimes are made on Bradley mailers that seem to be paid for by a Philadelphia group.
Burns mailers paint Bradley as to blame for the sale, and decline in service at area hospitals.
I agree that the sale was not Bradley’s fault, which was a major point made by the two exercised guys at the Cambria County Republican storefront in Richland who lectured me at great length, an encounter documented previously on this very blog, along with their defense of Amy’s involvement in plans to import Afghans, without public awareness of same. Yes, Virginia.
But, Bradley does not come away with clean hands on this hospital sale. She was the propagandist who assured the area the care would not decline and people would be pleasantly surprised by improvements.
It struck me as Obama promising I could keep my doctor if I wanted to do so when the Affordable Care Act was being debated. It passed and my doctor exited the profession due to it. Wrong, Barack.
I’ve been to the Johnstown hospital many times since its sale to a for-profit company, either as a patient or a visitor, and I can attest personally to filthy conditions, lengthy delays either for treatment or admission, and a general decline in the experience since the sale.
Bradley apologists stress that she merely was doing her job putting a positive spin on the sale. It reminds me of the Nuremberg defense following World War II – just following orders.
I speak from personal experience in these matters, having been employed by the Johnstown Tribune-Democrat when it had its first sale to out-of-town ownership (MediaNews) in 1987.
I knew at the time it was bad for the workers and the community. These groups buy what they consider inefficient assets and wring them dry – financially speaking – before selling the husk to another operation sure it can extract even more from it.
In the case of the Johnstown newspaper, this is a rinse-repeat situation that has been repeated twice since then.
As I recall, there was a flowery, upbeat report of the initial sale printed in the newspaper. But here is what is important: I didn’t write it, nor would I have done so.
Instead, I was the guy who, when the new owners held a brief chat in the newsroom the day the sale was announced, wanted answers.
I confirmed my recollections of that day with another fellow employee during a Saturday phone call.
Me: Why here, Dean? (I asked of Dean Singleton, one of the new owners)
Dean: Probably for the same reason you’re here.
Me: I was born here.
Dean: Next question.
To repeat, I never was asked to write a glowing report on the new ownership. But, if I had, unlike Amy, I would have refused and let the chips fall where they may. Those who know me will assure you this is true.
The way I view it, there are two diametrically opposed possibilities regarding Bradley and the hospital sale.
Either she truly believed it was a positive, which paints her as extremely naive considering her background in TV news.
Or, it could be she knew or suspected the truth, but fibbed a bit just to keep the paychecks coming.
Naive or disingenuous? You make the call. But neither is a quality I want in my state representative.
Sam Ross Jr's site 