Editorial
The Utter Side 
July 14, 2010
By Cherie Chesser
I am outraged by a new rule administered by the U.S. Coast Guard last week. The new rule bans the media and the public from coming within 65 feet of oil spill cleanup efforts without special permission. That means going no closer than 65 feet to oiled wildlife, booms, cleanup workers, etc. My question is this – just how on earth is the media supposed to reflect the truth if we can’t get close to it? The permission thing really gets me… If a member of the media has to have permission, or be escorted to a site – it gives an opportunity for the truth to be covered up.
The Link has covered the oil spill very little – because it’s covered so well by other media outlets. We try hard to cover the news that you CAN’T find elsewhere… but the fact remains that this disaster might very well be the end of life as we know it on the Coast and it’s the job of the media to let the public know what is going on. ALL of what is going on, not just the parts those in charge want you to see.
I talked to a Hurley business owner yesterday whose business has been devastated by this spill and might not ever recover. It’s getting really close to home and the fact that now I CAN’T grab my camera and go chronicle what’s going on really bothers me.
The Coast Guard is claiming this is for safety reasons – and I understand that limits have to be in place or it will quickly become a madhouse completely out of control – but this new move is an extreme and is stomping all over our first amendment rights.
I would love to know your thoughts. Do you think this new rule is fair or not? Also, do you think The Link should be covering more of the oil spill or do you like the fact that we are holding off and leaving that to the big guys? Please tell us your thoughts. Write to The Link by e-mailing news@vancleavelink.com or mailing to P.O. Box 5545, Vancleave, MS 39565.
June 16, 2010
By Randy Whitley
Are you offended by the public use of profanity? Comedians, musicians, and politicians have helped bring profanity to main street America. Why is it that a musician or comedian has to write material laced with profanity? Is it because of the lack of creativity or the lack of an education to come up with a more colorful word without using an expletive? Why is it necessary for adults in a public setting to carry on a conversation filled with profanity?
My intention is not to judge because I’m the first to admit that I slip occasionally, but typically not in a conversation that involves a public setting. I’ve had the opportunity to attend several athletic events from t-ball to high school baseball over the past few months. Sports are a big part of the East Central and Vancleave communities and the events should be a place where families can go for good clean fun without having to worry about what the children may hear. I’ve observed that folks tend to use profanity in normal conversation with no concern to who is around or who may hear. It’s not uncommon to hear the “F” bomb dropped by an adult at a little league ball game or to be walking the track at Lum Cumbest Park and hear shouts of profanity by teenagers at the basketball courts.
Using profanity is like smoking a cigarette. It doesn’t make you cool. It doesn’t make you popular, and it’s certainly shouldn’t be used in a public setting. The next time you are in a public setting be considerate of people around you. Words are powerful and what we say is truly a reflection of ourselves, our morals and our character.
---------------------------------
The editorial page is the only place where the voice of our staff can be heard. All editorials (a.k.a. "The Utter Side") are written by our staff and freelance writers. We highly encourage your feedback and letters to the editor. In most cases, your responses will be printed in the paper. View our submission policy by clicking here.
