Political debates are essential institution in our democracyDate: 10/22/2019 I had the privilege of moderating several debates the other night for Focus Springfield for the city council race in Springfield.
The reason I say it was a pleasure is I appreciate any candidates who are willing to express their viewpoints in an atmosphere they can’t control.
It is the nature of elected officials and candidates to want to be in as complete control as possible of their narratives.
In this case, the candidates were tossing the dice. They faced questions for which they were not briefed from myself, a media panel featuring Liz Roman of The Republican, Paul Tuthill for WAMC and Adam Frenier for New England Public Radio, and from each other.
I appreciate the fact the two mayoral candidates for Chicopee – John Vieau and Joe Morissette – have participated in a debate and that in Westfield, Don Humason and Michael McCabe are also planning to debate.
All of these debates are good for the voter who wishes to make an informed decision
Although the outcome can vary from people who are civilly but actively arguing points of view to a boring overly polite exchange to anger, the debate is one of our most important institutions of our political system.
I will say we had several no-shows the other night. One candidate bowed out after saying yes to the appearance. In the past this action would have canceled the segment, but it was decided to give the candidate who showed up some time. It was not fair to her to lose her time to address the voters.
Another candidate sent in a reason for his absence. Christopher Pohner wrote, “Unfortunately due to last night’s severe wind storm I have to attend to emergency repairs with my business contracts, therefore I will be unable to attend your debate this evening 10/17/19 thank you for the opportunity.”
Pohner, as some of you might have heard, was the subject of a story by my colleague Matt Szafranski about racist posts he allegedly wrote on his Facebook page.
If you did not see the debates you can access them by going to the Focus Springfield Youtube page at https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=focus+springfield.
Not so social social media
Speaking of posts on Facebook, what has transpired in Springfield for this election should be a lesson for anyone thinking about seeking elected office.
If you use social media you have to be aware that what you share doesn’t necessarily go away. Social media posts are like zombies – you think you’ve killed them but they can come back to harm you.
In Pohner’s case, he has maintained he did not write the inflammatory remarks on Facebook. He posted after the blog posting by Szafranski, “I've been vilified, and unjustly accused, but what hurts the most is that the many persons of color that I helped over the years have kept silent about this, not uttering a word in my defense, knowing that I have been verbally slain for political gain.”
That remark spurred 111 comments, overwhelmingly in favor of him and his candidacy.
He told The Republican. “Ninety percent of what you are seeing there is not me. Anybody can write anything on social media.”
Well, that’s frightening that “anybody” can write something on a person’s Facebook page without that person’s knowledge or consent.
I tend to think that statement may be inaccurate.
I’ve never met the candidate. As far as I know he doesn’t have a website for his campaign. He did not send out press releases to this newspaper. All I know is he did very well in the preliminary election despite the fact he is a political unknown.
Now he is known, but for the wrong thing.
If he is elected one thing is clear: everything he does as a councilor will be scrutinized.
In the meantime, this incident is a good reason to think twice before you post.
|
