Terrific summary but I have to inquire as to what the editor is smoking when he says :
“Fortunately, local circumstances have in general changed for the better. This is especially true concerning the Lancaster Newspapers, Inc. which has returned to its former high standards.”
Nothing has changed. LNP did not report this story on a totally one-sided basis because that would not sell enough papers. They told just enough of the other side, while maintaining a lopsided position in support, without asking any questions, to use the controversy to sell papers all the while also having a horse in the race in the form of their ownership position. Personally, I see nothing different today.
I don’t know why you give them credit for change and I would point to their coverage of the healthcare behemoth in this town as another example of merely serving as a propaganda arm for the local elite.
Maybe you are just trying to offer some professional courtesy, and while that is admirable, I would contend that you and LNP are NOT in he same profession.
EDITOR: We would agree that LNP should be more pro-active concerning Lancaster General Health’s neglect of their public charity responsibilities, their questionable expenditures concerning executives, and their ignoring of their public health and education mission.
Not to mention their utter refusal to cover the civil rights war for fathers occurring in their own town