-
Get involved.
We want your input!
Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.
After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.
After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/
Thanks in advance and have fun!
RadioDiscussions Administrators
The Fight For The Soul Of Seattle
- Thread starter Kelly A
- Start date
This was an incredible documentary, and a timely followup to their original film, "Seattle is Dying." It seems that this film has already created a divide between those who want to see positive change come to the City of Seattle, and those who remain adamant that nothing is wrong with the council agenda. At this point it is no longer possible for a rational person to ignore the issues that are plaguing Seattle. Anyone who remains skeptical of the ills plaguing Seattle will see these issues manifest for themselves if they decide to venture into the emerald city. The last time I ventured into Seattle was in 2019, and my experience was unpleasant at best, and downright scary at worst. Just to be clear, I am not a Seattle hater. In fact, I strongly believe that Seattle had the propensity to be one of the finest metropolises in the country. We are extremely fortunate enough live around amazing natural beauty and have access to a multitude of fortune 500 technology companies. There aren't many locations I can think of that have all of these wonderful perks. The unfortunate reality is that Seattle has fallen far behind its former glory as a World's Fair city, and is not anywhere close to being in the position to improve if it continues on its current trajectory. Who will be left to make decisions if the city continues to spin out of control? It's hard to say. As a younger person, I always thought it would be an amazing experience to live and work in a city like Seattle, but now I look at locations with Spokane or Boise with envy.
Here's what I've seen: Animals go where they can find food. Homeless people go where they find people willing to give them a handout. The other thing I've noticed is a large number of homeless veterans. How can that be? Don't they get medical service for life? Apparently not. So now a bunch of Iraq war vets are being let out of VA hospitals because the vets aren't medically sick. They end up on the streets, they aren't employable, and so what would you do with all of these former soldiers? Think about that as you prepare for Christmas.
Not just Seattle. I was in Austin a year or so ago. I went to a concert that let out after midnight, and I found I was hungry. It was Sunday night and all the restaurants appeared closed. The only thing I saw was a food truck. It was well lit, on a busy street, I bought a burrito, sat down, and was immediately surrounded by a group of homeless people wanting a handout. Never experienced anything like it anywhere. This was in Texas. There are a lot of poor people. That was a year ago. I saw statistics tonight that it's much worse now.
You're absolutely correct, this is indeed a problem that we can see in every big city. It's becoming increasingly more difficult to go about your business in a metropolis without encountering these situations. To compound the situation even further, the experts say that handing money to those who pandhandle may have a markedly negative impact as the individual may not feel compelled to seek out services that might be available to them. I think that the KOMO film made some very interesting points about what changes we might see if we were to invest significantly in a treatment facility and program that could tackle many of the homeless social issues that we see in Seattle.
You make a very good point. It's hard to say if anything would really change at this point. Nonetheless, it is certainly worth a try. To continue on this course of (in)action will lead to more societal problems. Of course, this is a problem that requires a concerted effort between many governing bodies in the state.
And nothing will change as long as there's a significant percentage of the population unwilling to invest in or ensure healthcare and treatment for the less fortunate in our society. These solutions require money, and no one, even in these wealthy cities, wants to pay for it, and the lower and middle income tax payers don't have it. The scale at which things need to be done requires investment from somewhere.
Seattle has been a big city for many years. I feel more safe in NE Washington DC, than I would on 3rd Avenue. The outrageous things that stuck out for me were:
* That the Sh*tty Council was pushing to move the Courthouse because it wasn't safe where it was.
* That being homeless, an addict, or otherwise impoverished, was a simple defense for committing a crime. (Baby food)
* That SO MANY businesses have closed in downtown, not just because of COVID, but because of crimes committed to the businesses, and lack of safety to shoppers downtown. I remember as a kid, my mother taking me shopping downtown, never giving a second thought to whether it would be safe, visiting the Holiday window displays at the (Bon Marche') Macy's. Kid's and parents don't have those memories anymore, nor will they in the future. Things change, I get it, but the lack of leadership and enabling the influx of addicts to take over the center of a major city, is unconscionable. That security footage of that crazy A-hole punching that defenseless woman, knocking her to the ground breaking her nose, is infuriating. Thanks to the City Council, the offender probably got off for being homeless or an addict.
And to your point, the citizens keep electing more of these fools into office. It all started with Mayor McNichols (Mayor McCheese), and has gone down hill since.
You missed my point. The reason the homeless are attracted to Seattle is because they HAVE invested in services for the homeless. There is a food source for them there. That's why they go. If you invest more money, it will just get worse.
Okay, now I understand what you are saying. I agree with you, if you invest more money into the programs that are currently being employed in this region, the problem is going to grow exponentially worse. In my opinion, what we really need right now is to repurpose the funds that have been wasted on these programs and use them to invest in some of the proposed options for inpatient treatment. This is not a proposal that many Seattleites would be a fan of, as you would basically force those who need help to receive help. I feel like this is one of the few solutions that makes sense right now, even if it will cost the taxpayers even more. I hear a lot of arguments about how we all need to exercise compassion with our homeless population, and getting these people into treatment is by far the most compassionate thing we could do. It's also the best thing to do for the regular citizens who still need to live and work in Seattle, too. Kelly was spot on with his analysis of Seattle in 2020, and it's hard for me to imagine anyone venturing into the city in 2021 with these issues further snowballing out of control. Now that the problems have been created, I don't think they will simply go away.
We need to look at this as a bigger problem. It's not a Seattle problem. These are people who have fundamental problems that aren't solvable. They either have mental problems or social problems. We used to put them in hospitals or jails. Lately, we've been cutting funding to both of those things, so now they're out on the street. If we want to solve the problem, we need to put them somewhere other than downtown. So move the food source to that place, and the homeless will go to it.
Since this is a radio community....I'll make a tie to Seattle Radio + the Homeless issue.
Every time I drive by Terminal 5 in West Seattle (which absorbed the almost-original KJR facility -- there's your radio tie!!) and see that huge swath of unused land ... I keep thinking that with some interesting and creative improvements it could be an excellent site for a homeless village. Add some "tiny houses" or shared public restroom + shower facilities, food distribution pantry, etc. and it would be an interesting learning point.
Every time I drive by Terminal 5 in West Seattle (which absorbed the almost-original KJR facility -- there's your radio tie!!) and see that huge swath of unused land ... I keep thinking that with some interesting and creative improvements it could be an excellent site for a homeless village. Add some "tiny houses" or shared public restroom + shower facilities, food distribution pantry, etc. and it would be an interesting learning point.
Having been homeless once, I have an insider perspective.
Many people in those camps were once like you and me. Regardless of how they look now, many once had homes, steady jobs, money in the bank and active upstanding lives. But through a circumstance or a series (and often through no fault of their own-some even have a paper trail to show it), they lost everything. And there is no worse feeling on earth psychologically than losing your own home with nowhere else to go. It's pure trauma. And once mentally stable people can completely fall apart. I've witnessed it in real time.
I was one of the lucky ones. I was able to find work and eventually a place to stay. It took me several years to recover. But I will never forget the lessons in humanity (and lack thereof) I've had to learn from my experience on the streets.
No matter how bad you think you've got it, take a look around you. You're luckier than you imagine.
And, as a radio tie, people like Rush Limbaugh and others don't have the foggiest damn idea of what they are talking about. They perpetuate stereotypes about the poor and homeless that have absolutely no basis in reality whatsoever to people who are equally as clueless.
I'll even argue AM talk radio in the 1990s is the very root of the disinformation problem we're dealing with today. Once Limbaugh and copycats were allowed to spread unsubstantiated falsehoods about the poor, LGBTQ people and dog-whistled racism, the talk became political action ("Defense of Marriage Act", "Welfare Reform", "Three Strikes".) And the rhetoric got more draconian and frankly, fascist. It was a race of who could be the biggest bully for the highest ratings. This kind of attitude poisoned millions (myself included.) Conspiracy theorists like Art Bell were allowed to peddle nonsense like Y2K unfiltered to an audience who truly believed if the radio says it, it must be true. And the unholy amalgamation of both in the form of Alex Jones.
Roger Ailes based Fox News on the 1990s AM talk radio model. And the rancor still continues, unabated.
And it came to a head locally not with an AM talker, but with KQBZ, an FM talker for "guys" with hosts both local and syndicated that regularly spoke of women as mere sex objects. And today, after raising two girls and knowing their life stories and systemic problems they've had to deal with, I'm ashamed of myself today for even listening to that station back then. My god, what were we thinking?
Time warp to today; You now have many on the Trump end of the GOP supporting the idea of martial law, a social safety net in tatters now when we really need it the most. And a bunch of sexist, faux-masculine "Proud Boys" loose out there. And a bunch of psychotic "QAnon" nuts who have no grip whatsoever with reality.
Granted, the internet dumped gasoline on it. But the lit match was 1990s talk radio. The repeal of the Fairness Doctrine was the worst thing that ever happened to broadcast media when we should have modernized it for new technology. And the proof is all around us today.
It's more than just the soul of Seattle, we must fight for the soul of radio. And the nation.
Many people in those camps were once like you and me. Regardless of how they look now, many once had homes, steady jobs, money in the bank and active upstanding lives. But through a circumstance or a series (and often through no fault of their own-some even have a paper trail to show it), they lost everything. And there is no worse feeling on earth psychologically than losing your own home with nowhere else to go. It's pure trauma. And once mentally stable people can completely fall apart. I've witnessed it in real time.
I was one of the lucky ones. I was able to find work and eventually a place to stay. It took me several years to recover. But I will never forget the lessons in humanity (and lack thereof) I've had to learn from my experience on the streets.
No matter how bad you think you've got it, take a look around you. You're luckier than you imagine.
And, as a radio tie, people like Rush Limbaugh and others don't have the foggiest damn idea of what they are talking about. They perpetuate stereotypes about the poor and homeless that have absolutely no basis in reality whatsoever to people who are equally as clueless.
I'll even argue AM talk radio in the 1990s is the very root of the disinformation problem we're dealing with today. Once Limbaugh and copycats were allowed to spread unsubstantiated falsehoods about the poor, LGBTQ people and dog-whistled racism, the talk became political action ("Defense of Marriage Act", "Welfare Reform", "Three Strikes".) And the rhetoric got more draconian and frankly, fascist. It was a race of who could be the biggest bully for the highest ratings. This kind of attitude poisoned millions (myself included.) Conspiracy theorists like Art Bell were allowed to peddle nonsense like Y2K unfiltered to an audience who truly believed if the radio says it, it must be true. And the unholy amalgamation of both in the form of Alex Jones.
Roger Ailes based Fox News on the 1990s AM talk radio model. And the rancor still continues, unabated.
And it came to a head locally not with an AM talker, but with KQBZ, an FM talker for "guys" with hosts both local and syndicated that regularly spoke of women as mere sex objects. And today, after raising two girls and knowing their life stories and systemic problems they've had to deal with, I'm ashamed of myself today for even listening to that station back then. My god, what were we thinking?
Time warp to today; You now have many on the Trump end of the GOP supporting the idea of martial law, a social safety net in tatters now when we really need it the most. And a bunch of sexist, faux-masculine "Proud Boys" loose out there. And a bunch of psychotic "QAnon" nuts who have no grip whatsoever with reality.
Granted, the internet dumped gasoline on it. But the lit match was 1990s talk radio. The repeal of the Fairness Doctrine was the worst thing that ever happened to broadcast media when we should have modernized it for new technology. And the proof is all around us today.
It's more than just the soul of Seattle, we must fight for the soul of radio. And the nation.
I really appreciate your perspective. Thank you for taking the time to share your experiences with the Radio Discussions community. Trying to tie homelessness back to radio, I think it's important to highlight how this industry has been impacted by changing technology and the Coronavirus pandemic. Broadcasting jobs have never been "secure," but job security in 2020 is virtually non-existent. There are many people who have wound up in difficult financial situations following the loss of their job, and I can only imagine that this pattern holds true for those who have been cut by the broadcasting industry this year. It is important to keep some perspective, and remember that no one is immune to these challenges.
Apropos to that idea, there was this open letter written to the radio community from Tom Kent:
Tom Kent Pens Open Letter to the Radio Industry (****************)
It's not just a mental health or addiction problem. I see new homeless cropping up almost every week along a local park and trail. Naturally, some of that may be due to them moving around. But still, it's a sign that all is not well with the US economy, when such a large segment of society has nowhere to go. And some of this is due to low wages, high rents and other high costs of living that make it difficult for a lot of people to keep a roof.
The situation for a lot of the working poor can be very precarious when it comes to housing.
I know a lot of people who are probably one paycheck from losing their roof. And that's in normal times, before the covid economic issues, and accompanying moratoriums kicked in. Housing costs in the entire region have skyrocketed, but wages haven't increased for many people.
Add that to the issues you mention, it's like the perfect storm.
I myself haven't been homeless, fortunately, but I know more than one person who was, including family members. So I understand your perspective somewhat.
I don't think radio is the source of the problem, although I agree with you that the anti-homeless rhetoric on radio is distasteful. I recall hearing Limbaugh refer to homeless people as "human debris" in the late 1990's, and I could no longer tune into him because of that.
But then, when the liberal government of Seattle sent bulldozers to the homeless camps during the 1990's, razing their homes and destroying their personal property like it was owned by non-people, it became apparent that negative attitudes about the homeless seemed to transcend political divides.
Correct, and with the bad economy, you have people not able to pay their rent, and getting evicted. Which is why the new relief bill is supposed to have some kind of law in it regarding evictions.
Evictions Are Violence: Millions Could Lose Homes Amid COVID Pandemic If Federal Moratorium Expires
Millions across the U.S. could be forced from their homes in the middle of the pandemic if Congress does not extend the federal eviction moratorium that is due to expire at the end of December. Congress is expected to push the moratorium back by one month, to January 31, in the $900 billion...
www.democracynow.org
The mental health matter is the long-term homeless. Evictions is short-term homeless.
Radio isn't the source of the problem, but the goal of conservative talk hosts has been to politicize homelessness, and create this narrative that the real problem is Democrat mayors. The fact of the matter is that most big cities are run by Democrats. That's true in red states and blue states. Homelessness isn't a political problem. It's a social problem. Changing the party of the mayor won't end homelessness. Republicans don't have a plan to address the problem. All they're doing is casting blame in an attempt to make Democrats the enemy. Same thing with the violence and looting. No solution offered. Just blame.
- Status