Jay Baldwin is the Director of Joint Communication at NIC, but he starts his “communication” in today’s Press column by insulting those questioning education plans for our area. Jay’s opening statement is this: “Above the din of inane accusations, personal attacks and misinformation…” What inane accusations are you referring to, Jay? Name a personal attack. What information is incorrect? Jay doesn’t address these issues. He goes on to seemingly take credit for a North Idaho job opportunities program that he and NIC had nothing to do with establishing. Jay is now only one of more than 100 people contributing their ideas to the Workforce Innovation Now program, called WIN for short, but so am I, and so are others who have concerns about NIC’s methods of pushing the Ed. Corridor concept on the taxpayers without an open process.
And at the end of his column Jay writes, ” Not to diminish its value, because public debate is a necessary tenet of our political system…” Gosh, Jay, glad to hear you admit the public has a “necessary” place in the discussion. Your job title includes the word “communication” and you are paid by taxpayer dollars, so maybe you should drop the insulting attitude and respectfully offer meaningful information to citizens asking questions.
You can read his column by clicking this link: cdapress.com/articles/2009/01/04/columns/columns13.txt
Dan put his comment under our Open Session before I wrote this post. Here’s his view:
Obviously Mr. Baldwin hasn’t read Dale Carnegie.
I suppose people who are concerned about education and don’t agree with Mr. Baldwin are “inane” and making personal attacks and giving misinformation. That’s not the way you build a community, Mr. Ed. All opinions are valid. As soon as the self-appointed elite in this town recognize that, the better we all we be.
Comment by Dan — January 4, 2009 @ 9:22 am |Edit This
Comment by mary — January 4, 2009 @ 11:33 am
How many times must it be repeated….what those in power “recognize” is their own infallibility. They could not care less what the rank and file think or say. Their arrogance trumps all. And that arrogance will continue until the citizenry rise up and storm the barricades of this “self importance”. Do you hear the distant drums? Sadly, not yet.
Comment by Faringdon — January 4, 2009 @ 1:32 pm
NIC seems to embrace a vision of education that really is not a fit for this community. They see NIC as a quasi 4 year institute and emphasize 4 year preparatory courses. But the high schools are not cranking out competent students at that level and local industries need a better trained technical base to support solid income growth in this area. The area needs this technical growth to develop and sustain a solid economic base as a step towards improving the overall caliber of our community. Then our student population will improve to where they can take better aim at 4 year degrees. But NIC wants to skip this tech step not understanding its need. We have NIC and we have many 4 year programs in our immediate area. We really need NIC to heavily focus on PTE and tech programs in a strong coalition with local industry. Then we can entice more good employers to town and fill their labor needs. That should be the plan Stan.
Comment by Wallypog — January 5, 2009 @ 10:29 am
Good points, Wallypog, and I agree totally. Mayor Bloem and others worried about “cultural capital” over community, seem in a rush to make us The Big City. Things take time, good things take vision, planning, and involve the community.
Comment by Dan — January 5, 2009 @ 10:52 am
doesn’t seem any more insulting than some stuff i read on this site.
Comment by reagan — January 5, 2009 @ 2:21 pm
reagan the people who post here are not representatives of any public entity. They are also not entitled Director of Communications. You know as much as anyone that communication is a dialogue not a dissertation. If this man is NIC’s conduit for communication it is a one way conduit. Rather than condemning anyones input he should be encouraging it. He does not need to agree with what people say but he should welcome the opportunity to hear it, try to understand it and engage in working for a common ground. That’s his job (or it should be).
Comment by Wallypog — January 5, 2009 @ 2:51 pm
poor pitiful liberals they hold the public to a higher standard than they hold their propaganda ministers.
Comment by TheWiz — January 6, 2009 @ 7:03 pm
it is instructive to see how poorly the public responded to jay at the cda website. he response is equally instructive.
Comment by TheWiz — January 6, 2009 @ 7:08 pm
“reagan the people who post here are not representatives of any public entity.”
oh, i get, the double standard. i’ve heard that here before, too.
Comment by reagan — January 6, 2009 @ 9:28 pm
This site is tame compared to most. Then again, government officials and their paid representatives should be held to higher standards than bloggers, right? Or would that be a “double standard?”
No, a double standard is when the media gets apoplectic when a Republican does something and they act aloof when a Democrat does the same thing. That’s a double standard.
Comment by Dan — January 6, 2009 @ 10:34 pm
dan while a double standard can involve members of political parties it doesn’t always. in this case i don’t think it has anything to do with politics but if that is the filter you use to view the situation well then so be it. and yes i think it is a double standard when a blogger or anyone else doesn’t hold themselves to the same standard. if you are going to hold “government officials and their paid representatives…to higher standards” then you should hold yourself to them as well. anything less is a cop out.
Comment by reagan — January 6, 2009 @ 11:11 pm
Actually this is not about holding public officials to any kind of ‘higher’ standard. This is all about expecting them to demonstrate adherence to minimum everyday standards. There is no reason for public officials to limit communication or criticize those who choose to speak whether in a public forum or this one. We have seen how the city council plows those who speak out against their plans. Local gov’t around here conducts itself 10 notches below gutter level ethical standards and this gentleman is right down there with his colleagues in slime. The obvious fact that he insults those who try to communicate their ideas as a so called professional communicator says it all. He conducts himself more like a propaganda minister.
Comment by Wallypog — January 7, 2009 @ 1:30 am
why? i dont hold myself to the same standards as a medical doctor, i am not one. once more the resident lib tries to act with insulting condescension towards the rest of us. typical elitist snobbery.
Comment by TheWiz — January 7, 2009 @ 5:40 pm
wiz, the doctor argument is a transparent and weak strawman. i also wasn’t aware that having a moral code that holds all people to the same level was elitist, i was traised to believe it was fair and ethical. apparently you are not of the same belief.
Comment by reagan — January 7, 2009 @ 9:47 pm
projection is a funny form of argument. the real strawman here is the claim that everyone owes the same duty to everyone else. flawed thinking leads to flawed conclusions.
government officials and employees have a positive duty towards the public that this site looks to see filled. the duties citizens owe government are very different than those government owes to us. standards based on duties owed vary.
the elitist defends secret government and denies the obvious and clear moral and legal duties being breached by such conduct. then the elitist attacks those who are pointing out when public officials breach positive duties, sad and odd but very typical.
Comment by TheWiz — January 8, 2009 @ 2:18 am