MISADVENTURES IN JOURNALISM: ANOTHER SHITTY ARTICLE ABOUT HISTORIC PRESERVATION

  1. *begin rant*
  2. City Lab, an Atlantic off shoot, published an article about Historic Preservation a couple days ago.
  3. I have a degree in historic preservation, and it's the field I currently work in. I've been fortunate enough to work within multiple different professions of preservation while I figured out what the hell I actually wanted to do (I *think* I have it figured out).
    Those different fields: Architecture, planning, museums (curatorial and interpretation), landscapes, and education.
  4. That being said, I know what I'm talking about here, even if my support of the issue is biased.
  5. Now what I want to know is how the flying fuck this hot pile of garbage was willingly published by the City Lab editors.
  6. This piece is all over the map. They seem to start with one idea (how historic districts hinder development) and switch to another (how, actually, it's single family zoning that hinders development) halfway through.
    The second thought isn't wrong, however ...
  7. The author chooses to take every single fear mongering idea about historic districts and compile them into one article. Not only are the vast majority of these wrong, but the ones that have a little truth to them are completely misrepresented.
  8. They also make completely false statements and provide evidence that has absolutely nothing to do with them as citation. They then drop the issue without explaining why that citation was used and don't explain anything, but use their earlier statement as part of their argument later on.
    Capps says Texas v. Inclusive Communities makes historic districts unconstitutional without any explanation (when done correctly, they're perfectly legal), but then later uses that as a reason why republican lawmakers in the Midwest can fight new districts.
  9. There's a lot of talk about "how to move preservation into the 21st century"
    Because FYI, preservation, as a recognized field, only turns 50 this year.
  10. It's never going to successfully make that jump if major journalism institutions allow un fact checked, misrepresented garbage like this to be published.
  11. *end rant*