web analytics

Letters: Shame on the Examiner for its appalling front page

Trending Articles

The Thursday, July 27 edition of the San Francisco Examiner.
Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmailFacebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail

“S.F. to Trump: City rallies troops after the president prohibits military service for transgender people,” July 27
Deeply offended by your front page photo

I was appalled to see Thursday’s front page. I fully support expression of anger toward something that offended many people, but putting this picture with that expression is offensive and reckless to our young children and to me. As a grandfather of four, I have tried very hard to protect them from this kind of visual.

Since I read a lot of newspapers, I am offended by your choice because it will be seen by children, and they will think it’s normal to express that way. And that’s not OK, regardless of how angry we feel about certain issues. Poor taste on your part to print it.

Eric Emmanuel
San Francisco

Examiner’s classless decision

Shame on you, S.F. Examiner, for printing such a provocative photo on the front page of the Thursday edition. Very inappropriate even for liberal San Francisco!

Is that how you want to communicate to the public? Shame on you! Classless and very distasteful!

Margaret McNamara
San Francisco

“S.F. advances relaxed rules for utility boxes,” The City, July 27
City Hall’s troubling priorities

I really hate AT&T, but can’t The City find about half a million or so, out of the $10.1 billion budget the mayor just signed into law, for lawyers to fight the telecom giant that opposes payments of some $5,000 per box for artists to paint murals on each utility box?

That shows us where local political priorities are, and with art (and the homeless, and hapless small merchants besieged by homeless encampments and refuse), they sure aren’t. Shame on the supervisors.

Ann Grogan
San Francisco

“In an era of bots and fake news, we must appreciate real people,” Political Lines, July 20
Self-serving arguments

How typical that Maureen Erwin considers her own annoying behavior to be acceptable and even a source of pride. She assumes all of us are naive enough to think it makes a difference which of the two major corporate servant political parties wins an election and that propaganda supporting these millionaire candidates doesn’t constitute commercial speech.

Needless to say, in spite of the toothless “Do Not Call Registry,” we are subjected to these in addition to her own beloved spiels, and our dinners and otherwise peaceful evenings at home are interrupted by both of them. Yes, our much-touted freedoms are disappearing, largely due to the fact that the people Erwin wants us to vote for refuse to take a stand against America’s march toward a fascist police state.

As far as “real people” are concerned, it is also real people who harass us on Muni and BART, run stop signs and red lights and vandalize and steal our property. Please spare me the cliche that we, Americans, have some kind of democracy to uphold.

Robocalls that make the phone ring and then disconnect when we don’t rush to pick up are bad enough, but Erwin shouldn’t be so arrogant as to presume that what she does is any more deserving of respect. All her attitude demonstrates is that, like everyone else, she feels good about herself and considers what she is getting paid to do to be a noble enterprise.

On the other hand, I appreciate her work opposing GMOs. Just don’t call me at home to discuss the topic.

Carl Hoffman
San Francisco

“City leaders move to aid merchants hurt by Central Subway delays,” The City, July 13
A business is a business

Supervisor Aaron Peskin and, no doubt, the mayor want to reimburse Chinatown businessmen for their business losses caused by the Central Subway construction project.

That would constitute a very large departure from precedent.

What about Macy’s? What about the smaller businesses along Stockton Street east of Union Square? In fact, what about all the Union Square businesses that have lost business because the access difficulties resulting from the Central Subway project? Shouldn’t they also be compensated?

And what about the damage, loss of high-end merchandise and loss of business suffered by assorted businesses along Geary, resulting from the PG&E water main rupture of 2014? Shouldn’t they also be compensated?

And then there’s Market Street. When the BART/Muni Metro Market Street subway was being constructed, downtown Market Street was a complete mess, in large part because of The City’s decision to keep the streetcars running on the surface of Market Street while BART dug a monumentally large hole underneath. Dozens, if not hundreds, of businesses along Market Street were hurt. Many didn’t survive the program. Yet no compensation was ever paid to any of them.

If I were representing those other businesses, I’d be advising them to file their claims the day after City Hall approves the paying of damages to Chinatown businesses. A business is a business, regardless of where it’s located.

Jerry Cauthen
San Francisco

Click here or scroll down to comment

In Other News