Picus Story Criticized
The Times’ coverage of Los Angeles Councilwoman Joy Picus seems to be rather biased. In the Valley portion of the Metro section of Feb. 3, your reporter, John Schwada, refers to the “schoolmarmish Picus.” What is that supposed to mean and whose opinion is it?
He wrote the same sort of personal opinion in the preceding paragraph. After saying that many will admire her stand, he flatly states that her “crusade” will result in a “damning charge” at the next election.
Doesn’t this sort of mean-spirited nonsense belong on the editorial or the op-ed page?
At the end of the story, one finds a negative quote from a former opponent and a rather feeble statement from a community person. Was Picus asked to comment? Isn’t it considered good journalism to ask subjects to respond to charges made against them?
One expects more professional work from The Times and its reporters.
R. W. SCHEIBEL, Woodland Hills
Start your day right
Sign up for Essential California for news, features and recommendations from the L.A. Times and beyond in your inbox six days a week.
You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Los Angeles Times.
