Scout's Dishonor? - The Continuing Saga

PING! STANDARD DISCLAIMER - The opinions expressed in this post do not
represent of Boy Scout Troop 381, Great Trail Council, Old Portage District,
or anyone associated with those organizations. These opinions are the
opinions of the poster. Also, some of the comments below are intended
humously. If you find them offensive, don't blame me!

There are five television stations in Northeast Ohio (specifically the
Greater Cleveland and Akron metropolitan areas). There are two daily
newspapers and several weekly newspapers. A couple weeks ago I mentioned in
a post that the Akron Beacon-Journal had seen fit to publish an article on
their front page entitled "Scout's Dishonor?" That article reported that the
Copley Township trustees had asked Boy Scout Troop 382 to find another place
to meet. Much of the article dealt with alleged misconduct by the membership
of the troop and vandalism in the town hall.

Last night (5/14/98) one of the five television stations in the area ran a
story on the plight of our brothers in Troop 381. The reporter mentioned
several times that the Scouts had been accused of vandalising the building
(including breaking stair railings and urinating in the halls). The fact
that the troop had been meeting in the building for 41 years without much
trouble was mentioned only in passing. The selected bites from interviews
with residents seemed to be positive toward the Scouts, but could ultimately
be interpreted either way.

Only one of the three trustees has ever talked to the press about this
issue. Previously the comments centered on their conduct. Now she has no
comment on their conduct because "any problems we had with their conduct
were resolved over a year ago." This important revelation was also glossed
over. It was mentioned twice that the township wanted the meeting room for
storage, and once that the trustees were helping the the troop find another
place to meet. The fact that the Scouts had been accused of vandalising the
building was mentioned at least five or six times. By the way, no one seems
to know who made the accusations.

The report is what FOX News would call "balanced" because representatives
from either side were given a chance to speak. Of course, the story was
sensationalized to make it more appealing to the target audience. And, after
analyzing the text of the report, I can safely say the reporter went out of
her way to make sure the report could be interpreted either way.

Now, I'm not very close to this situation because I'm not involved with
Troop 382. I have talked to their Scoutmaster, but I'm not involved in the
solution. Last week, though, the troop leadership and township trustees met
with representatives of Great Trail Council. I'm told that a deal was made.
I am left to wonder exactly why this situation has made it to local TV news.
I wonder exactly who broke the news to the ABJ and why they decided it was
important enough to warrent front page status. Who at the local FOX station
felt that a story reported in a newspaper two weeks ago and apparently was
resolved, was worthy of being the third of five "teasers" at the top of the
show.

Furthermore, who's behind this conspiracy? It couldn't be the troop since
reaction to the new reports seem to be 50/50. Now, they may have sent out a
press release to try to drum up community support, but who turned it into a
front page story. Who made the most recent accusations? How do the trustees
expect to find the troop another place to meet after portraying them as a
bunch of juvenile delinquents with little or no adult supervision? And,
finally, why can I hear a bunch of little old ladies complaining about how
bad kids are today and screaming "OH NO, NOT THE BOY SCOUTS TOO!"

YIS
Anthony J. Mako, ajmako@apk.net
Scoutmaster, Troop 381 http://members.aol.com/Scouts381/
Home of the Unofficial Boy Scout Desk Top Theme
Great Trail Council - Copley, Ohio
"I used to be an Eagle (Basic 1982, C-7-97), but I'll always be an Eagle
(1981)"

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• Next message
• Previous message
• Next in thread