Money Can’t Buy Him Love
POTTSTOWN, PA – Can money really buy love and respect?
Courtesy of our hard working friends at the Montgomery County Open Records Office, SavePottstown!! has recently obtained the 2010 Annual Report for the Political Action Committee known as Pottstown Citizens for Responsible Government (you know…the PAC that seems to have a never-ending supply of money honey).
Let’s see…in 2010 PCFRG reported contributions of $7,000. WOW – that’s a good sum of money – enough to send one lucky Pottstown student to a private school for a year!
We bet you’re wondering how many folks contributed to PCFGR last year.
Anyone want to wager a guess? Did a thousand…or maybe a hundred concerned Pottstown citizens in pursuit of responsible government think it worthy to donate to PCFRG?
Not quite.
In 2010, PCFRG had just one individual who contributed $7,000 to its coffers. And that individual is none other than PCFRG Treasurer and Web site editor (and part-part-part time Pottstown School Board member) Thomas Hylton.
According to the annual report, the total expenditures last year for our fav PAC was $6,654.99 ($5,316.60 of that amount was spent on 20 paid advertisements that PCRFG ran in the print edition of The Mercury). So…last year over $5,300 was passed from Tom Hylton’s grubby pockets to the grubby pockets of his ex-employer The Mercury.
Gee…no wonder The Mercury won’t print any negative Tom Hylton Sound Off comments or Letters to the Editor. What a convenient way to handle “news” coverage…the politician who pays the most gets the least amount of critical coverage.
And so far, in 2011, Tom Hylton has bought 11 advertisements (at $265.83 a pop). For those at home keeping score…that’s close to $3,000 in the past two months that Hylton has spent spewing his load on page A3 of The Mercury. What does $3,000 buy today? $3,000 would pay for one year of tuition at St. Aloysius. So that’s two students that Tom Hylton could have paid tuition for (and brought out of poverty)…but he chose instead to flush that money down the toilet in advertising revenue for The Mercury in promotion of himself and his one-man-band Political Action Committee.
And speaking of Tom Hylton…did anyone else happen to see yesterday’s news regarding Tom’s new BFF Governor Corbett and his appearance at the nearby Reading Country Club? Now if BFF Tom Hylton showed up at country club yesterday wearing his Mercury pork pie reporting hat he would have been tossed out of the club on his boney white butt.
Here’s the article as published in a legitimate local newspaper (one that doesn’t compromise its integrity by accepting paid advertisements disguised as commentary from dubious politicians):
Governor at Medaglia fundraiser in Exeter
How’s that for innovation, competition and choice?
When is Tom Hylton going to understand that there is simply not enough money in the world to buck the natural currents of individual freedom and independence of thought?
Thanks for the Reading Eagle link SP. Did you notice how the comments on the Reading Eagle site are done through Facebook? Too bad The Mercury can’t get their technological act together enough to start allowing comments through FB. That would eliminate a lot of the anonymous trashy comments that they get on a daily basis from their non-tech savvy wingnut readers.
But, like you said, they’ll never get it. They’re just a has-been news source waiting for the next buy out. Maybe Mr. Hylton will donate some more money (in paid ads) so they can upgrade their IT division. But I doubt it.
@ljohnson
Sorry to disappoint you, but your statement is sadly at odds with the facts.
The Mercury DOES allow comments through Facebook.
We have a Facebook page, link through it to our website, solicit reader input through Facebook for stories before they are published, publish them in the print edition as well as online and give preference to those who use their full name.
So we allow comments through both venues, through Facebook for those who wish to use their real names, and anonymously; you know, like this site.
I’m a little puzzled though by your views on this; not sure why someone who posts here anonymously is upset by anonymous posts…
Thank you Mr. Brandt for telling me that I post here anonymously. Even though I use my name when posting. Why do you feel it necessary to come onto this site and get in everyone’s face? Get over yourself. You’re not as impressive as you think you are.
Maybe I should throw some advertising dollars your way so you treat me with a little more respect.
Take a good look at The Reading Eagle’s website. They allow comments to their articles through Facebook. The Mercury does not do that. The Mercury has to pay someone to monitor and approve or deny its comments. If The Mercury tech people were smart enough to use FB for their commenting tool, it wouldn’t be the side show that it is today.
I’m sorry, but the FB page for The Mercury is a little lacking. Like it’s integrity.
Mr./Mrs. Johnson,
You’re right.
Your name is here. I apologize for implying otherwise.
As far as getting in everyone’s face, just trying to correct some “mis-information.”
You are technically correct that The Eagle only allows comments through Facebook. They announced a while back they would no longer allow anonymous comments. But by leaving out salient facts, a practice abhorred by this site’s authors and many of its commenters, it leaves the impression that The Mercury does not encourage Facebook use and people using their real names. And that is incorrect.
Some readers here may recall I have argued for The Mercury site to only allow commenting with people’s real names (in fact some might say ad nauseum), but I don’t run the company and I lost that battle.
As you many not be aware, unlike The Eagle, The Mercury is not a stand-alone newspaper but is owned by a national corporation. The Mercury website is identical in format to every other newspaper owned by Journal Register Corporation. It’s not a matter of being “smart enough” to use Facebook as a way of commenting, it is a matter of our format being a corporate decision.
However, I note you still haven’t answered my question.
What makes anonymous commenting on The Mercury site a “sideshow” and the identical practice here, something other than that?
Perhaps you could explain that to me. I assure you, I would be suitably impressed.
You want a sideshow? Start reading the 45 wacky comments from Friday’s Sound Off. As a matter of fact, take any day of the week on the Sound Off online comments. You don’t think that’s an online sideshow? That certainly qualifies in my book.
At least the readers who comment on this site have a brain and know how to use it.
Getting back on topic. In reading the annual report, did anyone else notice that Mr. Hylton hit his 11th paid advertisement in September of 2010. Already this year, he has run 11 ads in The Mercury. He must be gearing up for the primary elections, don’t you think? It’s reassuring to know that this year won’t be like past elections. His old tricks won’t work like they used to thanks to this site and others like it in Pottstown.
Hmmm,
So anonymous commenters here are smarter than all the anonymous commenters on The Mercury site?
OK, if that’s your explanation…
The commenters on The Mercury are hard core and not very nice to each other. On this site, they’re level headed and offer thought-provoking posts. Which is why I like visiting this site.
Also, The Mercury never offers even half of the information I learned about Pottstown from this site. Which I find very helpful in understanding Pottstown and why things are the way they are (and how we can overcome the issues to make some much needed progress in this town).
since the reporter from the merc is asking so many questions, i have a question for him.
according to the report linked above, tom hylton paid over $8,240 in the past 15 months for 31 paid ads in the merc.
don’t you think that is a major conflict of interest for your employer to accept that kind of ad money from a local politician that you write news articles on?
how can people in ptown expect a non-biased story when tom hylton has given close to $10,000 to the merc? i see that as a big problem. the merc should not be accepting any money from tom hylton as long as he is an elected official.
Actually Bill, I only asked one question.
Mr./Mrs. Johnson has answered it to my satisfaction.
But I would be happy to answer yours.
We (and every other newspaper in the country) accept advertisements from politicians we cover all the time, particularly at election time.
We still cover them.
We also accept money from the borough for ads they take out in our paper. We still cover them.
We accept much more advertising money from Boscov’s, but still publish information both about shop-lifting there as well as their bout with bankruptcy.
There is a reason for “the wall” between advertising and editorial at a newspaper and you have just articulated it.
I am not involved in selling ads. My salary is same no matter how many ads Mt. Hylton buys. And I have never been told not to cover a story involving Mr. Hylton, or cover it in a particular way, by anyone with any authority over my work.
As for whether or not people see bias in a story, that is for readers to decide and I have always invited them to contact me with any concerns they may have.
I have received few complaints about any stories I have written being biased. Those complaints that have been raised here I have answered to the best of my ability.
In fact you have not cited an example, merely raised the question. Is there an example of bias that you want to raise?
(Even Barry Robertson, the school board president ousted by the slate of candidates Mr. Hylton supported, told me on the night he was defeated that he believed we had been fair in our coverage.)
I hope that addresses your concerns.
sideshow
n.
1. A small show offered in addition to the main attraction, as at a circus.
2. A diversion or spectacle that is incidental to a larger set of circumstances or a bigger issue of concern.
Hmmm….I don’t know Evan, LJ’s choice of the word sideshow does seem to sum-up The Mercury’s sound-off and online comments rather accurately. Anyway, isn’t that exactly what Sound Off and online comments at The Mercury are meant to be – a sideshow – a small show offered in addition to the main attraction? I’m assuming that news reporting does still hold the “main attraction” slot.
Conversely, it would seem that the “stickier” blogs purposefully allow their readers’ comments, whether made by name or anonymously, to become their main attraction. There within lies the beauty of an interesting blog – one that keeps you coming back for more – comments from any and all willing to participate create the blog’s substance.
I also have to agree with LJ about the unnecessary harshness that ensues way too quickly online at Mercury amongst its regulars. At least on SP civility remains a constant, weather agreeing or disagreeing. (Actually, I think the same is true for all of the local blogs that I visit.) Unfortunately, many of those commenting on the Mercury’s site tend to go right for the jugular over the pettiest of things – a typo, even – and then any point that might have been worth considering becomes buried in BS. No, but thanks! I believe that there is quite enough unavoidable everyday life BS to deal with; I have zero desire to intentionally search out random verbal abuse from strangers. But, hey…whatever you’re into.
Hi Amy.
Not sure what a “stickier” blog is.
I make no defense of Sound Off, other than to say those people are your neighbors, for good or ill.
But I understand your point is people making comments here are smarter and more well-behaved. Why do you think that is? (Serious question)
I don’t dispute there are some regulars who troll Sound-Off who are mean-spirited.
But there are other places where comments are made on The Mercury web site, places where even some of the regulars here have left their thoughts…
Sorry, Evan….I guess my inner web-geek came through. “Sticky,” when said in reference to a blog/website, refers to a site’s ability to keep visitors on the site once they discover it and/or encourages them to return frequently (ie, visitors “stick” to the site).
As for your question, “… people making comments here are smarter and more well-behaved. Why do you think that is? (Serious question),” that’s a tough one. I don’t think I can answer it on-the-fly. What’s your theory on how different virtual cultures affect the amount of civility given to one another by its’ frequent commenters?