Wow this Daily Mail article SUCKS [From Motown to Ghost town]

**mcsdetroitfriend** · July-10-11, 10:59 AM

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...=feeds-newsxml

**BrushStart** · July-10-11, 12:12 PM

That is perhaps the most brutal piece of journalism I have ever read about Detroit, which is saying something.

I suppose Peter Hitchens is just another starving journalist feeding off the remains of Detroit, sucking its international reputation further into the abyss.

That said, Hitchens grossly overstated many of Detroit's problems and conveniently left out many recent developments. I guess the uglier you paint Detroit, the more rags you can sell in Britain to people who haven't a clue other than what they read in articles like this.

If journalists wanted to be fair about their coverage of Detroit's decline, then they would admit in earnest that the media has been one of the top 5 contributing factors. To them, bad news is good news and they've spent 4 decades dragging Detroit through the mud, denigrating it with every opportunity, while ignoring anything positive. They are vultures with piranha-sized appetites when it comes to tearing Detroit to pieces. Only recently have we received some support out of New York's big papers and a few bloggers at Crains Detroit.

**Zacha341** · July-10-11, 12:16 PM

Oh joy. Per one of the commenters we've earned the status of being a 'bellwether' of bad things. The same commenter seems to think Detroit is the 'capital' of Michigan it appears.

**gnome** · July-10-11, 12:20 PM

There is a comment section, maybe we should flame it.

**English** · July-10-11, 12:30 PM

Well, this is the truth about large sections of the city. It's no worse than the Dateline stuff. We need BOTH kinds of stories -- the positive new growth AND the huge challenges that we face.

**Zacha341** · July-10-11, 12:35 PM

Or at least sign up temporarily to reply to it. If they can yack from their side of the pond, we can respond from ours......

Originally Posted by gnome

There is a comment section, maybe we should flame it.

**oldredfordette** · July-10-11, 01:01 PM

The Daily Mail is one step up from the National Enquirer. Check out the stories on the sidebar. Not to be taken seriously.

**Jimaz** · July-10-11, 01:04 PM

Heh. They have a photo of slumpy "teetering on the brink of collapse."

Er, I think it went over that brink long ago. LOL!

**Zacha341** · July-10-11, 01:11 PM

Yeah, what's up wid' that? No photo credit on that photo... the others do have cred. Is old 'slumpy' a public domain shot?

Who's the original author of that picture? It's pretty large sized too... not just a fast web-search 'preview' thumbnail version.

They had to click further from somewhere to pull down this large shot.....

Originally Posted by Jimaz

Heh. They have a photo of slumpy "teetering on the brink of collapse."

Er, I think it went over that brink long ago. LOL!

**401don** · July-10-11, 01:12 PM

The scary thing is, based on the reader comments, they take this guy at face value - "great, insightful article Peter"

**iheartthed** · July-10-11, 01:23 PM

It's actually as much an anti-American piece as it is a "woe is Detroit" [[consider the audience). The state of inner-city American cities has for decades been the flaw that international media has seized upon to critique the union. The foreign media, particularly the British media, scrutinize Detroit because the city stands out as the most declined of major cities, and also one that has not enjoyed the type of renaissance that other major urban areas have experienced over the past two decades or so. Plus the theme of America's fatal flaws [[racism, throw away culture, etc), is well intertwined in the storyline of Detroit's downfall.

**Goose** · July-10-11, 01:53 PM

the fact that the guy uses "slumpy" as an example proves this idiot hasn't researched or been in Detroit for quite a while [[what was it, 2 years or so that slumpy collapsed?).... the guy may as well dig up pictures of the riot and make like they happened yesterday.....

what a turd.....

**Bigb23** · July-10-11, 02:10 PM

Wall Street got theirs, so who are we to bitch ?

**Jimaz** · July-10-11, 02:43 PM

Originally Posted by Goose

what was it, 2 years or so that slumpy collapsed?

"... the William Livingstone House was demolished on Saturday September 15, 2007." according to Lowell's newsletter.

My how time flies.

**Zacha341** · July-10-11, 03:10 PM

Yeah, there are plenty of old out-of-date yet classic ruins and stuff to dig out to prove a point, as well as recent stuff.... Again I just wonder who took the original photo? Lowell?

Originally Posted by Goose

the fact that the guy uses "slumpy" as an example proves this idiot hasn't researched or been in Detroit for quite a while [[what was it, 2 years or so that slumpy collapsed?).... the guy may as well dig up pictures of the riot and make like they happened yesterday.....

what a turd.....

**oldredfordette** · July-10-11, 04:10 PM

This one will make you feel a little better:
http://www.salon.com/life/feature/20...ful_wastelands

**Detroit Stylin** · July-10-11, 04:18 PM

Ok so where did that Mail article originate like 1986?

**Zacha341** · July-10-11, 08:32 PM

Nice site. Thanks. That abandon castle off the Hudson in New York was something. Would not think there was a castle anywhere in NY! Abandoned or otherwise......

Originally Posted by oldredfordette

This one will make you feel a little better:
http://www.salon.com/life/feature/20...ful_wastelands

**JBMcB** · July-10-11, 09:23 PM

Originally Posted by Goose

the fact that the guy uses "slumpy" as an example proves this idiot hasn't researched or been in Detroit for quite a while [[what was it, 2 years or so that slumpy collapsed?).... the guy may as well dig up pictures of the riot and make like they happened yesterday.....

If that was the only rotting building in Detroit, you'd have a point. The author just picked out a particularly interesting-looking building to spice up his article. What it represents is completely valid. There are still a lot of abandoned, derelict buildings in Detroit.

**casscorridor** · July-11-11, 01:25 AM

Some people like to deny the truth of Detroit's devastation. I mean, the streets are empty. More than half the buildings are gone or abandoned. Public schools and libraries are on the chopping block. Poverty is sky high, literacy rates dangerously low. Many street lights aren't even on in Midtown, the area everyone is focusing attention on as a redevelopment district, yet it's still dark. Of course there is a counter narrative, but by ignoring the reality one would do a disservice to the city. We want to tell it how it is, but not simply accept that as everlasting. We have to envision what the city could look at like, and what it takes to get it there. But unless we understand the full extent of its problems, how are we to fix them?

**Barbara Nadel** · July-11-11, 06:00 AM

As a Brit who visited Detroit only a few months ago, I would take issue with a lot of what Hitchens says. Personally I found much more activity, hope, spirit than he did. But I was amongst friends and I am not a celebrity which I think can sometimes cut you off from people's day to day lives. Like casscorridor I do think that realities have to be faced but credit has to be given too. Things like the farming and art projects are extremely important and positive but there's also a great literary tradition to the city as well as the fact that Detroit has some fantastic academic and cultural institutions. We don't all think like Peter Hitchens over here.

**Detroitdave** · July-11-11, 06:15 AM

Much of the article was true , however old news , much of it , us and world already knows.
I've just recently moved back to the city and I have a love/ hate, for a lack of better words, with the city and it's leaders. I do believe we are FINALLY moving in the right direction , after 50 years of decline.
My questions is WHY does it take almost 50 years to tear down some building i.e the Packard plant ?
Also much of Grand River, Michigan Ave, Gratiot , many parts of Woodward, those huge old plants right off of the 94 on the near east side and that awful plant at the Mt Elliot exit off of 94.
I know the 1st response is MONEY however the city is losing MUCH more MONEY by allowing these eyesores , that destroy neighborhoods and 50 years ! come on there is NO excuses , this is just pure poor city management for half a century ! l 10 years longer than I've been alive ?.
Dave Bing and Rick Synder have a huge task in front of them ,but I do believe they are on the right track , I'm an optimist but I'm just not sure I can wait it out . I would like to once again live in a city that is safe , clean, liberal, great neighborhoods , great schools and a thriving downtown, outside of a sports game or events. The people of Detroit have to want this too ! I honest believe it's going to take a whole wave of new people from outside of Detroit and southeast Michigan to change things.

**Gannon** · July-11-11, 07:43 AM

That Slumpy-pic is from before April 6th of 2007. Here is what she looked like on that day...this one is mine:

**coracle** · July-11-11, 08:03 AM

"...... I would like to once again live in a city that is safe , clean, liberal, great neighborhoods , great schools and a thriving downtown........" What a wonderful life that would be DetroitDave. I would like to think the trend could be reversed but I have large doubts. I've lived in the suburbs for 35 years but none the talk I've heard in that time gives me any hope of revival. I would move into your perceived city DD without a moment's hesitation. Great cities have people striving to live in them not striving to leave them. It doesn't matter how much money is spent on it, unless the crime can be completely stamped out Detroit is doomed. When the point of no return is reached it's too late. The DM piece is unpalatable but pretty realistic of the conditions.

**Carey** · July-11-11, 08:46 AM

The journalism in the Daily Mail isn't the journalism of such British papers as the Guardian, Independent and Times, which have done much more serious, nuanced articles about Detroit over the years. The Guardian, in fact, published a travel story a couple of years ago that told of the wonderful time two female reporters spent in Detroit one summer weekend.

That said, how can we be shocked that any visitor is overwhelmed by the facade of Detroit? While the Daily Mail's overall take on the city was incomplete and clunky, the reporter's descriptions of Van Dyke and Mack, the "enormous tombstone" of the Michigan Central Station and the deserted streets of downtown are absolutely accurate. Why pretend that the ever-increasing decay of most city neighborhoods is not occurring?

The scale of Detroit's abandonment is staggering, and it startles all first-time visitors. The dismal state of most of the city does raise legitimate questions about the nation's priorities and its future. In more capable hands than those of Peter Hitchens, those points might have been made in a more intelligent way. Being realistic about Detroit is not a sin. It does not detract from the many efforts underway by many people to improve the city. The media is hardly the cause of Detroit's plight, and in fact there have been countless stories in recent months that focus on revitalization.