By Ann Cooper
When we started Commenting on the Comments a few weeks ago, we noted that some West Side Rag readers say they come to the site mainly for the comments. On the flip side, some say they never read the comments. If you’re one of those never-readers, or just a sometimes-reader (which probably includes most who follow the Rag), here’s a sampling of things you missed last week.
ICYMI: Dead chickens in the middle of the road. Our story about two dead chickens found on West 92nd Street couldn’t answer those fundamental questions of journalism: who (did it), when, or why. But the visuals were highly unusual for the Upper West Side, so we ran them with what was known and ended with a tongue-in-cheek kicker: ”Why did the chickens cross the road?”
Amy corrected us:
Amy
Don’t you mean why DIDN’T the chicken cross the road?
A couple of other readers suggested the chickens may have been used in sacrifice rituals.
Irene
Santeria?
AMD
Can you say Voodoo
Or maybe they were……
gmartin
running away from Popeye’s on 95th street?
And here’s another chicken story, one we apparently missed. If you ever see this guy, please take a photo and send to WSR.
Lisa
Speaking of chickens, a few months ago I saw a guy walking on 72nd and Broadway with a live chicken tucked under his arm. It was a pretty chicken, and girls were ooohing and aaaahing. He said it was his pet. I can only imagine how many women this guy was able to meet with this tactic. Helps that he was nice looking, too :).
ICYMI: 5G Towers Coming to UWS. When the Rag reported city plans to install several 5G towers on the Upper West Side to provide more high-speed, free Wi-Fi service, comments flooded in. A few welcomed the towers and their promise of better Wi-Fi, but quite a few raised aesthetic objections – none more direct and succinct than Joan’s.
Joan
They are just plain ugly.
Our story reported that UWS City Councilmember Gale Brewer had used the “ugly” theme in a letter to city officials, in which she argued the towers would mar the historical integrity and beauty of the neighborhood. Brewer’s letter did not mention another issue raised by some commenters:
Sabrina Rosen
I wonder if there is an increase in cancer risk that comes with an increase in 5G poles? I am worried for our children.
Sabrina got a quick, succinct response.
Steen
Reply to Sabrina Rosen
There is not.
It seemed safe to move on, but there was more:
S.L.
There are documented cancer clusters that have been linked to 5G towers. Why are the towers concentrated in 2 areas? Two towers between 94 and 97 Street along Columbus Ave. Two towers between 61st and 63rd streets along Broadway. Is NYC going to pay for oncology treatment if cancer clusters occur in those 2 areas?
And some helpful reading suggestions:
People need to do research on the safety of these cell phone towers.. Start with this article: https://westviewnews.org/2023/01/11/new-york-city-a-sorcerers-garden-of-5g-cell-towers/westview-news/
Kudos to Gale Brewer for speaking out about the aesthetics, which might be our only hope for banning these monstrosities, though the safety issue is more of a concern, in my opinion.
The ProPublica article A.E. recommends is quite long, but a good, investigative examination that questions government assurances of the safety of the technology. “[A] growing body of international research asserts that there is reason to worry about harms — many of them unrelated to cancer — from wireless radiation,” according to ProPubllca. Bottom line: like so many things in life, there’s no “beyond a doubt” answer.
ICYMI: Robert Beck Takes His Canvas to the Library. Artist Robert Beck’s scenes of life on the UWS are always accompanied by thoughtful stories and observations. His essay in praise of libraries this week is a timely one, given the struggle over city cuts to the library budget (on Thursday the city announced funding would be restored, enabling libraries to reopen on Sundays). Beck also included this observation, to underscore a point about knowledge gained from some Internet sources versus knowledge stored in the library: “If you read online comments sections, it’s clear that anonymity enables uncivil behavior.”
Should commenters be allowed to post anonymously (on WSR, you need to register a name for your post, but you can invent one for yourself)? That’s definitely a point worth commenting on.
Subscribe to WSR’s free email newsletter here.
YAY Libraries!!
Anonymous comments bring out stuff that would not be said otherwise, like the comment earlier this week on an article directed towards me that said that right now it is politically inconvenient to stick one’s neck out for Muslims and that is why Gale’s office does not do much to help Muslims complaining about being profiled and made to feel unwelcome on the UWS. No one will ever acknowledge that publicly but I am sure that is what many people, even liberals on the UWS privately believe.
I agree that anonymity brings out opinions and contributions that wouldn’t not otherwise be opined or contributed out loud. That’s why I would prefer comments with one’s name. If one isn’t willing to stand behind the thing you’re going to anonymously shout, then maybe one shouldn’t shout it. At minimum, using actual names would encourage people to think for a moment before they commented online. That moment of thought could avert a lot of petty and sometimes cruel off-the-cuff remarks.
Says the woman who provides only a first name. Knowing that really makes you identifiable.
One reason why comments here are so interesting is because people can comment under a pseudonym. It allows the freedom to say what you really think without worrying people will think less of you for it. If WSR did not moderate comments as well as it does, things might be different. But I like to read people’s true opinions.
I think you’ve pegged it correctly. It’s easier (and in the current environment possibly safer) to express opinions under an assumed name. I use my real name in comments to articles in national and international media. But I use a pseudonym for WSR comments because it’s so close to home, and all my neighbors and local friends read The Rag. Maybe there’s an element of cowardice here, but I’m not up for an argument when I’m stuck in the elevator with the disagreeable lady in 13D. Actually, I’ve come to like my pseudonym so much I’m thinking of having my real name changed legally. (Not really.)
A comment on the comments on the comments: Just to point out that you combined SL’s comments on the cell towers’ safety (or lack thereof) with mine, which started, “People need to do research” and included the links to the two articles.
So sorry A.E. Fixed.
Lol! I love the neighborhood comments! I even had one you published once. The chicken mystery comments cracked me up. You’ve got a great readership and I love seeing the thoughtful, sometimes opinionated and often funny comments of my fellow UWSiders.
It is more than troubling about 5G installations throughout the upper west side and anywhere actually in a residential area. It’s just another example of money interests overriding health and safety.
Shame on those who support 5G in residential and congested areas. Maybe the data is not fully in but the one thing we do know is it can’t be good for you.
While I have a deep respect for the reporting of ProPublica, the studies they cite as raising alarm are one meta analysis from 2011 that found a possible (not probable) risk for glioma in people who held the phone against their ear for an extended period of time–so incredibly close contact yet still a very weak link. The other study, as was noted in the article, was found on Alex Jones’s website.
In fact, the whole “The FCC is hiding something!’ tone of the article is incredibly off putting. I realize this was written before the SC’s Chevron ruling, but we don’t need paranoia to win. For scientific information, I would start here: https://www.niehs.nih.gov/health/topics/agents/emf