2012 conventions 2012 election 2013 session arts arts and culture author ballot measures basketball bomb books boy scouts budget bullying business charlie hales children clackamas climate change coal college courts crime culture culture club democrats drugs economy education environment family film fluoride food gay rights guns handguns health health care health insurance high school history housing immigration internet kitzhaber law legislature lgbt literary arts living marijuana marriage media medicine mental health military minor parties mohamed mohamud movies music native americans news newspaper obama olympics oregon our town parenting pers photography police politcs politics port portland portland business journal president prevention public safety religion republicans rnc romney rural salem sam adams sandy hook schools science shooting sports suicide supreme court taxes technology terrorism theater third parties transportation union university of oregon washington wildfire women

I think that media and politics are always plagued with questions about which is the most of something or the worst of something. I think that the relevant question is not about whether Portland is the "green-ist city" or if it is the "third most toxic city" in America. These assignments are based on definitions and statistics that are very context dependent. The important questions rather, are "what is Portland (or any other city, county, country, whatever) doing to make it a nice, safe and overall great place to live?" and "what more can it do to make it better?"

Rankings are alway sketchy - I always think of the stereotypical 'frat boy' from all the various universities talking about how their school is the number 1 party school. There are far more important questions to ask rather than worrying about rankings.

posted 5 years ago
view in context