Actual Spartanburg not pictured.
That’s right, Spartanburg isn’t the city in the background. In fact, I don’t know what city it is. Greenville, maybe?
While this may just be the result of a basic blog template that hasn’t been customized yet (although the site was launched nearly a week ago), it’s a painful goof that needs to be corrected.
Steve Shanafelt
Yeah, that is most definitely downtown Greenville.
Which, to me at least, says this isn’t a mistake. It was an intentional choice by someone — either Belenchia or the site’s designer — to put Greenville rather than Spartanburg on the site. Man, that’s embarrassing.
WOW. I’d rather see a generic sunrise or a pretty flower than some other city in the banner.
Bad move.
Nice call Steve. Say, you do free lance right?
This boy is letting his teenage cousin do it because “she’s good with computers”.
Worth a shot. Help him out and make some bucks.
I can’t … Ethics and stuff. I’m not able to do any work with any of the local candidates. If I did, I’d either have to own up to it in every piece of election coverage I did or not write about the local election at all.
But there are dozens of perfectly capable bloggers here in Spartanburg who could probably do it easily enough. It looks like some kind of standard template.
I’ll comment on ethics since you called yours into question. Ethically, shouldn’t you also “report” on another candidate’s consistent reference to Greenville as her residence on all her personal web accounts. Not to mention some fairly scandalous and lewd quotes. Maybe everyone wishes this was Greenville. Heck, this site can’t even get enough support to place one classified ad. It is settled; Spartanburg shall be forever deemed Greetanvilleburg (just rolls off the tongue). BTW, I commend your Cronkite-esq journalist blog.
NPP: Where do you see Ryba mentioning “Greenville” as her residence? Her Facebook campaign page lists her as being in Spartanburg, and the closest thing I can find to support your claim is that her personal page is in the Greenville network. But that’s not her fault, it’s something Facebook decides. There’s not a “Spartanburg” Facebook network, and even the Spark is part of the Greenville network.
Also, I’m not sure what qualifies as “scandalous and lewd,” but if you’re going to make that kind of accusation, you really need to provide a link to the quote in question. If you have something, e-mail it to me or post it here or on the Spark’s forum, but just saying some kind of content exists isn’t enough.
As far as the Spark not being able to get “one classified ad,” I assume you’re referring to paid display ads. We get requests for people wanting to know about advertising regularly, so it’s not a lack of interest from the community. Really, it’s because I’m not quite ready to make this site into a proper business yet, and I’m not going to start taking money from people in the community until I have all of the business side in order.
Thanks for the props about the site. I’m not sure what makes the site “Cronkite-esque,” but if you’re getting something of value from the Spark, we’re doing our job.
Ummmm, you people are deeply queer.
Is this really what matters in a District Council Member?
Please folks, let’s get real focus on real issues. You do have real issues in Spartanburg, right?
Does it matter that someone running for City Council in Spartanburg either: a)doesn’t know enough to realize the background image on his campaign site is actually the Greenville skyline; or b) doesn’t care enough to bother putting the correct image in after a week?
I’d say yes.
I agree with Steve. If the candidate wants to serve Spartanburg, but doesn’t have access to a photo or drawing of Spartanburg’s skyline, why put a skyline OF ANY OTHER CITY, especially Greenville?????
A pretty flower or a generic chair would be more meaningful – maybe a photo of ol’ Daniel even. At least those might point to his dedication to beautification or his desire to have a “seat” on the council, or a sense of this city’s history. But Greenville, really?
Isn’t that the same lame Spartanburg wants to be/would hate to be Greenville dichotomy?
What matters is the candidate’s policies, experience, relationships in the community and commitment to the job.
Not, the candidate’s website.
You’re reaching…
Lol – I heard this is a gimmick to get people to look at and talk about the Website. Looks like it worked. I was told the pictures would be changing. So I guess this candidate needs to thank Steve.
I seriously doubt it. The website has no relevant information on it, and was obviously thrown together in haste by someone who had little source material. The idea that it’s some masterstroke of intentional controversy is laughable given the failure of the site to do things like provide basic contact info for the candidate, provide a platform or any biographical information.
The only thing it accomplishes is to make the candidate look like he doesn’t represent Spartanburg. I fail to see how this could be part of some grand strategy, spurious retconning to one side.
From whom, JAFO, did you hear this rumor?
I heard JAFO just pulled that one out of his ass.
Even if that’s true, it’s not a smart move. I can’t imagine how branding your candidacy by putting an image of Greenville would go over well even among the people who are jealous of what Greenville has. People want Spartanburg to be a thriving city with its own identity, not a mini-Greenville.
I’m more inclined to think there was no thought put behind it. It was an available graphic. And I can’t say I’m too wild about a cut-and-paste candidate.
That’s Atlanta — I believe midtown. Definitely not Greenville. Note the twin towers. Not in Greenville.
That would make more sense if it was just a generic placeholder of an image for an incomplete website. It’s still unfortunate, but at least it’s not an intentional slight to the city.
It looks like it has changed since you put up the screenshot, Steve. The image you show is definitely Greenville, but the one up on the site now looks like Atlanta.
You’re right. What a weird thing to do. I mean, is it that hard to get a photo of downtown Spartanburg? And how does this fix anything? It’s still sending the exact same message: Not Spartanburg.
I think p303 has it right. Why not just a cloud or something vague as the background? The first time was likely an oversight, but the change has to be intentional this time. Sad.
That is definitely the ATL, which I love but left for Sparkle City – for many of the reasons the new banner illuminates: population density, the resulting traffic, etc.
Seriously, the G’Vegas banner was almost better than the ATL one!
Sparkle City night skyline will never look like Atlanta’s – well, not in my lifetime anyway.
Based on the nature of this discussion, I think I understand why Spartanburg is still such a small and provincial place. You folks are putting all of this energy into discussing a graphic on a website like it really means something. I’m embarrassed for you.
Also, it’s pretty clear there’s no objectivity here on this site.
Why don’t we change the site name to “Ryba Spark”?
What’s your obsession with Cate Ryba? This post isn’t even about Ryba, it’s about Belenchia’s website goof. You’re the only person who keeps bringing her up. In fact, the Spark’s coverage of the campaign hasn’t really mentioned Ryba very much, other than to note that she’s running.
Also, what’s your relationship to the Belenchia campaign?
Would someone kindly post a link to both of these candidates’ sites, please?
They’re both linked on the “Ballot” on the top of the sidebar. We’ll be adding more sites as we find them.
You’re joking, right?
You attack Belenchia’s website for its graphics, repeatedly calling it “sad” and then you ask me what does this have to do with Cate Ryba?
Well, you opened the door, so……
You are obviously a deeply committed advocate of Ryba. Friend, paid employee, hired gun, something else…? Why else would you dedicate so much effort on this website to the exercise of criticizing the other candiate. You are having your friends post additional comments and this gives you the “opportunity” to re-post and re-iterate this ridiculous refrain about how “sad” all of this is.
In fact, what is “sad” is that you would stoop so low as to do all of this for your friend and hurt your otherwise nice website.
She must be a really good friend.
I am not affiliated with either campaign. That would be you. I’m obsessed with fair play and you are on notice that I’m watching you. Whoever wins a fair election deserves to win. Let your readers have facts, not just empty observations and opinions.
Who brings more relevant experience? Why not write about that?
This isn’t a post about any of that stuff. It’s a post about a website faux pas. It’s not the extent of the Spark’s election coverage. It’s not even October yet. Calm down.
Website faux pas, if that’s what it is, seems pretty small (and irrelevant) in the scheme of things. That’s my point, I guess…
Wait a minute. Who is declining to engage in meaningful debate now? Objective Observer has proven to be neither objective nor particularly observant. All I’ve read of substance so far on this thread is the observation that one candidate’s website had some peculiar choices for graphic design, and the only counter I’ve heard from that is that Spartanburg is backward, that this is a trivial subject, that the operator of this site and most of the commenters are totally in the tank for the other candidate. Other than making some vague comment that “the candidate’s policies, experience, relationships in the community and commitment to the job. Not, the candidate’s website” is all that matters, I haven’t seen any conversation about any substantive issue.
And there’s an implication there that one candidate meets that requirement and the other does not. Now, I think in fact that policies, experience, relationships, and commitment are important, as is a candidate’s vision for what kind of community they want for Spartanburg to be. But the tone implied that the candidate that Objective Observer, Journalism Objectivity and Non-Partisan Party support is that candidate and they candidate they are criticizing with innuendo does not.
And I might just as easily ask, whose payroll are you on, Mr/Ms Objective Observer and Mr/Ms Journalism Objectivity and Mr/Ms Non-Partisan Party? Anybody who has to label themselves “objective” makes me want to grab my wallet, listen very closely, and is probably violating some truth in advertising standards. I’ve heard nothing of substance from you. This is nothing more than the cheap smoke and mirrors politics than we have come to see in national politics.
Debate, yes. Have an idea, and make it something beyond juvenile taunts and baseless accusations.
Mr. Shanafelt,
One might ask the same about you? What is your relationship with the Ryba campaign and why are you not using your “objective, investigative” journalistic skills to investigate BOTH campaigns?
Are you REALLY being objective or have you taken sides?
I already did that: http://www.spartanburgspark.com/2009/09/sparkle-city-headlines-more-candidates-enter-city-races/#comments
But, to clarify, I’ll restate what I said on that thread: I have no personal relationship to speak of with Cate Ryba. I’ve met her socially on a handful of occasions, but my only real contact with her has been in her capacity with the Mary Black Foundation. I’m not affiliated with her campaign in any way.
I’m also not affiliated with Mr. Belenchia, and haven’t met him. For all I know, he’s a fine candidate.
Have I taken a side? Yes. I’m pro-Spartanburg. I’m for the candidate most likely to bring this city forward politically, culturally and economically. The candidate that best demonstrates their ability to do this by Nov. 3 gets my vote.
I was just curious to see if there were any decent Spartanburg skyline photos out there, so I typed in “spartanburg skyline” on google and came across this:
http://media.photobucket.com/image/spartanburg%20skyline/Skyliner25/PartialSkyline_01.jpg
Evidently whoever made the campaign website up did the same thing, because I was surprised to find that particular photo, and it shows up first thing. With that kind of creative laziness, you end up like this–with a photo that’s not of Spartanburg.
Now they have the Atlanta skyline up. The should just go all out and get some photos of New York or L.A. in there. Just get a camera and take a pic of Morgan Square, damn.
Not only is that not a photo of downtown Spartanburg, but the photo on the campaign site was actually altered from the original to have a kind of starburst thing centered around the church. This means someone took an incorrectly tagged photo, altered it, and INTENTIONALLY used it as the banner. Then, when the goof was caught and posted about here, someone went back and changed it to another incorrect skyline. In the mean time, no new content — the stuff that actually matters to the campaign — has even been added.
I really don’t understand this. Start a Facebook campaign page and be done with it.
Speaking of lazy, you apparently missed that fact that Mr. Belenchia does have a Facebook page for the campaign. Did you miss that? Try Google next time, then post the facts.
Facebook?
Juvenile.
Tell that to Sarah Palin.
I don’t think it was a public profile at the time this was posted. I know that, because I did a Google search at the time. I think it’s astonishing that you’d assume otherwise.
But even if I hadn’t, it doesn’t address the RELEVANT issue, which is the badly designed website.
Okay, after taking another look at the screen shot above, I can now see why it was so hard for them to resist such a gem of a picture that was so remarkably easy to find.
It has that great big Church steeple right smack in the middle, and they neatly placed it under his name on the site. They also added a little sunshine ray too, enhancing the connection between the steeple and the name.
That is so goofy.
Katie (or do you prefer “Cate”)
You seem to know alot about media and graphics. Did you learn these skills at Mary Black Foundation? You are busted.
Can’t imagine voting for you. Shame…
Wow, I’m going to out something here, but Katie is my sister, and she most certainly is not Cate Ryba. To my knowledge, she’s never even met Cate Ryba. Nice try there nutbar!
Swing and a miss!
Yes, and Steve Shanafelt is my sister. You seem to be in it, Mr. George.
It’s a CONSPIRACY! Hahaha…
Seriously?
ooooo can I play? Who am I related to?
OO: I think it’s just darling that you think Katie is Cate Ryba. Or were you actually joking?
I’m going to ask one more time, and try not to dodge it this time, Observer. Are you, in any way affiliated with Thomas Belenchia or his campaign for city council?
Since you’re into challenging other people on supposed bias so much, how about we get a little full disclosure from you. Not too much to ask is it?
Chris
I am not affiliated with the Belenchia campaign. I have not made any statements in support of Mr. Belenchia here. I have made statements in support of fair play and honesty ahd disclosure. The folks on this site, namely you and Mr. Shanafelt have made several comments in support of Ryba and numerous ones against Belenchia.
I am calling you out on your behavior asking that you own up to your agenda. If you’re supporters of Ryba, just admit it. People will respect you more.
Candidate bias? Nope Issue bias? Absolutely!
I freely admit I have opinions on what direction the city should be moving in. I’m unabashedly progressive, and I intend to ask questions of candidates from that point of view. Those who know me could have told you that already. I do have a political column here every Monday after all. That being said, I know how to keep MY opinions on that column.
So in one way, yes I am absolutely biased. The difference between me and most of the hacks over at the SH-J though, with me you know where I’m coming from all the time. You don’t have to read between the lines to figure out where I stand or why I asked about a progressive issue that no other media outlet in Spartanburg would touch. Everything is always on the level. I have nothing to hide about my politics, nor would I wish to.
I am not–though you have accused me of it–in the tank for Cate Ryba. I have met her on occasion and spoke once at an arts event she holds occasionally at Hub-Bub called talk20–an entirely nonpolitical event I might add. That is the extent of my dealings with Cate Ryba. The rest of what I know about her comes from reputation.
I don’t know Mr. Belenchia at all–though about an hour from now all that will change. For all I know, he’s the progressive, forward-thinking candidate I want on city council. If he is, that’s great. We win no matter who gets elected.
I will be asking the same core set of questions to every candidate I interview. Nobody will be getting special treatment. There may be different follow-ups, but everybody in these contested races starts from the same place. That’s as fair as I know to make things.
I was going to write some elaborate response, but Chris pretty much said it. The Spark is openly advocating for progressive changes in the City of Spartanburg, as well as local pride and a focus meaningful, sustainable changes to the local economy.
We’re not attached to, funded by, taking orders from or otherwise involved with any local political group, candidate or … anybody really. The Spark exists on its own, and it was like this long before the current election.
But, again, we’re OPENLY progressive. We make no claim to be neutral or objective, nor have we ever. There is a progressive, pro-local bias on the site, as should be obvious to anyone who reads it. There’s nothing clandestine here.
And pointing out that one of the local candidates has THE WRONG CITY in the background of his City Council election page isn’t a partisan attack. Belenchia (or whoever is in charge of his campaign) definitely has some explaining to do on that one, but it’s not a reflection of Belenchia so much as it is ineptness on the part of whoever put up the site. There are no specific comments about Belenchia the candidate on the site, other than saying his website sends a conflicting, amusing message.
Chris
It is rumored that you have had the opportunity to meet and interview the aforementioned Belenchia. Will you be reporting on your interview?
OO: Yes I interviewed Belenchia today. I’ll be going over the hour and 20 minutes worth of audio I got out of it and have something posted by the middle of next week after I’ve done a couple of follow-ups with him.
I’m sure you’ll find it incredibly biased. If you don’t, then I’m probably doing something wrong.
Strange how OO hasn’t made a peep since Belenchia’s interview went up.
I am still scratching my head over just where anything was said that could be perceived that the staff here at the Spark is endorsing one particular candidate for City Council over another.
I’m with Steve on this. Someone, and we don’t know who started up a website for one of the candidates and their choice of background was a less then wise one, considering the purpose for the website. The last time I looked there was little or no content about the candidate himself there, so little to comment about, other then the skyline in question was obviously not Spartanburg. For that I would say the web designer is at fault not the candidate.
Both candidates are qualified to run for office. We just don’t know yet who will be the better person for the job. More is known about Ms. Ryba, because of her work then Mr. Belenchia, but that doesn’t mean that he won’t make a fine councilman. We simply do not know yet.
Frankly the accusations as the supposed triad of Objective Observer, Journalism Objectivity and Non-Partisan Party, have made are clearly unfounded. I have read every single post and have yet to see one statement by Steve or the rest of the staff that implies we are supporting one single candidate at this time. That may change as we learn and draw closer to election time. But right now a nice neutral stance is clearly in place, as we work to gather information on all candidates running for local office.
Of course this individual is free to think what they please, based on whatever motivation they choose to use. Thankfully we are also free to think otherwise.
Sylvie
You are clearly a level-head, so let me post a response here. I’ve studied sociology and human behavior for 22 years so I have a little experience with the subject. Biases can be subtle things. Often the biased person isn’t even aware of the bias he or she is presenting.
Example 1: There are several references to progressive politics here. You’re all carrying the banner. I haven’t said anything until now, but I would put myself firmly in that camp too. [ *disclosure!* ] Probably more so than any of you. There’s a subtle suggestion that Ryba is a progessive candidate and Belenchia is not. It’s there in your comments, look closely. Now, what’s that based on…..? I think you may see my point.
Example 2: I quote you: “More is known about Ms. Ryba, because of her work then Mr. Belenchia”…
More is known about her…..by whom? By the three of you? Yes! That’s who! So, you see there is a bias here, however subtle. I bet there are alot of folks that know about Belenchia. Ask around, ye journalists!
Example 3: The whole hoopla about the website is so petty and unbalanced it calls the author into question. It means nothing. Could it be that you all (and I) are new media geeks who place too much emphasis on “web images” relative to offline efforts and published material? Something to think about.
Example 4: There’s a separate post on this site anouncing Ryba’s candidacy with much fanfare. No such separate announcement for the other candidate.
I can see that the team here thinks it is unbiased, but I guess I’m asking all to take a closer look. From the outside, it doesn’t look that way.
But I do respect you all for engaging in the debate and not taking things (too) personally. We’re talking about behavior, not our souls.
“There’s a subtle suggestion that Ryba is a progessive candidate and Belenchia is not.”
Based on what? You’re generating that bias, not the Spark. I’ve repeatedly said that I know nothing about Belenchia or his politics. We DO know something about Cate Ryba’s politics — a lot of it is on her campaign site — and there’s a chatter of excitement about that, but I don’t think enough is known about Belenchia to even say.
As I write this, Chris is interviewing Belenchia to find out what he’s all about. We have standardized questions for all the candidates. We have something like six weeks to get all kinds of info from everyone running for office. Chill out. Making fun of a terrible website isn’t the same as a political hatchet job, so calm down.
“More is known about her…..by whom? By the three of you?”
By anyone who looks at the relevant campaign websites, which is what the post is about. Ryba has a reasonably informative site, Belenchia has one with the wrong city in the background. There’s no bias in pointing that out. If the situations were reversed, we’d still talk about it.
As far as knowing more about all the candidates, we’ll know more when we’re done interviewing them, until then, we’ll talk about what’s available. That’s not bias, that’s the result of being volunteers with day jobs and limited time.
“The whole hoopla about the website is so petty and unbalanced it calls the author into question. It means nothing. Could it be that you all (and I) are new media geeks who place too much emphasis on “web images†relative to offline efforts and published material? Something to think about.”
This is ONE POST out of perhaps two or three dozen we’ll run prior to the election. The only person trying to make it into the definitive Spark coverage of the topic is you. Is it trivial to talk about a photo on a website? Obviously!
But it’s also revealing of the attention to detail behind the campaign. It’s like the M&M riders on Van Halen’s performance contacts: Failure to do something as simple as getting the right city in the background of a campaign website hints at a lack of professionalism, interest and ability in the part of Belenchia’s campaign itself. It looks lazy, and it’s casually insulting to pretty much anyone who cares about the city of Spartanburg having its own identity.
It IS RELEVANT. Trivial on the grand scheme, sure, but it’s on topic and totally fair to talk about. And it’s interesting. But it’s also not the extent of our coverage on the subject. If it was, you’d have a great point: How utterly shallow we’d have to be to think someone should choose a political candidate based on a background photo.
Sheesh … Give us some credit. We’re a small group of volunteers doing the best we can with a very limited set of resources. A regular newspaper can get all this stuff knocked out in a couple of days, but we have to pace ourselves.
Unless I’m very much mistaken, the only person who sees this as the extent of our local election coverage is you. I think everyone else assumes, as one would with any media outlet, that this is one small post among dozens to come. We’re working on getting more, I assure you.
Steve
I was just starting to feel the love between us, when suddenly….
OK, let’s see what Chris thinks about the candidate and let’s see what else besides website graphics the candidates have to offer. I trust you that there will be more, substantive reporting to come.
I’m all ears now…
Read the Belenchia and Ryba interviews we posted, using a set of questions we came up with a week before this post even appeared.
And keep posting anonymously. It suits.
Oh I do love a good sense of humor. Mr Belenchia’s website has been updated. I has more information about the candidate now which is simply but nicely done. There is another city skyline as the background, NOT Spartanburg with a poll for visitors to vote on what city skyline they are seeing.
Maybe our comments about the skyline prompted the vote, and they are having a little good natured fun with it. Of course it has nothing to do with the actual campaign. I just found it amusing.