Today's Independent editorial is a great example of positioning yourself to be right no matter which way the wind blows.
On the one hand you've got:
In our view, a referendum on fiber-to-the-home can’t happen soon enough. It’s time to let the people vote.The next two sentences?
At press time, LCG and LUS were weighing their options and considering an appeal to Hebert’s ruling. It is imperative that the courts decide whether LUS’ application of this particular law for such projects is appropriate, so the case should go on. (emphasis mine)That just about says it all.
The logic for going to referendum? Only that looks bad not to. I looked high and I looked low and I saw no other rationale. The Independent does not hint that it is the principled thing to do. Rather, it is the expedient thing to do—in their judgment.
The Independent had a choice here. They could have chosen to trust that the people can understand the objective situation we are in here in Lafayette and run a series of articles, emulating the dailies' educational pieces on its endorsement, laying out the plain and a simple case that the push for a vote is a tactic from Cox and BellSouth to advance their interests without any real regard for the rights of the people of Lafayette. Or, they could have chosen to lend their voice to the barrage of incumbent misinformation, foregoing using what influence they have to further expose the facts of the matter, and help BellSouth and Cox frame the issue as about voting rather than the value of a fiber optics network for the future of Lafayette.
I would have preferred the path of principle.