Perhaps the biggest single flaw that The Clarion-Ledger has in its recent addition to its "Changing Face of Jackson" series is the fact that it doesn't include itself in the litany of problems that the newspaper claims are holding back the city of Jackson.

The truth is that Jackson's image has suffered mightily from the irresponsible, sensational coverage The Clarion-Ledger has saddled the city with for at least the past three years—a period of time that happens to coincide with Executive Editor Ronnie Agnew's tenure at the newspaper's helm.

Ever notice that The Clarion-Ledger often has a Jackson crime focus on its front pages even though it's supposed to be a "statewide" newspaper? I've always wondered when the C-L is going to start "The Vaiden Crimewatch." Hasn't happened yet. The bottom line is that The Clarion-Ledger sensationalizes Jackson's problems in order to push papers. To answer the question "whom does the Clarion-Ledger serve?" you need look no further than page 27H of the Sunday Real Estate section and witness the large map of "Prime Developments" with pretty little logos.

Not a single logo points to a development in Hinds County.

There's nothing wrong with courting suburban readers—that's something we do at the Jackson Free Press, too. But it's the way the Clarion-Ledger tries to court those readers that is a disservice to both Jacksonians and those self-same suburbanites.

What does the C-L do? With an uncaring editorial hand, it allows sensationalism and conventional wisdom to overshadow facts and good reporting—leading, ultimately, to the extraordinary logical breakdown of their argument in this past week's "Changing Face" package.

We start with the centerpiece, page 1 story, "Can Jackson Use Recipe for Revival?" by Julie Goodman, in which Jackson is compared to Richmond, Va.—and we get the first doozie that set my jaw working. About halfway into the piece—after about two dozen paragraphs spent talking about Richmond's attempts at revitalization, we get this:

"The city of Jackson is saddled with dilapidated homes, serious image problems and virtually non-existent nightlife." (My emphasis.)

Really? It's a throwaway line for Ms. Goodman, apparently, but it's a smack in the face of downtown's clubs—not to mention the restaurants, hotel bars and arts venues—that serve thousands of JFP readers most every night in downtown Jackson. I know a lot of these business owners and managers personally, and they work very hard to make Jackson's "virtually non-existent" nightlife everything that it can be for those of us smart enough to get out and enjoy it and help build it up even more.

The notion of the "virtually non-existent nightlife" that Ms. Goodman injects into her article is not a fact—I call it a "suburban legend" that seems designed to fit the story's agenda.

And there's a pattern here. The second absurd generalization this past week was in Executive Editor Ronnie Agnew's column written to support the series. We start with this paragraph:

"Since Harvey Johnson was thrown from office, Jackson feels very much like a city in transition. Johnson spent eight years planning and acting at about the speed of a turtle trying to maneuver I-55."

What's odd about Agnew's assertion is that—in the same piece—he then goes on a listing tirade, pointing to the new things in Jackson in the past few years:

"A refurbished Farish Street. A new telecom center and larger convention center. New downtown housing…"

Where does Agnew think those improvements came from? Johnson was mayor from 1997 to 2005. Johnson wasn't perfect, but he wasn't mayor during the crack wars of the early 1990s, either. Johnson saw crime diminish significantly on his watch, he oversaw some major developments in downtown and elsewhere despite the financial problems that Jackson is saddled with in the form of an aging infrastructure of water, roads and other key services, not to mention real estate costs that are made artificially high by the tax-exempt government buildings, churches and owners of vacant lots and empty buildings in downtown Jackson who refuse to sell at market-rate prices. Those are all legacies that are generations old, not months.

What Agnew is doing, of course, is perpetuating popular suburban legends about Mayor Johnson. It's the conventional wisdom of Mr. Agnew's perceived ideal reader that Johnson was slow and nothing happened on his watch. So, it must be right. Right?

I must also toss another rancid tomato in Mr. Agnew's general direction for this irresponsible wallop:

"Young thugs, often no more than 14, are determining housing patterns in this city when they do the perp walk on the nightly newscasts for crimes that are absolutely indescribable."

I'm not the devotee of the local TV newscasts that Ronnie may be, but the best I can come up with on 14-year-old "perps" is an arrest last week of a 14-year-old for armed robbery. Prior to that, the most recent crime mention of a 14-year-old in the C-L's archives was a murder suspect being assigned an attorney in January 2005. Enough 14-year-olds to determine housing patterns? I don't think so. Enough media sensationalism to determine housing patterns? Maybe.

Let's review. Ronnie Agnew is the Big Boss of editorial at the C-L. He bears the torch of the paper's journalistic integrity. And yet, in his own column he's caught red-handed sensationalizing crime. That's utterly what he's doing. "Young thugs often no more than 14" on the "nightly newscasts" for crimes that are "absolutely indescribable." (Emphasis mine.) Really?

The crimes, Ronnie, are yours, and they are journalistic. They ought to throw away the key.

One final point: Let's look at the rest of Agnew's assertion regarding the rebuilding of Jackson:

"A refurbished Farish Street. A new telecom center and larger convention center. New downtown housing. All the new stuff will be for naught if Jackson officials can't get the crime problem fixed."

Agnew here is so desperate to perpetuate this suburban myth—the city will never come back until crime is gone—that he ignores his newspaper's own reporting in the same issue. Remember the comparison to Richmond? The city of Richmond (pop. 198,000) had more than twice as many violent crimes (2,700) in 2004 as Jackson, which has a similar population of 184,000, but a much lower number (1,272) of violent crimes the same year. Richmond is ninth on Morgan-Quitno's "Most Dangerous Cities" index, which ranks Jackson 14th (an annual study that the paper loves to quote—when the numbers are bad for Jackson. They don't make as much of the fact that Morgan-Quitno routinely ranks Mississippi the "least livable state.")

But according to The Clarion-Ledger now, Richmond is the model for Jackson? Does anybody else feel like they're on The Clarion-Ledger Tilt-a-Whirl ride at the statewide newspaper fair?

In fact, I agree with The C-L's reporting that suggests that urban redevelopment and crime prevention go hand-in-hand. More economic opportunity in Jackson will beget lower crime. Agnew, however, ends up with his logic all in a twist trying to support his suburban legend despite the facts his own newspaper presents.

Agnew's final assertion is that "new blood" might be good for the city. After reading this latest edition of the "Changing Face" series, I agree. The Clarion-Ledger should focus its attention on its own editorial leadership, and spend a few in-depth months evaluating how its coverage has affected Jackson's ability to make progress. Instead of relying on the "suburban legends" that they believe are swimming in the minds of their target readers, The Clarion-Ledger should lead Jackson media by example, and rely on the facts that they uncover through good, honest reporting.

Let's leave the sensationalism on the copy room floor.