Guelph Mercury managing editor Phil Andrews says on his "From the Editors" blog that he recently got a sneak preview of a media review the City's doing as part of it's communications strategy, and the news was apparently good if you're a fan of balanced media coverage.
Looking at stories - news articles, editorials, letters to the editor, columns and blogs - published between July 1, 2011 and June 30, 2012, the media audit aims to examine what kind of coverage City Hall gets from the various media sources in the Royal City. According to Andrews more than half the items audited were from the Mercury. In particular, blogs and editorials were both considered 71 per cent balanced, but while blogs were found to be 21 per cent negative, editorials were only a bit more negative at 23 per cent.
But the real question is what is all this in aid of? Is this the city equivalent of Googling one's own name and seeing what comes up? Is this seriously going to help the city better communicate knowing who's fairest most of the time? Whatever the reason, I hope the results will find their way online somewhere for the consumption by the general public (not to mention other bloggers interested in their perceived fairness. Hint, hint).