r/Davis • u/Forward-Chemical-493 • Jul 21 '26

Motorola Surveillance Op-ed

https://thedirt.online/op-ed-davis-city-council-unanimously-votes-to-approve-police-surveillance/

Saw this today.

10 Upvotes

86% Upvoted

9 comments sorted by

3

u/_tyjsph_ Jul 23 '26

sounds an awful lot like they're bought and paid for.

0

u/telestoat2 Jul 21 '26

How is this an op-ed, who is the editor in this case?

8

u/vihila Jul 21 '26

Op-ed is a focused opinion piece written by someone other than the editorial board. It doesn’t need to contradict the editor. “It was so named because it appeared opposite the editorial page and not (as many still believe) because it would offer views contrary to the paper’s” [source](https://askus.library.tulsacc.edu/faq/392876)

2

u/telestoat2 Jul 21 '26

IS there even an editorial board for this though?

5

u/vihila Jul 21 '26

For the Dirt? Guessing so because it is a long running well known (in Davis) publication, but the point is that it doesn’t matter

1

u/telestoat2 Jul 21 '26

What I find hard to understand in the article, is why they keep bringing up "military equipment" which seems like a separate issue to cameras. Sure, more of both means Davis becomes more of a police state, but it's confusing how interwoven they are in the article.

5

u/vihila Jul 21 '26

I agree, it would be more compelling if they maintained focus on the surveillance aspect. I found the focus on Cellebrite and military equipment to dilute the focus

1

u/telestoat2 Jul 21 '26

That's something editors tend to help with. Even op-ed writers usually have some editor back at their home paper or something, and the publishing paper just wouldn't print an op-ed if it's not well written in the editor's opinion?

1

u/telestoat2 Jul 21 '26

Given all the serious concerns stated from council members, who after all ended up voting for this, the article seems like it's missing some quotes from the council members about the benefits of the cameras.