I think we missed an opportunity.

I was among the thousands of people who took advantage of riding the new Hartford Line this past weekend.

I view this new train service as having huge potential for economic development as well as a way to decrease traffic on I-91.

The opportunity we missed was a simple one: when people from Connecticut arrived in Springfield over Saturday and Sunday they didn’t know what to do or where to go.

My statement was based on the comments people were making on the train. They were just as ignorant of Springfield as I am of Hartford.

Hartford offers many cultural amenities, but unfamiliarity with the city coupled with the oftentimes-hideous traffic has generally kept me away.

I’m sure folks from Hartford could make similar claims.

So, this weekend could have been one of discovery. What if there had been someone greeting each train from the south with information about what restaurants are open at what times, how far a walk it is to various attractions, such as¬ The Hall of Fame and the Quadrangle? What if there had been a tour bus that visitors could have taken?  Or one set up on a loop?

This kind of train service could increase the amount of tourism to the city. No, those visitors wouldn’t be staying over-night, but they could be attending our events, eating in our restaurants and generally spending coin of the realm.

In fact, we should be marketing our events more to the south in order to increase this tourism potential.

Of course, I don’t mean to sound overly critical, but the Connecticut DOT needs to address the lavatory issue for these rail cars. Because not all cars have lavatories compliant for use by the disabled, all of the lavatories in the affected cars are closed.

This is not a selling point to using this rail line.

Despite the lack of a rest room, I intend to use the rail the next time I’m tempted to attend something in Hartford.

Freedom of the press can be misleading

Pittsburgh Post-Gazette cartoonist Rob Rogers has been fired after a career of more than 25 years at the paper and it’s because his boss, the publisher, is a supporter of President Trump.

Rogers had been critical of Trump in cartoons and one cartoon about separating the children of illegal immigrants from their parents apparently was the last straw.

People will now scream about freedom of the press, but the issue here is those who control the media, control the message.

I have the ability guaranteed by the Constitution to speak my mind. I don’t own this newspaper, so it’s within the owners’ right to prohibit what I say because its their ‘paper, not mine.

This was common in in the newspapers during the 18th, 19th and much of the 20th centuries. Newspapers were well known for their bias, a bias that extended far off the editorial page.

The objective press is a relatively new concept and one assumes that publishers would embrace it as much as editors and reporters.

These are difficult times, though, and clearly there is a new breed of media owner that sees his or her outlet has having the potential to spread a particular message. That is underscored even more when you have a president who has repeatedly accused the press of nefarious activities.

It’s not a good trend as it simply feeds into the idea of what we want to consume should reinforce rather than challenge our preconceived notions.