The Chicago Tribune has a familiar editorial today, cheerfully arguing, yet again, that it would be great if Chicago got the 2016 Summer Olympics. The occasion for this particular pro-Olympic editorial is that Barack Obama might not go to Copenhagen on Oct. 2 when the International Olympic Committee unveils who gets the 2016 games:

Official word from the White House is that First Lady Michelle Obama will lead the U.S. delegation to Copenhagen next month to support Chicago’s bid to host the 2016 Olympics. The president himself is busy with health-care reform and can’t commit “at this time,” according to his staff.

Busy with health-care reform? That’s the excuse? Is he afraid that House Republicans would launch a surprise attack on Medicare on Oct. 2 while he’s in Copenhagen?

That sounds pretty flimsy.

To give some context to this chiding, Trib owner Sam Zell has donated to the Chicago 2016 committee. But such financial conflicts of interest are relative: the Chicago Sun-Times, our city’s other major daily, has also given money toward the bid.

I’m not fond of the idea that the financial interests of a media company necessarily impugn their credibility. But it is strange when you have unsigned editorials like this one that argue for the Olympics while not clearly making the case for the game’s economic benefits. The Trib admits that the city council has yet to come up with a credible way to provide oversight for Olympic spending. But then the editorial returns to vague assertions: “Still, on the whole, we’re comfortable with the financial protections. The Olympics would be a big jobs generator in Chicago, a chance to bring business to the city, a chance to put it on the world stage.”

Chicago is in flux. A plan to move the city’s public housing tenants into mixed-income units is being implemented fitfully ten years after it started. The city waits for federal and state money to repair its transportation infrastructure. There’s a more than $400 million budget deficit. Getting the Olympics would re-orient the city’s spending and housing and transportation development for the next seven years (and also help define post-Olympic development). The Olympics may be good or bad for Chicago — but they’re definitely a BIG DEAL. So whatever the Tribune’s motivation, it’s insensitive to city residents to offer platitudes that the games will put Chicago “on the world stage.”

Comment RSS - You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.