We'll take a different approach this time.

Instead of summarizing a new article worth your attention -- with paraphrases, excerpts and a dash of Deadline seasoning -- we'll let its writer tell why it matters.


David Uberti, a Northville High graduate with Detroit roots, calls himself a "Detroit apologist." 

Here's what David Uberti, a Columbia Journalism Review staff writer since July and an urban affairs contributor to The Guardian newspaper, says on Facebook about his article Monday for the media journal -- which headlines it "Why the media don't get Detroit -- and why it matters.":   

I'm a product of Detroit. My immigrant grandfather opened a TV repair shop there, and my father attended medical school within city limits — he still works there. My parents settled in a vibrant suburb like so many other former Detroiters. And I've since moved to New York, a metropolis where kids like me still believe that we can Make It In America, and on our own terms.

In many aspects, my family story mirrors the story of Detroit, a story not only difficult to understand, but also one that few Americans want to hear. The city's decades-long decline has defied the ferocious optimism underlying the American Dream. It caught the media off-balance, as has the city's current paradox of downtown development and neighborhood decay. Most important, journalists have done a poor job of explaining why people should care.

But there's still Hope in Detroit — still a belief that a strong back and iron will might bring it back from the brink. We must understand what's happening in this great American city, for the challenges headed-off by Motown could soon come to a place near you.

Read more in my latest piece.

We did and we suggest you do, too. Click the red link below.

Here's a small taste to seal the deal:

Countless people who love the city have fought like hell to save it. Their victories are real, but so are the massive challenges that remain.

Understanding and respecting such contradictions is crucial for reporters who set out to explain what went wrong—as well as what’s going right. 

Read more: Columbia Journalism Review