Durham ranks 16th in country for growth last year -- but you won't learn that in the N&O

Though not the lead story for the day by any stretch, we here at BCR were bemused by the differential coverage of a little story on growth in our local papers today.

The latest report from the Census Bureau finds growth a continued reality for the Triangle in the twelve months ended July 1, 2008. Raleigh Cary saw a 6.9% growth rate, third in the nation among cities; Raleigh ranked 8th with a 3.8% increase.

Durham was in the mix, too, at 3% -- 16th in the U.S., according to the TBJ's wrap-up. (The city grew to 223,284 souls by mid-summer last year.)

The N&O covered the story, too, but you wouldn't know of a Bull City connection if you read the N&O... unless you look veeeery cloooosely.

The article by Kristin Collins doesn't mention word one about Durham, focusing only on Raleigh and Cary. A sidebar lists the fastest growth cities and towns overall in N.C. -- which by percentage naturally favors smaller suburban areas.

The unkindest cut? A graphic that shows all 25 growth areas, and accurately lists Durham as #16 -- captioned by the wordsmith wonders thusly: "Two Triangle locales are among the Top 20."

Conspiracy? Doubt it. We're inclined to blame a lack of resources and time on the N&O's part. Heck, they can't keep a top-shelf editor like Rob Waters (formerly of the Los Angeles Times) on staff for Durham, overloading one editor with Orange and Durham instead; they can't even manage to keep an office open in the Bull City, for that matter.

Still, there's so many missed opportunities in this article to even mention Durham, the failure on the chart is just icing on the cake.

We've written Kristin Collins to see if she has any explanation as to the oversight and we'll print what we learn here.

Update: Collins writes to say--

We do mention it in the list under the map. If I had it to do over again, I would mention it in the story too. I thought it would be more prominently noted on the map, but instead there is a bizarre map with no city names on it. I don't really get that. Anyway, thanks for your note.

At the time I wrote Collins and N&O Durham editor Mark Schultz, I hadn't noticed the caption pointing out that "two" (not three) Triangle cities had made the top 20, so I didn't think to ask about that here.

Comments

[jonn]

From the 2nd paragraph: "Raleigh saw a 6.9% growth rate, third in the nation among cities;"

I think you meant Cary?

[Patrick Morrison]

is anyone else bothered by the words "Cary" and "city" in the same sentence?

[TSQ75]

this morning on NPR all you heard was cary and Raleigh...and Cary referred to as a City...odd, indeed

[David McMullen]

I remember when Cary was still insisting it was a "village". I don't recall when they officially became a "town", but that's what they call themselves these days: http://www.townofcary.org/

[Lee L]

Cary calls themselves a town, but I am pretty sure the common definition of City is 100,000 or more, so they qualify.

I thought the N&O report was especially funny as they even said 2 cities from the Triangle made the top 20, when Durham makes 3 at number 16. If you are saying rah rah Triangle, then why leave out Durham? It is killing their point.

I guess it is the usual quality reporting they do.

[Carol]

Looks like WRAL online has given Durham credit. Checkout the headline.

[Mike Woodard]

Under NC statutes, there is no difference legally between a city, a town, or a village. Size doesn't matter. ;-)

Technically, cities, towns, and villages are incorporated municipalities. This means that the General Assembly has granted a charter authorizing the establishment of a municipal corporation and outlining its powers, authority, and responsibilities.

The charter designates whether a municipality will be known as a city, a town, or a village. It is simply a matter of preference. That's how the "town" of Cary can be larger than dozens of cities.

[Gville Guy]

What’s even more amusing to me is how Winston-Salem keeps fighting to be the “4th largest” city in NC. They annexed about 21,000 folks after Durham overtook them in the 2000 census. Now they keep fighting with the census bureau to have those heads counted. Is the designation of being the 4th largest city in NC” really that significant?

http://www.cityofws.org/Home/Departments/MarketingAndCommunications/NewsArchive/News2009/Articles/CityToChallengePopulationEstimate

The funny part is that after the 2010 census, Durham may still remain the 4th largest NC city due to its robust growth rate

[RaleighRob]

^Gville Guy: good point. Funny, the W-S vs Durham for 4th place has been going on since I was a kid growing up in W-S.
The difference is that Durham mostly grows by people actually moving into it. Winston-Salem has to constantly annex tons of unincorporated county land to even try to keep up. (Eventually they will run out of any.)

[Bass]

@ Gville

I was thinking the same thing. But there is no way they can maintain that 4th place spot when they are 91st on this list.

[Lamb]

Doesn't seem like the N&O is biased against Durham. They seem to highlight all of our negatives such as crime, yet they never cover our positives, such as growth. Why don't we petition to have the N&O discontinue coverage of Durham and stick to it's home city Raleigh? That's everybody's favorite city anyway!