Second of two parts
Re “Media Judgment: Culver City Finally Can Play with the Big Kids”
When National Public Radio reporter Melissa Block recently asked Culver City Mayor Andy Weissman a demeaning, arguably insulting, question, “Why don’t you tout yourself as Los Angeles?” the mayor’s well-known unflappability proved handy.
Many politicians would have fired a seething rocket back at Ms. Block’s perceived impertinence.
But Mr. Weissman’s cool remained his favorite weapon.
He calmly pointed out that as an independent community since the early years of the last century, Culver City wields a $150 million annual budget, that there is a great deal happening in this near-Westside setting given the exponential explosion of (especially) Downtown businesses in the last 10 years, and that he is pleased “we are receiving all of this attention.”
Just the way his mama taught Mr. Weissman to react 50 years ago when people ask you awkward, inappropriate or impolite questions.
Happily for Culver City, there wasn’t a screen reflecting the offended thoughts fighting to escape Mr. Weissman’s mind.
“I will tell you what I was thinking,” said the mayor. “With all of its problems, why would any city want to call itself (part of) Los Angeles?
“Look at their troubles — schools, budget problems, traffic.
Why Be Here?
“Why would you want to be a part of that when Culver City is so idyllic?”
For Culver City-oriented critics, Ms. Block’s revealing question provided a window into the historic thinking of National Public Radio.
It is believed that their on-air personalities never had mentioned NPRWest’s Culver City location until its recent seven-year anniversary.
They may never even have acknowledged that their Jefferson Boulevard studios are in the greater Los Angeles area, much less the unmentionable Culver City location. Just “California.”
And so the nationally widening modern profile of Culver City — television and radio both profiling Culver City’s return to glamourous, early motion picture days — has come with a prickly price protruding from its new image.
The theme of recent interviews, intended to billboard Culver City, was:
“Yes, Culver City is hip and happening. But how can you forget the past? How deservedly drab its reputation once was?”
As an aside, it may be fortunate that motion pictures were born and raised here in the Heart of Screenland. Otherwise, the town’s historic rep might be so odious that influential cynics would either want to knock it down and start over, or unilaterally merge it into Los Angeles.
Ms. Block’s aggressively skeptical stance may have been intended to put the mayor on the defensive.
Land of Attractions
Instead, Mr. Weissman talked about why Culver City is an appealing, up-to-date landing zone.
He insisted that residents are not provincial. “Many people live, work and play here, and they do so for a reason,” Mr. Weissman said. “They are here because they want to be, not because they have to be.”
The dramatic makeover of Culver City, with an accent on Downtown, dates about to the turn of the century.
“A whole different kind of energy is in Culver City from the days, say, 20 years ago, when our business base was more manufacturing- and industry-oriented,” Mr. Weissman said.
“A whole different attitude exists on the streets. We are encouraging street traffic and people traffic. And that is not just Downtown.”
Pre-makeover, you probably could not have found a public official, willing to be quoted by name, who would say what Mr. Weissman does now:
“Unless you had a specific reason to be here, there was not much reason to come down here. But in the last 10 years, we have become an ultimate destination.
“Part of the trouble before was that the lack of energy was a product of the way the streets were laid out. Changing that was an important part of our new look, too.”
Between the studios, a dazzling array of new eateries and imaginative enterprises, about 250,000 people spend their daytimes in Culver City, lending this awakened community a sheen as modern and demanding as tomorrow.
