Date: Tue, 1 Nov 1994 10:29:10 -0800
From: THOMAS CLARK tlc[AT SYMBOL GOES HERE]NEVADA.EDU
Subject: Re: Boulder Dam
On Mon, 31 Oct 1994, James Beniger wrote:
I'd like to hear Thomas Clark clarify/elaborate the sentence "Local media
are careful to make the distinction between Boulder and Hoover"
When newspaper writers talk about the construction phase, they use
"Boulder." When they refer to anytime later than 1947 they use "Hoover."
Television people (we can't really call them reporters around here) are
clueless. They usually use "Hoover" for everything.
Part of the confusion stems from an interesting political spat. In
1928, the paperwork was signed into law for "Boulder." In 1931, the
structure was dedicated as "Hoover." In 1933, Hoover was out of the
picture. The Democrats, seizing the opportunity, CHANGED the name back
to "Boulder." In 1947, Congress officially (!) made the name "Hoover."
A group of Boulder City old-timers who worked on the dam call themselves
The '33 Club. This was the year they rid themselves of the hated
sobriquet "Hoover." These are also the folks that the local newspapers
used to interview. But our major regional newspaper, the Las Vegas
Review Journal runs columns only by George Wills, Wm Buckley, Sobran, R.
Emmet Tyrrell and others from The American Spectator. This weekend it
endorsed political candidates by name and named only Republicans. It
made no mention of Democrats or anyone running in non-partisan races.
The RJ now has a policy of referring only to Hoover Dam in all contexts.
This policy has been in effect for only about two years. (In the words
of one reporter friend, "due to the failed Clinton Administration, we
must use only 'Hoover Dam.'")
Media watching here is interesting.