(7/16/07) Money Magazine announced its list of 100 Best Places to Live for 2007. Amherst didn’t make that list, but it did make two subsidiary lists, ranking third on the list of “where the singles are,” and ranking sixth on the list of “youngest” populations.
Inexplicably, all mentions of Amherst call it “Amherst Center,” which Money defines as “a village of Amherst.” The magazine references UMass, presumably for contributing so many singles to the community, but doesn’t actually include the school’s enrollment in Amherst’s population figures. Instead it says that the town has a population of 17,600 and that 73.7% are single. That same fuzzy math appears to be used for all the college towns on the list.
According to the magazine, Middleton, WI is the best of the “Best Places to Live.” Massachusetts had five communities on the list – Milton at #7, Chelmsford at #21, Easton at #48, Westborough at #73 and Wilbraham at #94.
Comments
So Money Magazine gives us another case study in "American Journalism When You Know Something About It". It's disturbing; this is a national magazine with a good-sized circulation.
Remember when we counted on journalism for accuracy, perspective, and analysis about the world around us? Now they just want our attention and, once they get it, mission accomplished.
Posted by: Richard Morse | July 16, 2007 07:05 PM
At least we're not home to UConn, the non-town to our south about which
the sagacious Money (cribbing from Slate) wrote:
In 2005 Storrs was named by Slate as "America's Best Place to Avoid Death Due to Natural Disaster."
Posted by: Denizen of Amherst Center | July 16, 2007 11:26 PM