Column is speculation on what happened in Boston

---

Tweet I am writing in response to Pete Nichols' opinion piece, "Bomb scare points out country's susceptibility for overreaction" (SN 2/5), about the city of Boston's reaction to the ill-planned marketing efforts of Turner Broadcasting System Inc. I am an MSU alumnus now living in Boston. While I agree with Nichols that this is an opinion piece and not anything that should be mistaken for journalism, I did get some secondhand embarrassment for him after reading his one-sided analysis and immature take on the incident.

Nichols' piece is misleading because it gives readers the impression that he is offering his opinion on actual events that took place. In actuality, Nichols is offering his opinion on his hypothetical interpretation of what must have happened in Boston. I think the most important thing to understand is that the New York-based marketing company, Interference, did not go through the proper channels to have its ads posted legitimately and legally.

I think hard-core fans of "Aqua Teen Hunger Force" would recognize the designs on the boards as a character from the show, but it is apparent that the 41-year-old Massachusetts transit worker who spotted the sign did not. I cannot pretend, as Nichols does, to let others know how I would react to seeing one of these signs posted around my neighborhood. So while he is correct in his assertion that bomb squads were contacted to remove the "devices," Nichols' description of the mood in Boston on the day of the event as one of terror is about as responsible as me venturing a guess as to how many 12-sided dice and dungeon master's guides Mr. Nichols has in his possession. From my experience in and around my downtown Boston office on the day of the "scare," most people's reactions were of the curious and frustrated variety, rather than shocked terror.

Chris Coelho
2004 MSU graduate

---