Raleigh is the No. 2 place to get your life on
Raleigh will be named the second best city in America to live, work and play in the July issue of Kiplinger (a personal finance magazine that has a whole section on its website dedicated to the best of just about everything a Kiplinger reader might be interested in). The issue hits newsstands June 10, but you can read the article online now.
It’s always awesome when some place in the Triangle is highlighted as a top place to be. But there are a few things about Kiplinger’s latest declaration that really irk me.
If you read the article closely, you’ll see that technically Raleigh and the “larger surrounding areas” are ranked No. 2 on the list. It’s a fact that becomes obvious only if you notice that the article posts population as 995,662 (U.S. Census estimates for 2006 put Raleigh’s population at 356,321). But really, the whole article focuses on how rad Raleigh is. It doesn’t talk about the merits of Durham, which also boasts a large creative class population (a key criteria the authors said they used to develop their rankings) or make mention of the charms of Chapel Hill and Carrboro. Instead, the only other Triangle spot that gets a shout out is Cary.
It goes on to call Raleigh Times the “unofficial cultural epicenter of the new Raleigh” (wonder what the gentlemen running the New Raleigh blog think of that). The article goes on to say:
… (Raleigh Times) sits on a corner of Fayetteville Street, which is the keystone of Raleigh’s Livable Streets project, a plan to bring urban living to a city that languished as its suburbs and exurbs flourished. The bar, which offers 50 Belgian beers, attracts the young and old, hipsters and preppies, plus folks from the University of North Carolina, North Carolina State University and Duke University.
First of all, Raleigh Times is not on the corner of Fayetteville Street. It is firmly planted mid block on Hargett Street. I take issue with this only because the Christian Science Reading Room is on that street corner and there is a clearly a huge difference between what’s serve at the Times versus what’s preached at the reading room. Don’t get me wrong, as a former newspaper reporter and beer lover, I love me some Raleigh Times, I just wish the article didn’t use the Times as a crutch for making a greater point about Fayetteville Street.
It’s easy to find flaws when news organizations start making lists of top places. Just look at the scathing comments people posted after CNN Money declared Durham No. 12 on a list of 100 best places to “live and launch” (because you know the Bull City is just a gang-ridden place where you’ll get mugged on the street corner *insert HUGE does of sarcasm here*). And I can empathize with the challenges a reporter faces in trying to capture the feel of an entire community based on a brief visit. I’ve been trying to do that for the community section of the various MyNC.com sites, and it’s not easy.
Do you think it makes sense for the article to declare Raleigh No. 2 without giving additional props to the Triangle? And if you’ve been to Raleigh Times, would you go so far as calling it the “cultural epicenter” of downtown Raleigh?
What I'm Doing
12 Responses to “Raleigh is the No. 2 place to get your life on”
Hey Ginny,
Thanks for this article and good points. I have to be biased and say I don’t see how they failed to mention my two favorite areas in Raleigh - Glenwood South and North Hills. While they did include a couple blurbs about the Triangle, they should have included more. And I wonder how much Raleigh Times paid to get in that article (kidding..kind of). Haven’t been to Times enough to say whether or not I agree with the “cultural epicenter” remark.
By JasonPeck on Jun 2, 2008
I would totally agree with you on this one. There are a number of really interesting and fun places to go near Fayetteville St, but I really doubt that Raleigh even has a “cultural epicenter” at this point. They seem to be forcing Raleigh to have this hip, amazing town image, when, in reality, it’s just some freshman getting to his locker for the first time in high school. I enjoy Raleigh and am thrilled how much it’s doing for itself, but it’s got a little ways to go. However, all press is good press right.
And seriously, Houston as number 1?
By Taylor on Jun 2, 2008
The 995,662 number is probably the Raleigh-Cary MSA number (which also includes the other smaller Wake county towns). Chapel Hill and Durham have their own combined MSA population number that might be worth looking up. Even though all are part of the triangle, we are still not lumped together in total population counts (but a little addition is not hard for anyone to do). So if the article went on this fact that CH-Dur and Ral-Cary were technically considered two separate entities in population counting, then the article is fine with excluding Durham or Chapel Hill.
Raleigh Times the cultural epicenter? Absolutely not, for me anyway. I go there for good conversation and beer. I have many other interests that they cannot cater too. Great place, but that article is just riding the bandwagon that surrounds it.
By Leo on Jun 2, 2008
[Disclaimer: I am an alum from UNC.] I think “Raleigh” is synonymous in most people’s minds (outside of NC) w/”The Triangle.” People don’t get that there’s this super-rich cultural zone that includes but is not limited to Raleigh. Now that I’ve moved out of the area, I still follow it closely and have seen it blossom: Raleigh, Durham, Chapel Hill & Carrboro. You can still get an apartment in CH/C-boro for +/-400 which is amazing, I think. It’s my personal #2, too.
By Gwen Bell on Jun 2, 2008
I e-mailed the gentleman from the media relations firm that brought the article to my attention, asking where the 900,000+ figure came from and here is how he responded:
“Regarding your question about the Raleigh population, you assume correctly. The Kiplinger editors used the greater metro area in all the numbers — population, salary growth, cost of living, etc.
Noticed that it says in the introduction to the story that “The cities that made our list represent larger surrounding areas.”
Though he didn’t specify which cities and towns were included, I have to believe that Durham and Chapel Hill were included in the 900,000 + figure. Cary’s 2006 estimated population was 112,414, according to the Census. And if you add that to Raleigh 350,000+ you’re still more than 500,000+ shy of the figure cited in the article. So Durham and Chapel Hill must be included.
By Ginny on Jun 2, 2008
Thanks for the disclaimer ;o) I didn’t realize rent could be found for so cheap around Chapel Hill and Carrboro. Taking into account free wifi in Carrboro, that’s a wonderful deal. Too bad gas prices are too high for some of us to afford a commute to Raleigh. Maybe my dream of someday seeing the Triangle connected by rail will come true.
By Ginny on Jun 2, 2008
Raleigh-Cary MSA is much larger then you think. This is an old article but it backs up my point. From the TBJ:
“The MSA grew 3.8 percent to 949,681 people during the 12 months ended July 1, 2005.”
“The Triangle’s other MSA, Durham, ranked 103rd in the nation in 2005 with a estimated total population of 456,187. That’s up about 7 percent from 2000, when Durham’s population estimate was 425,923.”
“The Raleigh-Durham MSA comprises Wake, Franklin and Johnston counties. The Durham MSA comprises Durham, Orange, Chatham and Person counties.”
I think that last line should have said Raleigh-Cary, an error on the TBJ’s part.
By Leo on Jun 2, 2008
Absolutely–provided that the criteria used for the decision doesn’t take in to account statistics from Durham, Cary, or Chapel Hill. The article doesn’t cite any other cities’ benefits as Raleigh’s, so there is no need to. To be sure, Durham, Chapel Hill, Cary, Garner, etc. all play a part in the growth of Raleigh–but I don’t think that because it’s close it automatically deserves mention.
@gwenbell - “People don’t get that there’s this super-rich cultural zone that includes but is not limited to Raleigh.”
I think you need context for this statement. Most people in North Carolina associate Chapel Hill with being a thriving college town that has all of the cool music acts, and Raleigh being rather dreary, dull, and without culture. Most folks I’ve talked to not from the area associate “The Triangle” with Duke, RTP, UNC, and NCSU–not just Raleigh.
I do agree with the sentiment that Raleigh isn’t the area’s cultural epicenter, though. Taylor’s analogy was a perfect one.
By John on Jun 2, 2008
I do think it makes sense to single out Raleigh (or Durham, for that matter), rather than discuss it within the Triangle as a whole. I have lived here for nine years and do not get the feeling at all that the several cities and towns of the Triangle are connected in any meaningful way. I live in Durham and often go six months or more without ever going to Chapel Hill, much less Raleigh. It’s even hard to think of Raleigh itself as a single place, it’s so spread out. On a related note, I find the high rankings that Triangle cities have received to be completely baffling, and I say that as someone who is content living here. No city can be a great place to live if you need a car to function effectively.
By Paul Dudenhefer on Jun 2, 2008
I don’t pay much attention to these rankings … go to any large city and you’ll find loyal who will sing its virtues and give you all the great reasons to live there.
Raleigh Times is a good place, but I wouldn’t call any single establishment the “cultural epicenter” of the city. The closest thing I can think of would be Glenwood South, but that would pay short shrift to Durham’s burgeoning arts scene, and all the goodness that is Chapel Hill …
By absent.canadian on Jun 3, 2008
Um, cultural epicenter? Does Raleigh have one? If so, it’s not the Raleigh Times (though it’s a fine establishment!). I’m partial to the Flying Saucer.
By Ilinap on Jun 4, 2008
Since the Census Bureau separated the Triangle into two different MSA’s, data collected and analyzed for these sorts of rankings preclude Durham/Chapel Hill from Raleigh and vice versa. It’s a real shame because the the entire Triangle is stonger as one entity.
The media relations person associated with this story must be mistaken about the inclusion of Durham/Chapel Hill into the population stated n in the article. If they were, the metro population would be expressed closer to 1.5 Million (the ~population of the Raleigh/Durham/Chapel Hill CMSA) were
The Raleigh/Cary MSA includes 3 counties: Wake, Johnson and Franklin Counties. The lion’s share of the Raleigh/Cary MSA population is in Wake Co. Its population alone is projected at 868,121 in 2008). So, based on the stated population alone, there’s no way that the report included Durham/Chapel Hill in its statistics.
Now that Raleigh and Durham are separated into two metro areas, the competition level is increased between them. Unfortunately, this will not encourage the collaboration and unification that the Triangle needs to elevate its profile to the next level. By separating the area into two metros, it diminishes the visibility of the Triangle as well when it comes to to total population. I remember when the Triangle passed 1 Million several years ago. Now, we wait for that to happen again for Raleigh/Cary. Durham/Chapel Hill is the real loser in the numbers game since the metro is not even 500,000. This is going to hurt the metro’s visibility naitonally.
By John on Jul 31, 2008