Disgusted at City Baths report


I am writing to express my utter disgust at your recent article concerning the City Swimming Baths. The description of the City Swimming Baths in your article is unrecognisable to me. I am a daily patron of the William Street Swimming Baths and have been for many, many years and therefore I am concerned that the description in your article differs so drastically from my own experiences.

In the days since your article was published I have spoken to at least 30 regular patrons of the baths and I can inform you that there is a high level of anger that the reputation and cleanliness of the facility has been called into question and reported in such a sensationalist manner.

I can absolutely refute these claims. None of this has not been my experience, nor that of the many patrons I have spoken to since the article was published. It appears to me that only twice in the article are un-subjective claims are made - these concerning that perpetual absence of toilet roll (how unlikely and exaggerated this reads) and that of grime and mould growing in unspecified places. I imagine that both of these criticisms would have been thoroughly investigated by your reporter before the article was published. I would also have imagined that any competent journalist upon receiving such an opinionated, vague and damaging description would have sought to investigate the allegations in an effort to present a balanced and unbiased account.

I doubt that these steps were taken as I know that the William Street Baths have a loyal membership who attend daily in order to utilise the public service which they provide. Surely if what the article suggests were the case then the regular patrons would not now feel so angry and would not have in recent months and years fought so hard to keep the facility open.

People choose to frequent the baths daily because they value the facility and the service which is provided. The staff of the William Street Swimming Baths deserve genuine praise for the service which they provide, often assisting elderly and infirmed members of our community with the utmost dignity and respect. For many people their daily swim at the baths is vital part of their daily lives, providing a contact point with others as well as allowing beneficial exercise.

Your article damages this vital service by reporting the opinions of one person as though it were fact. For many years the powers that be have been trying to close this facility. Your inaccurate article only serves to provide them with ammunition.

I suggest that the matter should now be investigated (better late than never) and I request that following an investigation into the service provided in the William Street Swimming Baths that a full apology be printed.


William Doherty