EDITORIAL: Walsh owns up consequences of failed Olympics bid

Boston’s controversial bid for the 2024 Olympics left the news cycle more than a year ago, but two authors are bringing Mayor Martin Walsh’s arguably biggest flop in the spotlight once more. Former No Boston Olympics co-chair Chris Dempsey and Smith College professor Andrew Zimbalist are releasing their book, “No Boston Olympics: How and Why Smart Cities Are Passing on the Torch,” later this week. The novel uses Boston as an example to show how more cities are choosing not to host the Olympics.

Walsh, though, spoke publicly in opposition of the book and called the authors “a couple of opportunists.” Walsh claimed that the book is being written purely for profit and includes false information about the entire debacle and his administration’s part in it.

Walsh’s initial reaction was clearly defensive. While the Boston mayoral election is still months away, his opponent, councilor Tito Jackson, is gaining publicity and support. This is one of the worst times for Walsh’s failed bid to be inspected all over again.

Though some would argue that Dempsey has his own agenda, Walsh’s wording wasn’t OK. The term “opportunist” in general is objective and shouldn’t be applied to this specific situation. Writing a book about Boston’s history, though recent, doesn’t make you an opportunist. If Walsh coins this term to authors, who wouldn’t fall under that category? He thinks that people are trying to make money off of his failure, but there’s no problem with that. The only troublesome aspect of this novel is the potential for including incorrect information. If the book spreads propaganda rather than facts, then his comments would have merit.

The failed bid is embarrassing for Walsh. He doesn’t want the mistakes of his past to negatively impact the future of his campaign. He could’ve said nothing, accepted their thoughts and moved on. Instead, he chose to share his contempt for the book during an interview, calling names of people who don’t agree with him. Walsh attempted to defend himself but wound up disparaging two authors who are trying to bring attention to an important moment of Boston’s history. He felt attacked, retaliated and came off as insecure.

Walsh will probably bring more attention to the impending novel than if he had said nothing at all. The book uses Boston as a case study but focuses on the larger topic of how cities are passing up big events because they take many resources and don’t see a big return. It’s an interesting subject and certainly merits a book or two. If Walsh let it go and let the book be without his input, news outlets wouldn’t have even picked up this story. It’d be a headline but not front page news.

Boston 2024 was certainly big news when it occurred, but it’s not the biggest setback a politician could make or has made. Walsh wanted to bring the Olympics to Boston, but when he realized the majority of the public didn’t agree, Boston’s bid was dropped. He made promises he didn’t keep and wasn’t transparent with his constituency, but in the end he did the right thing. Perhaps it’s not completely necessary to dig up the past.

If Walsh’s claims are accurate, if this book includes wrong information, then he has every right to take a stand against them. It’s at least respectable that Walsh is owning up to the part he took in Boston 2024 and is not afraid to make it part of his legacy.