Positively Fourth Estate

Thirteen

2011-06-29T16:28:00.003-04:00

About a month ago, I was sitting in a lecture hall as former Washington Post ombudsman Andy Alexander reminisced about his life a few decades ago as editor in chief of Ohio University's student newspaper, The Post. It was an excellent speech, a nice mix of self-deprecating humor and insight you would hope to hear from a man who has been quite successful in a field that can be especially demanding.

But one fact he mentioned is that much of Washington's political reporting boils down to writing about press releases. He noted this kind of reporting is not necessarily covering a metro beat as is often associated with journalism, but attending hearings and sifting through bureaucracy. As incredibly important as it is to the civic process, I can't imagine finding the same fulfillment in covering national politics than a city or state's, say, budgetary and crime concerns.

Numerous media outlets have complained the Obama Administration is not as transparent as then-Senator Obama promised it would be in 2008, which is highly discouraging. And considering the three 24-hour news networks compete all day and night with numerous political blogs trying to drive the news cycle (Talking Points Memo, Politico, Huffington Post, Drudge Report, etc.), there is a strong tendency to play up political stories that are of consequence for 10 minutes, if at all.

That leaves us with a blog post from Politico today, "Obama says his 12-year-old is 13." In it, MJ Lee writes that in today's news conference, Obama mistakenly cited his daughter's age when making a point about how Republicans can learn from their responsibility to complete their work in a timely manner.

Obviously, this was just a blog post and Politico led higher on its site with actual news from one of the president's rather rare news conferences, but the point remains. His daughter turns 13 in five days. While there does seem to be a more insatiable public interest in Obama's daily actions than even President Bush's, there is no justifiable reason to pretend this is news. Diluting a publication's name with content that is sub-standard, all the while justifying that it's on the blog only for those interested in such minutiae, is not the same as thoroughly covering an issue.

-30-
Tell him what we said about "Paint It Black"

Oliver's Army

2010-06-27T14:10:00.004-04:00

In a very brief amount of time, public opinion of the General Stanley McChrystal mess took a strange turn. First, as you would expect, people argued the pros and cons of whether President Obama should fire him as a measure to prove civilian control over the military. Only a few days later, the question was no longer to what effect this kind of division in the ranks would harm America's longest war, but rather, how did Rolling Stone pull this off?

In that meta way that journalism all too often operates, there have been numerous stories on how freelance journalist Michael Hastings secured such impressive access. Hastings himself has also stood front and center to answer these questions in interviews, which is admirable.

One such explanation comes from Matt Taibbi in a very good Washington Post piece. He says that Rolling Stone, to which he writes for in the vein of Hunter Thompson, gives him free reign to write as he sees fit.

"They give you an enormous amount of space to address any topic I want, and there's no editorial interference in terms of political viewpoint, and I can use any language I want," he said.

That quote has stuck with me for the past couple days. If Rolling Stone can publish two stunning pieces of journalism in short time (its recent piece on BP and the Minerals Management Service seems forgotten now, which is a shame), does that mean this philosophy of embracing biases is good for journalism? That boastfully writing with opinion and exaggerated personality is at least a successful route?

Rolling Stone thrived in the 1960s and early '70s doing just that with new journalism. It may have been more revolutionary then without the numerous opinions you find on cable news and the internet, but those narrative might be what people want.

Still, it wouldn't kill Rolling Stone to rate an album something other than three-and-a-half stars (five for reissues, of course).

-30-

WaPo's profile of Rolling Stone's push for more serious topics.

That story you likely read.

But you may not have read this

I Stand Corrected

2009-12-06T11:18:00.004-05:00

It's always embarrassing to run a correction. You spend all day researching and writing a story - drained, tired and irritable by the night - only to have a few readers call in the next morning to say you weren't diligent enough in your work.

That sets off the cycle. The Web site will probably be updated to mention the mistake, and for at least 24 hours until the next issue comes out, your mistake sits seemingly highlighted on thousands of copies while you wish you could have it back.

In baseball, pitchers say they often know they threw the wrong pitch that screwed everything up. The responsibility's on you, and it's a matter of having that short memory - to move on when everyone else does.

Maybe a name is misspelled (which is pretty much inexcusable) or a fact incorrectly attributed. Every once in a while some huge error happens, and the only thing we can do is apologize, plead human error and go to work the next day.

I always read the corrections sections in papers, but rarely hold the mistake against the reporter. We've all been there, and that day after really is the worst. That punishment is enough. Nothing else can be done.

Sometimes though, a correction is so epic that it's circulated around the Internet and used as an example for how out of touch the whole industry is. Those mistakes are funny and spread quickly. When that occurs, you can only laugh it off and enjoy the infamy.

-30-
Those corrections of classic rap songs will kill you every time.

Sign o' The Times

2009-12-06T11:12:00.005-05:00

There's a reason the New York Times faces such a huge amount of scrutiny for a daily newspaper - the paper's really good.

That's obvious, yes, but I think we forget it sometimes. It's assumed the stories come easier, because who wouldn't want to talk to the New York Times? Even if the reporter calls with a story where your caught dead to rights, you're much better off playing ball and trying to get in your side of the story. That is some very impressive clout.

I bring all this up to highlight today's front page story on how President Obama decided on the latest Afghan surge. It's one of the best things I've read in months. With many deep-background quotes, Peter Baker tells a very intimate story of the meetings with Obama's closet advisers.

The best part was this leaked quote:

--

"'What I’m not going to tolerate is you talking to the press outside of this room,' (Obama) scolded his advisers. 'It’s a disservice to the process, to the country and to the men and women of the military.'”

--

The access they have in the White House is stunning, especially considering Obama's predecessor. President Bush once infamously called Times reporter Adam Clymer a "major league asshole" while on the campaign trail in 2000 and ripped the paper during his entire administration. Rahm Emanuel supposedly calls up Times reporters just to shoot off about whatever crazy thing is bugging him that day.

Here's hoping that kind of access is kept through, you know, good journalism, and not holding great stories that would be detrimental to the White House. Because if another paper picks it up and the Times' critics (your Hannitys and Becks) have more ammunition to accuse the paper of censoring the truth, everyone would suffer.

-30-
Enjoy.

Buenas Tardes Amigo

2009-11-11T22:16:00.003-05:00

Many give Bill O'Reilly credit for popularizing the idea of a prime-time cable news host who forces his opinions on everyone else, and rightfully so. That forcefulness of opinions, whether right or wrong, has been intimidated several times over with little success. I feel Lou Dobbs got lost in that middle ground - where he's hated by blogs for all the dumb things he says but does not draw the ratings. And now, he's officially leaving CNN.

Before Glenn Beck perfected it, Lou Dobbs promoted his show by linking everything to a rather disgusting hatred for immigrants. Basically blaming them for everything. His brand of forcefulness was nothing like the compelling variety O'Reilly had or the train wreck of Beck. It was just awful.

I think CNN deserves some credit here. While MSNBC and Fox News push for ratings by blatantly aligning with the left and right, respectively, CNN does its best to shoot straight for the center. Or whatever Rick Sanchez is. The channel is at least making an effort to keep journalistic integrity. Even the analysis shows like Anderson Cooper 360 and The Situation Room are almost too fair for their own good.

-30-

Some things are inevitable, I guess.

Ill Communication

2009-09-03T14:37:00.002-04:00

Remember when Obama could control the media with brilliant speeches and eloquently put his message on point to the American people without getting caught up in ridiculous pettiness like being a socialist? I guess that honeymoon's over.

Although, counter-point: death panels.

-30-
Really strong points from the Harvard Crimson on Obama's stalling at getting the message out on health care reform

Shine on you Crazy Diamond

2009-09-03T14:16:00.005-04:00

During last year's election cycle, MSNBC struck television gold with the pairing of Keith Olbermann and Chris Matthews. Not separately, mind you, as the unchecked egos of each on their own shows generally stalled things to a halt and made both Hardball and Countdown unwatchable a lot of the time.

But when sitting on the same set, there was definite tension between the uber-serious Olbermann and, well, let's say lunatic Matthews. The show never gave much political insight, the whole thing was a game where both men knew their roles. But it was entertaining, and despite the tense lead up to the election, that quality was in short supply.

That magic combination of pure mania and delusion isn't hit often, cable news really is that boring, but I think that's now changed with Fox News' Glenn Beck.

His craziness is well documented, and I'm sure he's proud of it in a martyrdom sense. I remember watching his show on CNN Headline News a few years back and thinking, not unlike all the other shows on that channel, that it was kinda dumb. In about a year, Beck has completely tapped into the conservative outrage as seen in the health care debate and everything Obama does.

I happened to be watching last night (clip below) and caught one of the craziest things I've ever seen. There are many shots between Fox/MSNBC during the commentary shows on both channels, which makes sense, being competitors, but this is ridiculous.

To think, fake populist rage is the reason we aren't getting a public option on the health care bill. It's a real disappointment, to be honest.

-30-
These are some of the biggest leaps I've ever seen.

Way down in the hole

2009-09-02T21:48:00.001-04:00

I managed to finally sit down and watch all of The Wire this summer - I've seen a few episodes before, but nothing made any sense out of order - and enjoyed that it devoted a full season to the plight of newspapers, specifically the Baltimore Sun.

Maybe the whole theme of the Sun's fall was a bit dramatic, but it was a strong season. Truthfully, I kind of doubt journalists are that interesting, but it was good TV. One episode even included a quote that I'm sure rings true across the country.

--
"You know what a healthy newsroom is? It's a magical place where people argue about everything all the time!"
--

Exactly. I know for a fact that whenever I'm no longer employed in this industry I'll miss that part the most.

There was also, however, this quote in the final episode.

--
"As I look back over a misspent life, I find myself more and more convinced that I had more fun doing news reporting than in any other enterprise. It is really the life of kings."
--

It's a nice thought when the job weighs a bit too heavy, and I like to think there's still a bit of truth to it. Although the man who said it, H. L. Mencken, died in 1956, at a time when they probably were kings. What happened?

-30-
Can't deny it had a perfect first scene and intro music.

Perry Farrell

2009-09-02T21:34:00.002-04:00

Whenever I tell someone I'm a journalism major, I'm often reminded that there is still some time left to change my major. It's pretty discouraging, but I like to think my degree isn't the most useless of diplomas from a four-year school. That is a daily struggle with art history majors.

But the constant message in journalism is that of multimedia. Journalists are supposed to be proficient at getting a story online well before final deadline for print, and supplement it with video of the scene, audio of a few interviews and a less-than-objective blog update detailing what the event was really like. Balance that with another similar story due that day and an investigative piece that demands attention and nothing gets done well.

It'd be nice if we could all take a breath. Average journalism isn't hard to do, it's probably why the pay is so low, but the good stuff takes time. When newspapers post clunky videos from a shaky handheld camera over a bad connection of what happened that day, is it really worth it to the reader? A few hundred more page views is always nice to tout, but that's time the reporter could spend probing further. I'd imagine most readers still get their news while at work, a time when it isn't really practical to turn on the speakers and watch a video of local news.

I'm far from against new media, my personal goal has always been to work internships in different mediums to find some sort of well-rounded view of journalism, but this shift away from telling the most detailed and interesting story we can is depressing. If it brings in more advertising, I say kudos for finding an outlet. Overall though, it just seems counter-productive to what we're trying to do.

-30-
I was pretty stumped on what to link to this time, so here, enjoy this classic again.

Random Rules

2009-08-29T12:46:00.000-04:00

Consider this a disclaimer, because it only seems fair to be upfront. I've criticized the Athens Messenger ('Mess) and Athens News (A-News) from time to time, and it's no secret our paper messes up too, but there won't be any snide remarks about The Post on these pages.

As per Post policy, I can't critique the paper. That distinction/responsibility is solely given to Ashley Lutz, our editor in chief. It's a rule that I'm okay with, as the ability to comment on a daily paper with more than 100 employees shouldn't be granted to everyone. If the rules say only the editor can do so, that makes sense to me.

So perhaps unfairly to them, Athens media criticism will be directed mainly toward the Mess and A-News. Then again, A-News editor Terry Smith is a fan of the Silver Jews and Pavement. Your move, 'Mess.

-30-
I don't think this Web site is a high priority

Good Riddance (Time of Your Life)

2009-08-12T19:37:00.004-04:00

For the stats junkies out there, here are a few more numbers about how brutal times are for j-school graduates.

Not much commentary necessary here. Just barely a majority of graduates are finding jobs in print after spending thousands of dollars on a degree, and few actually enjoy where they end up. It's almost enough to make a kid look back longingly at going for a real degree and meet this journalism thing down the road. Almost.

Thank God there are options other than law school. It's just a shame those options are getting more competitive, if they soon exist at all.

-30-
Class of 2008 suffers

Handshake Drugs

2009-08-08T08:56:00.004-04:00

One of the things about working for a small town newspaper is that you have to be versatile. There are few defined beats, often general things that a reporter covers quite a bit. This includes editors contributing content, often in the form of columns.

That's what Athens News Editor Terry Smith (full disclosure: my former news writing teacher and a man with great taste in music) does every week in his newspaper. Normally these op/ed pieces are on basic topics, one running topic is his neighbor's bothersome "devil cat" by the name of Diego. True story: That cat once wrote a letter to the A-News calling Smith out.

But for the first time since he heavily criticized Athens Police Chief Richard Mayer for not providing enough details on the death of two students at a nearby apartment complex (it turned out to be overdose), Smith surprised me with his assertiveness of an important local topic.

Long story short, an Ohio University student took illegal mushrooms and fatally jumped off of a balcony a few months back. Recently, the county prosecutor, a man who is essentially a rock star going after drugs in a very rural and addicted county, charged that student's dealer with involuntary manslaughter. Obviously, that's a pretty controversial and bold move done by someone who likes grandstanding a bit and I believe is genuinely sick of all the drugs in his county.

Smith clearly disagreed with that move, and wrote an extensive column claiming the manslaughter charge was too much. But it raises a big question, should the person who decides the direction of a region's major newspaper weigh in on a very controversial local topic?

In this specific case, I don't think it was the right thing to do. That paper, as well as ours, writes a lot of stories on the prosecutor's office. The most obvious factor is that, much as it pains me to acknowledge, source relations are so hugely important. When Smith writes that "(County Prosecutor C. David) Warren appears intent on destroying a second young life," I don't understand the purpose of weighing in so strongly on such a gray area. If the goal is to right a wrong in Smith's eyes, that's quite noble, but I don't think this topic is nearly cut and dry enough to do so.

It's also important the person who edits the stories and ultimately lays out the newspaper stays objective publicly. Smith claiming that one of the most powerful men in the county has gone too far while his newspaper covers this very newsworthy event is far from staying objective. Keeping that distance from the top is what gives a newspaper credibility, and without that, it's got nothing.

-30-
Terry Smith weighs in on the indictment

What I Learned From Television

2009-08-07T17:18:00.008-04:00

Just finished up my eight weeks in local television news, interning for WGAL-TV, our region's number one station. My internship had its good and bad moments, but it was mostly nice to be on the inside of a completely different medium. The station was definitely a well-oiled machine that had blanket coverage of a large viewing area. On to the bullet points:

-A photographer loses his knees and back first.

-Every story should try to hit the heart, health or wallet. If you get all three, you're on to something big.

-Don't speed in the news team van.

-That camera tripod is ridiculously heavy to lug around, something like 40 pounds.

-A car crash is rarely newsworthy unless it closes a major road, then it is.

-A lot of work goes into that minute long clip on television.

-Going live is difficult, especially if it's breaking news.

-Journalism is about to get much better or much worse.

-The good news is that paid overtime actually exists in journalism.

-Photographers do very impressive work getting those shots that go along with a story when it's read on air.

-A bad interview's better than none.

-Great journalists can't predict the future, just report the past very quickly.

In all, learned quite a bit. If anyone there happens to be reading this (quite unlikely), thanks for having me.

-30-
WGAL, News 8, Coverage You Can Count On, Susquehanna Valley

The Wall

2009-08-07T16:31:00.005-04:00

Two big newspapers both announced this week (odd...) that they will begin charging for access to their Web sites.

The Boston Globe and New York Post have both opted for a pay wall restricting their previously completely free online content. Considering the only other major newspaper I can think of that does this, The Wall Street Journal, also owned by Rupert Murdoch, mostly covers financial matters and is more likely to draw people who want to pay for better analysis, it's pretty big news.

Neither paper's decision is much of a surprise. Murdoch probably saw the success of The Journal's Web site and is now instituting this policy at his foreign publications as well. The Globe, God bless it, has spend months in an awkward back and forth with its owner, The New York Times Company, in extensive arguments about pay cuts that have made the paper a lot more difficult to sell. For a few months, the Times even threatened to simply shut it down if the union didn't comply to steep demands. Neither side looked good.

The next question is how much to charge. Let's focus on the Globe, as its losses (projected to total $85 billion this year, although top execs are now saying the deficit has fallen) are much worse and it isn't owned by a crazy billionaire who cares for it.

Comparing media markets, the Post covers a much smaller region (the New York metropolitan area vs. all of New England) and faces much stiffer competition for it. The Globe is the main broadsheet publication of New England and has a daily circulation of about 200,000 more than its rival, the Boston Herald.

So the Globe, save for a powerful union, steep losses and a looming sense of closure any day, is doing alright. The paper costs $6 per week to deliver every day, for the first twelve weeks, to the Boston area. At about $25 per month, and that includes costs the Web site wouldn't require like printing press, drivers, trucks, gasoline, wouldn't $50 or so per year for Web access be a reasonable amount? It'd begin to make up the huge deficit and actually fuel good journalism.

-30-
Things are looking a bit different these days

I Might be Wrong

2009-08-02T17:26:00.000-04:00

Today, only a week or so after the blogs, the New York Times public editor took one of his paper's writers out behind the woodshed.

The obituary the Times ran on Walter Cronkite a few weeks back has been corrected a staggering eight times. Considering these things are usually written months ahead of time, I mean, Cronkite was 92, it's surprising that so many mistakes could slip through. And not just dumb errors, but the dates of Martin Luther King, Jr.'s assassination and the moon landing. As one would hope, the paper's ombudsman cracked his knuckles and went to work.

In a rather smug way (as is his style), Clark Hoyt outlined how this cannot happen at the paper of record. He makes a few excuses, most notably that word didn't come in until 8 p.m., but that's not really legitimate here. I remember the Cronkite family announcing a week or two beforehand that he was very sick.

Here's the telling 'graph in his assessment.

--
Until the Cronkite errors, she was not even in the top 20 among reporters and editors most responsible for corrections this year. Now, she has jumped to No. 4 and will again get special editing attention.
--

Consider me the naive one, but I never thought the times had a known ranking of the the most corrected journalists. Makes sense, of course, but it's quite the beating.

Still, I love public editors. They rip the paper when need be and represent it better than most. Having someone on the inside who reads the letters and acts as a liaison, if I may adopt some corporate speak, between the readers and writers is very important. Ironic as it is, journalists have a bad habit of growing more cynical and distant from the audience they essentially work for, something they desperately need to stop.

When you write a fairly straightforward obit, even under a very near deadline, and cause eight corrections in the country's best newspaper, it's best to count your blessings that you still have a job.

-30-
You know when it's called "How Did This Happen?" that someone is in trouble

Zero

2009-08-02T15:52:00.000-04:00

If the Athens Messenger were to cease publication, Athens would technically be without a daily newspaper. It's a strange thought, since the town is also served by The Post, The Athens News, an NPR affiliate, and a few student run magazines. The town of 6,000 residents and 20,000 students is blanketed with coverage, often with a limited amount of interesting news.

Last week, Ann Arbor lost its only daily paper. The Ann Arbor News, which published for 174 years and had 60 editorial employees in the spring (now half that), will continue to update its Web site. Counting college students, there are about 75,000 more people who live in that Michigan city than Athens. It's always a shame to see a paper fold, especially when it's the only one in a large town. Trenton, San Francisco and Miami are just three cities that could see that same fate.

The difference is none of those are college towns, like Athens and Ann Arbor. So maybe this is another example of my half-full outlook toward newspapers, but it might not be so bad. If Ann Arbor is anything like Athens, and with the huge population difference, it might not be, the students can handle covering a town that relies on students for most everything else. I know from looking at college papers before enrolling at OU that they have a fine student newspaper.

The 'Mess, "Athens' eyes and ears for over 180 years" (despite the lack of AP style on over/more than), has a circulation of about 15,000 and doesn't break a lot of news these days. Should Athens ever became a zero daily paper town, I think it'd be more symbolic than anything else.

-30-
Rest in Peace, Ann Arbor News

The Name of This Band Is Talking Heads

2009-08-01T19:16:00.005-04:00

It wasn't long ago liberals hailed Keith Olbermann as a funnier and smarter Bill O'Reilly of their own. His "Special Comments" were legendary and instant YouTube hits, nine minutes of focused outrage often focused at someone in the Bush administration. Above all, he caught Bill O'Reilly using false arguments and that creepy flirting he does with female guests. Before Olbermann went off the deep end and Rachel Maddow started doing her best to fill in the gaps, he must have been a thorn in the side of Fox News and News Corp.

Now, as the New York Times is reporting, that run could be over. The two networks seem to have a handshake agreement where they will no longer take shots at each other while CNN sits idly by. Perhaps General Electric's chairman, Jeff Immelt, despite running one of the biggest companies in American history, was a little annoyed when O'Reilly told his millions of viewers, "If my child were killed in Iraq, I would blame the likes of Jeffrey Immelt."

Olbermann, in surprisingly terse style, suggested he will not be censored on what he says, and I'm inclined to believe him. The rivalry with Bill O' has done wonders for Countdown's ratings. It's made Olbermann a villain of the right, something I'm sure the notoriously arrogant host loves. O'Reilly never mentions Olbermann by name (hardly unusual, he still calls Sen. Al Franken "Stuart Smalley" after his Saturday Night Live character 15 years ago), and will probably continue that too.

Assuming everything stays pretty much the same on Fox News' end, it'll be interesting to see how Olbermann works around this new obstacle. If he can't name O'Reilly the "Worst Person in the World," then his show will have a big hole to fill five nights a week.

-30-
Rivalries normally bring out the best in everyone, and this one turned out something like that.

Ben Affleck's been pretty awful since co-writing Good Will Hunting, but this was pretty awesome.

Punks in the Beerlight

2009-08-01T15:53:00.005-04:00

With some stories, you can't help but get the impression it's just the journalist showing off his or her contact list. I guess even the New York Times likes to localize national stories.

-30-
I really don't know what to make of this

Bridge Over Troubled Waters

2009-07-29T13:59:00.007-04:00

It deserves attention that the best nightly newscast got a tip the other day from a prominent New York gossip and political blog.

No, it was nothing huge. Gawker.com posted a clip of the Manhattan Bridge wobbling up and down as the subway raced underneath, video that appeared on the NBC Nightly News later that day. Brian Williams, because he's awesome, used the show's blog to credit the blog, something he did not do on the newscast.

Ever since Fark.com began providing fodder for every single morning zoo crew radio show, blogs have been great at catching things the mainstream media misses. By being so specialized in what they do, they dig up old archival footage and watch more C-SPAN than anyone should ever be required to do. In this case, Gawker posted a YouTube clip and made it prominent.

Then again, now that ABC World News is featuring Pitchfork writers to discuss new indie albums, maybe it's just another trend of an old media trying to stay alive by latching on to the new successful thing. Kinda like a parasite.

-30-
Brian Williams probably loves the weekly Gossip Girl updates

If you're in to odd news that gets a bit boring sometimes

Born in the USA

2009-07-29T13:53:00.001-04:00

One of my favorite quotes on journalism comes, unsurprisingly, from Hunter Thompson. As the good doctor was eulogizing his mortal enemy Richard Nixon, he lamented the idea of a completely objective press.

---
"Some people will say that words like scum and rotten are wrong for Objective Journalism -- which is true, but they miss the point. It was the built-in blind spots of the Objective rules and dogma that allowed Nixon to slither into the White House in the first place. He looked so good on paper that you could almost vote for him sight unseen. He seemed so all-American, so much like Horatio Alger, that he was able to slip through the cracks of Objective Journalism. You had to get Subjective to see Nixon clearly, and the shock of recognition was often painful."
---

It's a great point to keep in mind when writing. Of course the most important thing is to be factually accurate and fair, nothing else matters nearly as much. But Thompson's argument that some things are so preposterous that reporters need to shut off their sense of emotionless coverage is an interesting one.

That, in a nutshell, is how I feel about the birther movement. For those of you who have better things to do than follow such trivial matters, it's a little movement questioning whether Barack Obama was really born in this country. The then Senator Obama campaign produced a newspaper birth announcement and certificate of live birth -- not a birth certificate, if we're getting down to brass tacks -- but the outrage continues.

The media, however, have treated their arguments quite condescendingly. Rachel Maddow, Bill O'Reilly and, most emphatically, Chris Matthews (linked below) have all said this is a stupid story that only lives because it falls into the story that Obama is a socialist. Granted, these people give their opinions and are not journalists, but the fact that newspapers haven't really touched this story until recently shows their disdain for it. When Lou Dobbs heard Obama could be an immigrant, he went for the kill.

Of course this whole news story is ridiculous, it's probably not even news. The problem is that journalists have this Utopian idea of complete impartiality, but they're looking down on something that is a genuine concern for a large group of people. Does it give reporters -- not columnists -- the right to call out a movement as dumb and wrong? If so, it opens up a whole can of worms where maybe we could have pointed out Nixon like Thompson wanted. But then the New York Times looks even more liberal and ethics could be out the window.

It comes down to personal decisions by those up top, and to decide a certain theory is so dumb that it doesn't deserve attention and promotion in your newspaper, then that's fair. I still feel like media condescension toward a large group (idiotic and news-hating as it is) is far from constructive when we're trying to serve our audience.

-30-
Great eulogy of Nixon by the Good Doctor

G. Gordon Liddy is a crazy man, believe it or not.

Hunting Bears

2009-07-28T00:12:00.003-04:00

A great headline always brightens my day. Granted this is no "Top Cop Admits Hanky Panky," "Sleep Specialist Lives the Dream," "Headless Body in Topless Bar" or "Dewey Defeats Truman," but it's pretty enjoyable.

-30-
"Bear-Proof Can Is Pop-Top Picnic for a Crafty Thief"

So Says I

2009-07-27T23:47:00.001-04:00

It's true that when the New York Times says something is a trend, it officially is. Sometimes the paper of record is a little slow to the party, Twitter comes to mind, but the Times often uses its clout to do fine stories on what newfangled thing the kids are up to these days. Other times, they just rely on anecdotes to suggest an activity is much more important than it really is.

Take for instance this story published recently, "Home Burials Offer an Intimate Alternative," about how supposedly more people are laying their loved ones to rest in their back yards. I don't know anyone who does this, and I kinda doubt you do too. Between the two of us, that's a lot of people who aren't being buried at home. Instead, the Times found a few people who really believed this was a good idea and added just enough stats to make the thing publishable, weird as the story is.

I love when the Times presents strange trends people enjoy just because, but stuff like this should not be treated as if it were a popular alternative. This isn't a profile, but an article on something seen as an up and coming method. As per ususal, here's the money 'graph.

---
Advocates say the number of home funerals, where everything from caring for the dead to the visiting hours to the building of the coffin is done at home, has soared in the last five years, putting the funerals “where home births were 30 years ago,” according to Chuck Lakin, a home funeral proponent and coffin builder in Waterville, Me.
---

Finding someone who supports any unusual idea is not difficult, but the Times suggests that this story is much more than a collection of those people. Such is the life of leading the national media.

-30-
A clever shot at journalism from a Web site known for such things.

This fits that writeup pretty well, I think

Streets of Philadelphia

2009-07-26T22:08:00.003-04:00

Ever since I was a kid, I never understood why the national sports media picked on Philadelphia. Boston and New York fans yelled racist and homophobic slurs at even their own players. Chicago fans complained all the time. Miami fans saw two World Series championships for the Marlins in a decade and still don't show up. Etc., etc. That stuff is hardly mentioned. But Philly booed a drunken Santa Claus at an Eagles game. Yep. 40 years ago. Stuart Scott and Michael Wilbon reference it to this day.

This narrative, like many in the media, played out over and over again. The City of Brotherly Love is hard on rich athletes. They booed McNabb when he was drafted. Eric Lindros and Scott Rolen couldn't take the heat. Hugely separate events were forced into feeding this monster, no matter if the media were cramming square pegs in round holes or not. It had to continue, because, well, it did for years before.

But only a few hours ago a gentleman was beaten to death in the Phillies' parking lot. Details, obviously, are few at the moment, but the fantastic Philadelphia Inquirer is reporting that he was celebrating his bachelor's party at McFadden's (a bar connected to the outside of the stadium that you do not need tickets to enter) and he was beaten to death without any weapons. Arrests are supposed to come soon.

And with that, everything starts again. The media will speculate, perhaps arguing over how far team fandom should go. The city will get another black eye. The bar will be faced with questions about why it didn't do more to stop it. The Phillies might be blamed for allowing anything like this to even start in their own back yard right after an afternoon game. But really, all it comes down to is few could imagine the grief of losing a future spouse at his bachelor's party for God knows what reason.

This is an embarrassment, it really is.

-30-
Breaking news, we'll see what happens

I Turn My Camera On

2009-07-26T21:49:00.001-04:00

I've never had the opportunity to see a newspaper printing press in person, a fact that I did not give much thought until stumbling on the cool Flickr page below. Not having this opportunity is hardly rare, but it's such a strange gap in what we do. Working to put copy in the newspaper and knowing just about nothing of what happens after we finish our job seems strange, like turning on the faucet and knowing water will come out.

Although, I'm a bit worried I'll leave the place wondering how this model of employing huge and expensive machinery to rush outdated news to newsstands has possibly sustained itself for so long. It could make for a depressing tour.

-30-
An impressive Flickr

-Via Gawker

Dog on Fire

2009-07-26T21:27:00.004-04:00

Just one more Cronkite point. It looks like the online readers of Time magazine weighed in on who they trust the most.

The kids love their Jon Stewart Leibowitz.

-30-
Skewed stats are still stats, right?