Thanks to my friend Megan, I've finally been invited to the preview of Google Wave. For those of you who haven't heard of it yet, Wave is Google's attempt to update the stodgy old email format. If you want to learn more about it, you can check out Google's verrrry long informational video. You can also request an invite and hope it comes through soon!
Wave is hard to describe. A wave is basically a message that's kind of like an email, but it's updated in almost-real time and it can include multiple people who all get to participate with each other. There are also search and widget features. Google says that they started working on it after asking themselves the question, if email had been invented today, what would it look like?
I think that Wave is going to be a really exciting way for journalists, especially web-focused journalists, to collaborate, communicate, research, bounce ideas off each other, etc. It's one of the best ways I've ever seen to integrate all the different communication and social media functions that journalists thrive on, and I think it has the potential to make a lot of people's lives easier.
I'm still trying to figure things out, so I'll be sure to post more as I discover all the coolness that Google has bestowed upon us!
Wednesday, October 21, 2009
Tuesday, September 8, 2009
Why the hell can't we all get along??
As the debate over health care reform is increasingly hashed out in public forums during Congress’s summer recess, it is apparent that the tenor of the debate is becoming ever more hostile. Town hall meetings with Senators and Representatives degenerate into shouting matches over the littlest detail of the bill. Right here in Phoenix, a protestor showed up outside an appearance by President Obama with an assault rifle casually slung over his shoulder. A similar story emerged from a presidential appearance in New Hampshire where a demonstrator had a gun strapped to his thigh.
Now, neither of those instances violated the law—both people were outside the perimeter around the President where weapons are not allowed, and New Hampshire and Arizona both permit open carriage of firearms. But the point of these incidents is not whether those demonstrators did something illegal. The point is that this serves to highlight the larger question of why the hell we Americans can’t seem to get along. We’ve always had a tradition of spirited debate about critical issues. But when did it get to the point where all we know how to do is hoot and holler and wave our guns at each other?
The culture of polarized political hostility is nothing new, but it seems to have reached a boiling point when it comes to health care. Opinionated citizens all across the country are shouting themselves red in the face. The collective national blood pressure must be up by thousands of points, judging by the tomato colored people we see on TV, online, and in the papers. If there was ever any question about whether we, as a country, are completely nuts, well folks, we have an answer.
But aren’t we better than that? Aren’t we above scribbling a Hitler mustache on Obama—or for that matter, on the President Bush the way extreme liberals did for eight years? We’re Americans. Our country has been the source of some of the most beautiful and insightful writings about debate and dissent the world has ever seen: from Thomas Paine’s fiery “Common Sense” to the reasoned logic of “Civil Disobedience” by Thoreau to the playful disbelief of Molly Ivins’s writings about lawmakers in Texas and beyond. Why can’t we celebrate our differences and disagreements instead of instinctively reaching for our handgun when we hear somebody say something we don’t like?
Now, I’m well aware that there have been plenty of debates over plenty of hot button issues throughout America’s history. And I also know that sometimes those disagreements were settled with violence, or even war. I’m admittedly young, and this has likely been the most intense policy debate I have witnessed in my lifetime. I know full well that this is not the first time the American populace has behaved like a bunch of escaped lunatics. But why does that make it okay? There’s no easy answer to this question, but I’m going to pose it anyway because it’s something that we all need to hear: aren’t we capable of debating an issue without acting like complete children? And, if the answer to that truly is no, then maybe we need to look a little deeper than health care reform to find out what’s truly making us behave like this.
Now, neither of those instances violated the law—both people were outside the perimeter around the President where weapons are not allowed, and New Hampshire and Arizona both permit open carriage of firearms. But the point of these incidents is not whether those demonstrators did something illegal. The point is that this serves to highlight the larger question of why the hell we Americans can’t seem to get along. We’ve always had a tradition of spirited debate about critical issues. But when did it get to the point where all we know how to do is hoot and holler and wave our guns at each other?
The culture of polarized political hostility is nothing new, but it seems to have reached a boiling point when it comes to health care. Opinionated citizens all across the country are shouting themselves red in the face. The collective national blood pressure must be up by thousands of points, judging by the tomato colored people we see on TV, online, and in the papers. If there was ever any question about whether we, as a country, are completely nuts, well folks, we have an answer.
But aren’t we better than that? Aren’t we above scribbling a Hitler mustache on Obama—or for that matter, on the President Bush the way extreme liberals did for eight years? We’re Americans. Our country has been the source of some of the most beautiful and insightful writings about debate and dissent the world has ever seen: from Thomas Paine’s fiery “Common Sense” to the reasoned logic of “Civil Disobedience” by Thoreau to the playful disbelief of Molly Ivins’s writings about lawmakers in Texas and beyond. Why can’t we celebrate our differences and disagreements instead of instinctively reaching for our handgun when we hear somebody say something we don’t like?
Now, I’m well aware that there have been plenty of debates over plenty of hot button issues throughout America’s history. And I also know that sometimes those disagreements were settled with violence, or even war. I’m admittedly young, and this has likely been the most intense policy debate I have witnessed in my lifetime. I know full well that this is not the first time the American populace has behaved like a bunch of escaped lunatics. But why does that make it okay? There’s no easy answer to this question, but I’m going to pose it anyway because it’s something that we all need to hear: aren’t we capable of debating an issue without acting like complete children? And, if the answer to that truly is no, then maybe we need to look a little deeper than health care reform to find out what’s truly making us behave like this.
Thursday, April 16, 2009
So long, old friend.
One of America's most interesting broadcasters is stepping down. Oh, John Madden. How we shall miss thee."Don't worry about the horse being blind, just load the wagon."
"When your arm gets hit, the ball is not going to go where you want it to."
"The offensive linemen are the biggest guys on the field, they're bigger than everybody else, and that's what makes them the biggest guys on the field."
"When you get hit like that it's like having a bumble bee stuck in your helmet. You just can't get rid of it!"
"Here's a guy who when he runs, he moves faster."
"Here's a guy who can use his arms and legs at the same time."
"From the waist down, Earl Campbell has the biggest legs I have ever seen on a running back."
"He would have scored a touchdown if he hadn't been tackled right there."
"He would have scored a touchdown if he hadn't been tackled right there."
-The one, the only, John Madden
Perhaps John can join the esteemed ranks of CNN! Surely his insights would be at least as interesting and/or factual as most of the other fucks on The Situation Room.
Friday, April 10, 2009
Oh, please.
If I have to hear one more cable news talking head droning on about how Arizona State isn't awarding Obama an honorary degree, I may be forced to turn to violence. WHO THE FUCK CARES? THIS ISN'T NEWS.
A little backstory for those of you unaware of the situation: President Obama will be delivering the commencement address at Arizona State University on May 13. It was announced that ASU has decided not to award the President with an honorary degree because they feel that while he has accomplished a great deal, his best work is yet to come.
Okay, great. All done. We can stop talking about it now. It's not important, or particularly relevant, or particularly newsworthy. Hell, it's only interesting for about thirty seconds at most. It seemed like they were covering it on The Situation Room every five minutes this afternoon. And over at MSNBC (video here) the anchors and commentators were positively frothing at the mouth with rage over ASU's "lame-brained" decision not to award Obama. Maybe I missed a memo or something, but I wasn't aware that it's okay for a supposed "news" network to refer to the organizations they report on as lame-brained. But that's probably just me being all crazy. Another overwhelming demonstration of thoughtfulness and impartiality from MSNBC.
Grow up, everybody. And move on.
A little backstory for those of you unaware of the situation: President Obama will be delivering the commencement address at Arizona State University on May 13. It was announced that ASU has decided not to award the President with an honorary degree because they feel that while he has accomplished a great deal, his best work is yet to come.
Okay, great. All done. We can stop talking about it now. It's not important, or particularly relevant, or particularly newsworthy. Hell, it's only interesting for about thirty seconds at most. It seemed like they were covering it on The Situation Room every five minutes this afternoon. And over at MSNBC (video here) the anchors and commentators were positively frothing at the mouth with rage over ASU's "lame-brained" decision not to award Obama. Maybe I missed a memo or something, but I wasn't aware that it's okay for a supposed "news" network to refer to the organizations they report on as lame-brained. But that's probably just me being all crazy. Another overwhelming demonstration of thoughtfulness and impartiality from MSNBC.
Grow up, everybody. And move on.
Tuesday, March 31, 2009
You Are the Most Important Person You Know
You are the most important person you know. As a matter of fact, you are the most important person any of us knows. Even if we haven’t met you, per se, you’re still the top dog, the head honcho, the person about whom all of us should be chiefly concerned. The things you say, the opinions you hold, and the things you do are unflaggingly fascinating, and we all need to hear, know, and see them.
All right, time for an honesty moment. Do I believe one single, solitary word of that paragraph I just wrote? Not a chance. I’m sure you’re a lovely, engaging person, full of hopes and dreams and personal triumphs, and that’s all well and good. But please, please, shut the hell up.
What’s the source of this little rant I’m indulging in right now? As I rode Phoenix’s shiny new Light Rail this morning, the young guy sitting behind me spent the entire ride blathering on at full volume into his cell phone, broadcasting his opinions on anything and everything at volume that ensured he could be clearly heard in neighboring counties. I can now count myself among those fortunate enough to know this incredibly loud stranger’s opinions on the ever-raging Xbox-PS3 debate, the infrastructure of the Phoenix metropolitan region, and the likelihood of the Bengals getting into the playoffs. I don’t care. NOBODY CARES. I was once riding the train in Chicago on which a woman plopped down, started spreading out sensitive, personal documents, and yammering into her phone about her delinquent daughter, her recent split from her other half, and her difficulty finding a job due to the fact that she was on federal probation. Really? Is this really who we’ve become? Are we the country that sits on a train full of other people holding cell phone conversations at the top of our lungs for upwards of half an hour? Attention, world: the Ugly American isn’t just a stereotype that applies to how my countrymen behave on vacation; we act like that at home, too.
The more I thought about it, though, the less surprised I was. We’ve been trained to act like this by our parents, our schoolteachers, and by the media we consume in mass quantities day in and day out. If you’re in the 18-49 demographic, you’re the most important consumer in America. If you’re older than that, we have all sorts of fantastic new satellite channels that cater to the needs of you, the very important older consumer. If you’re a little kid, you’re bombarded with ads for toys you need to have right this instant. The prescription drug companies run commercials all day imploring you to ask your doctor if Zoloft, Aricept, or Cialis is right for you, because everyone cares about YOUR health and well-being. You’d better switch to DTV right now, because we don’t want YOU to miss out on something. You are the most important person you know.
Well, no, you’re not. You’re swell and all, but don’t get carried away on a wave of your own self-importance. Just because you were told you’re special and perfect and incredibly significant doesn’t mean it’s true. I’m sorry to burst your bubble.
All right, time for an honesty moment. Do I believe one single, solitary word of that paragraph I just wrote? Not a chance. I’m sure you’re a lovely, engaging person, full of hopes and dreams and personal triumphs, and that’s all well and good. But please, please, shut the hell up.
What’s the source of this little rant I’m indulging in right now? As I rode Phoenix’s shiny new Light Rail this morning, the young guy sitting behind me spent the entire ride blathering on at full volume into his cell phone, broadcasting his opinions on anything and everything at volume that ensured he could be clearly heard in neighboring counties. I can now count myself among those fortunate enough to know this incredibly loud stranger’s opinions on the ever-raging Xbox-PS3 debate, the infrastructure of the Phoenix metropolitan region, and the likelihood of the Bengals getting into the playoffs. I don’t care. NOBODY CARES. I was once riding the train in Chicago on which a woman plopped down, started spreading out sensitive, personal documents, and yammering into her phone about her delinquent daughter, her recent split from her other half, and her difficulty finding a job due to the fact that she was on federal probation. Really? Is this really who we’ve become? Are we the country that sits on a train full of other people holding cell phone conversations at the top of our lungs for upwards of half an hour? Attention, world: the Ugly American isn’t just a stereotype that applies to how my countrymen behave on vacation; we act like that at home, too.
The more I thought about it, though, the less surprised I was. We’ve been trained to act like this by our parents, our schoolteachers, and by the media we consume in mass quantities day in and day out. If you’re in the 18-49 demographic, you’re the most important consumer in America. If you’re older than that, we have all sorts of fantastic new satellite channels that cater to the needs of you, the very important older consumer. If you’re a little kid, you’re bombarded with ads for toys you need to have right this instant. The prescription drug companies run commercials all day imploring you to ask your doctor if Zoloft, Aricept, or Cialis is right for you, because everyone cares about YOUR health and well-being. You’d better switch to DTV right now, because we don’t want YOU to miss out on something. You are the most important person you know.
Well, no, you’re not. You’re swell and all, but don’t get carried away on a wave of your own self-importance. Just because you were told you’re special and perfect and incredibly significant doesn’t mean it’s true. I’m sorry to burst your bubble.
Wow. Really?
This article over at CBS's website details the story of Jerry Avant, Jr., who was was shot 27 times while trying to protect nursing home residents from a gunman. Mr. Avant worked as a nurse in the North Carolina home, and had previously served for 10 years in the Coast Guard.
CBS, in an amazingly disrespectful use of the English language, refers to Avant not once, not twice, but three times as a "male nurse." Really, CBS? Really?? I thought "male nurse" was one of those things we've all agreed not to say anymore, like referring to an African-American as "articulate" or referring to a politician as "honest." It's unthinkably rude to me that they need to belittle this man's sacrifice by making it clear that, despite the fact that he was a nurse, he was indeed in possession of a penis. It's perfectly obvious that he was a man, based on the fact that his first name is the masculine spelling of the name Jerry, the use of "he" and "him" throughout, and the fact that they have a FUCKING PICTURE of him posted right at the top of the page.
What a crappy way to tarnish a story about somebody who did something truly good.
CBS, in an amazingly disrespectful use of the English language, refers to Avant not once, not twice, but three times as a "male nurse." Really, CBS? Really?? I thought "male nurse" was one of those things we've all agreed not to say anymore, like referring to an African-American as "articulate" or referring to a politician as "honest." It's unthinkably rude to me that they need to belittle this man's sacrifice by making it clear that, despite the fact that he was a nurse, he was indeed in possession of a penis. It's perfectly obvious that he was a man, based on the fact that his first name is the masculine spelling of the name Jerry, the use of "he" and "him" throughout, and the fact that they have a FUCKING PICTURE of him posted right at the top of the page.
What a crappy way to tarnish a story about somebody who did something truly good.
Tuesday, March 3, 2009
Ruminations on Twitter
I'm not so sure about this whole Twitter thing.
Even while everyone around me seems to be succumbing to the succubus that is Twitter, I stand firm in my refusal to tweet.
Look, I'll be the first to admit that I'm certainly self-obsessed enough that I think everybody wants to know what I am doing and thinking...but I'm also self-aware enough to know that nobody gives a shit that I'm watching Oprah or feeding my betta fish. I would never have trouble finding something to tweet about. But to my way of thinking, that doesn't mean I should just go ahead and do it.
There's a certain point that's all too easy to reach these days where we become over-connected: emailing, texting, Facebook status updating, IMing, and talking on the phone all at once is WAY too much. Add in tweeting, and without a doubt, everyone knows what you're doing all the time. I don't want everyone to know what I'm doing all the time, nor do I want to know what all my friends are doing. It's information overload; and on top of that, it makes life less interesting. There's something to be said for not knowing: in a recent interview with Rolling Stone, the kooky--yet reliably insightful--Stevie Nicks said, "I don't have a computer or a cell phone, because I don't want to be that available to anybody. I'm all about mystery. Little girls think it's necessary to put all their business on MySpace and Facebook, and I think it's a shame."
She's right. It's far more interesting to hear about something if you didn't already know it because of a tweet, or a Facebook status, or a MySpace blog. And if one of your friends feels the need to tell you something in person, you can be sure it's not going to be as inane as something they might tweet about.
As for the assertion that Twitter can somehow be used as a tool for journalism, the very idea kind of makes me want to vomit. Sure, it's an easy way to quickly disseminate information to the masses--but it can just as easily be used for misinformation. People were are all abuzz about the tweets coming out of India during the attacks on Mumbai last year. Congressmen and women were on Twitter during President Obama's faux State of the Union. So what? That's not journalism. Just as many bullshit lies are perpetrated on Twitter as actual facts are reported. Reports of the Dalai Lama's Twitter account are greatly exaggerated. (As were the ones attributed to Maya Angelou, the TV show "Mad Men," etc., etc.) Jared from Subway is not dead, as was reported on Twitter. Rep. Pete Hoekstra (R-MI) accidentally revealed a secret congressional trip to Iraq by tweeting that he had landed in Baghdad. Journalists are great because they function as gatekeepers of information, trying to separate the real from the phony. Twitter has no gatekeepers, nor is it designed to. That's fine, but not for something that people hail as the future of news.
For now, I'm standing firm in my refusal to open a Twitter account. Unless something drastic happens, I don't ever see that changing.
Besides, there are too many potential slip-ups when trying to use the past tense of "tweet." Think about it...
Even while everyone around me seems to be succumbing to the succubus that is Twitter, I stand firm in my refusal to tweet.
Look, I'll be the first to admit that I'm certainly self-obsessed enough that I think everybody wants to know what I am doing and thinking...but I'm also self-aware enough to know that nobody gives a shit that I'm watching Oprah or feeding my betta fish. I would never have trouble finding something to tweet about. But to my way of thinking, that doesn't mean I should just go ahead and do it.
There's a certain point that's all too easy to reach these days where we become over-connected: emailing, texting, Facebook status updating, IMing, and talking on the phone all at once is WAY too much. Add in tweeting, and without a doubt, everyone knows what you're doing all the time. I don't want everyone to know what I'm doing all the time, nor do I want to know what all my friends are doing. It's information overload; and on top of that, it makes life less interesting. There's something to be said for not knowing: in a recent interview with Rolling Stone, the kooky--yet reliably insightful--Stevie Nicks said, "I don't have a computer or a cell phone, because I don't want to be that available to anybody. I'm all about mystery. Little girls think it's necessary to put all their business on MySpace and Facebook, and I think it's a shame."
She's right. It's far more interesting to hear about something if you didn't already know it because of a tweet, or a Facebook status, or a MySpace blog. And if one of your friends feels the need to tell you something in person, you can be sure it's not going to be as inane as something they might tweet about.
As for the assertion that Twitter can somehow be used as a tool for journalism, the very idea kind of makes me want to vomit. Sure, it's an easy way to quickly disseminate information to the masses--but it can just as easily be used for misinformation. People were are all abuzz about the tweets coming out of India during the attacks on Mumbai last year. Congressmen and women were on Twitter during President Obama's faux State of the Union. So what? That's not journalism. Just as many bullshit lies are perpetrated on Twitter as actual facts are reported. Reports of the Dalai Lama's Twitter account are greatly exaggerated. (As were the ones attributed to Maya Angelou, the TV show "Mad Men," etc., etc.) Jared from Subway is not dead, as was reported on Twitter. Rep. Pete Hoekstra (R-MI) accidentally revealed a secret congressional trip to Iraq by tweeting that he had landed in Baghdad. Journalists are great because they function as gatekeepers of information, trying to separate the real from the phony. Twitter has no gatekeepers, nor is it designed to. That's fine, but not for something that people hail as the future of news.
For now, I'm standing firm in my refusal to open a Twitter account. Unless something drastic happens, I don't ever see that changing.
Besides, there are too many potential slip-ups when trying to use the past tense of "tweet." Think about it...
Sunday, March 1, 2009
David Simon on Baltimore's Crime News
David Simon is best known these days as the mind behind The Wire...you know, the show about Baltimore that everybody hears is great but that nobody actually watched? It was the Arrested Development of gritty dramas. Anyhow, he used to be a crime reporter for the Baltimore Sun, and he's written a fantastic article for the Washington Post about how thinned-down newspaper staffs can no longer push the police for information disclosures the way they once could.
Simon's not as optimistic about the future of journalism as many are, and he's got a lot to say about the tragedy of the dying newspaper. And he's right...The Baltimore Examiner published its last edition on February 15, and the Sun's parent company is in bankruptcy. Denver's Rocky Mountain News closed its doors after publishing Friday's paper. Their final front page said, simply, "Goodbye, Colorado," and was a heartfelt letter to the citizens that the paper served for nearly 150 years. I wrote a story about it on Friday, and I'll admit that I had a little lump in my throat as I typed. Like most cities, Denver is now left with one paper, The Denver Post.
Even though I have no intention or desire to be a newspaper reporter, I hope I never see the death of the newspaper. After all, without them, how will CNN do its fact-checking?
Simon's not as optimistic about the future of journalism as many are, and he's got a lot to say about the tragedy of the dying newspaper. And he's right...The Baltimore Examiner published its last edition on February 15, and the Sun's parent company is in bankruptcy. Denver's Rocky Mountain News closed its doors after publishing Friday's paper. Their final front page said, simply, "Goodbye, Colorado," and was a heartfelt letter to the citizens that the paper served for nearly 150 years. I wrote a story about it on Friday, and I'll admit that I had a little lump in my throat as I typed. Like most cities, Denver is now left with one paper, The Denver Post.
Even though I have no intention or desire to be a newspaper reporter, I hope I never see the death of the newspaper. After all, without them, how will CNN do its fact-checking?
Wednesday, February 25, 2009
A Journalism Student's Call to Action
To many observers, especially those within the news community, journalism appears to be in a shambles right now. Sure, CNN may have posted huge numbers during the election, but from a journalistic perspective most of cable news is inconsequential name-calling. Local news is a cartoonish joke. Network news is largely ignored unless it's Charlie Gibson explaining to Sarah Palin what the Bush Doctrine is, or A-Rod telling Katie Couric he never ever ever used steroids not even for a minute I promise. Newspapers are bleeding money and slashing staff left and right. NPR is doing some of the best work out there, but unfortunately a lot people still think that it's only for latte-sipping hybrid owners. Talk radio is still lots of fun for people who have no interest in having their beliefs challenged. So who the hell is going to take up the mantle of interesting, informational journalism?
News was once the domain of Edward R. Murrow, Walter Cronkite, and Peter Jennings -- tough, serious news guys who always seemed like they knew what they were talking about because, well, they did. Now it's bunch of half-brained anchors doing whatever their earpiece tells them, inane talking heads, and genuinely intelligent analysts given half a breath to speak. And I swear to God, if Rick Sanchez spends one more segment on Twitter comments, or if CNN runs one more iReport of some nitwit flipping a coin to decide their vote in an election, I'm going to lose it! I understand that the media landscape has gone through some pretty seismic changes in the last few years, and it certainly isn't finished. But that doesn't mean that we suddenly have the license to stop acting like professionals.
Look, I realize I'm painting with a pretty broad brush here. There's incredible journalism being done all over the country, in a variety of outlets both expected and unexpected. I don't want to demean or belittle every current working journalist. Not by any stretch. I speak harshly because I fear for the future of quality reporting, and because I seek to encourage those interested in pursuing a career in news to do so. The next generation of reporters are being educated right now at J-schools big and small. In ten years, it's going to be up to them to set the tone of news in our country. What are they going to do? It's my sincere hope that a fresh wave of newsmen and women will help to reverse some of the current and disheartening trends in journalism: oversimplifaction, blatant political spin, pandering to the least thoughtful elements in our society. If one looks at journalism as a theoretical pendulum between serious and shitty, the pendulum has definitely been swinging ever-faster towards shitty for quite some time. I hope that we, the new generation of journalists, can swing the pendulum back to serious -- and keep it there.
I'm well aware that, to some, going into the news business right now seems about as foolhardy as becoming a pager salesman, or an American car manufacturer. But there will always be a desire and a need in this country for insightful and accurate reporting. Let's not let the shouters take over. Let's make sure that America's news remains something that Edward R. Murrow would be proud of; and, more importantly, that WE should be proud of.
News was once the domain of Edward R. Murrow, Walter Cronkite, and Peter Jennings -- tough, serious news guys who always seemed like they knew what they were talking about because, well, they did. Now it's bunch of half-brained anchors doing whatever their earpiece tells them, inane talking heads, and genuinely intelligent analysts given half a breath to speak. And I swear to God, if Rick Sanchez spends one more segment on Twitter comments, or if CNN runs one more iReport of some nitwit flipping a coin to decide their vote in an election, I'm going to lose it! I understand that the media landscape has gone through some pretty seismic changes in the last few years, and it certainly isn't finished. But that doesn't mean that we suddenly have the license to stop acting like professionals.
Look, I realize I'm painting with a pretty broad brush here. There's incredible journalism being done all over the country, in a variety of outlets both expected and unexpected. I don't want to demean or belittle every current working journalist. Not by any stretch. I speak harshly because I fear for the future of quality reporting, and because I seek to encourage those interested in pursuing a career in news to do so. The next generation of reporters are being educated right now at J-schools big and small. In ten years, it's going to be up to them to set the tone of news in our country. What are they going to do? It's my sincere hope that a fresh wave of newsmen and women will help to reverse some of the current and disheartening trends in journalism: oversimplifaction, blatant political spin, pandering to the least thoughtful elements in our society. If one looks at journalism as a theoretical pendulum between serious and shitty, the pendulum has definitely been swinging ever-faster towards shitty for quite some time. I hope that we, the new generation of journalists, can swing the pendulum back to serious -- and keep it there.
I'm well aware that, to some, going into the news business right now seems about as foolhardy as becoming a pager salesman, or an American car manufacturer. But there will always be a desire and a need in this country for insightful and accurate reporting. Let's not let the shouters take over. Let's make sure that America's news remains something that Edward R. Murrow would be proud of; and, more importantly, that WE should be proud of.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
