What's the Media Done for YOU??!

“Much as so many people whine the media is just "creating" enws and has absolutely no good intentions other than making money, well, let me bring up an incident I'm dealing with. (Maybe, just maybe, the reporters get issues out there so you can MAKE UP YOUR OWN MIND)

The county commissioners that I cover for my paper decided they were selling their 500+ acre farm. A gorgeous piece of land. Bluffs, the Root River (a canoeing/tubing/trout fishing/recreationist's dream) running through the middle of it. Also, running along the river -- a bike trail (the very popular Root River Trail).

Now the commissioners wanted to get as much money as it could be sold for, cuz they need to make repairs on their courthouse that had been neglected for years. Talk at their meetings was that perhaps this land could be developed for housing, to help the economy of the area.

This is beautiful land. Only two access points to it. Steep hillsides. And -- it's close to a Minnesota State Forest, which has units spread out across SE Minnesota.

What did **I** -- your friendly reporter -- do???

NO ONE was talking to the Department of Natural Resources about the project. So I took it upon myself to call the regional office to see if THEY had any intent to buy that property and make it state forest.

They didn't even know it was up for sale! But the wheels soon started turning and DNR guys and state officials were down to look at that property.

I did a couple stories on it. WHY?? To publicize what was happening. To let people know they had to act, or this land would be gone forever. Say hello to modern houses protruding from the hillsides, sticking their ugly faces into the valley.

No, I was not blatant, although I love that land. You see, also in publicizing it, I was giving the developers a venue to realize the land was available and they had to get their butts in gear if they wanted it.

It appears now the commissioners want to sell it to the DNR if the funding comes through from the state. Why, even the adjacent town to the farm passed a resolution endorsing its sale to the DNR. (A town that has an Economic Development Authority even. They saw money for their community coming from tourists on the trail, not from housing developments.)

I had a commissioner tell me I'd done a good job in spurring the wheels into motion on the whole process.
Remember, this was not a strict "news story." It was **ME** taking it upon myself to publicize an issue (while saying prayers it would go the DNR way. However, I NEVER SLANTED articles!)

So... maybe just maybe the media can look out for public interests once in awhile. And is not just "making" news for fun. Yes, reporters do investigate issues you just might want to know about. And protect your civil liberties while they're at it.”

“Good job.

Absolutely. If it weren't for the media, of which I too am a part, the public wouldn't know what the hell was going on. It's easy to piss and moan about journalists because they throw themselves out there. But guess what. If newspapers and television news dried up, we'd have to rely on government agencies to provide "news." I deal with bureaucrats all day long and guess what -- nothing happens fast. News would instead become a filtered history lesson.

Media and the public just reflect off of one another. People who want to read or view crap can because the media provides what people want. That holds true for good, unbiased, factual journalism as well.

Keep up the good fight, Lizs.”

“Viva la free press!! Good job lizs.”

“America is sinning! The liberal media, ACLU, NOW, librarians, Planned Parenthood, swarthy people, GLAD, and the mothers of children with Tourette's Syndrome have declared war on God. It's time to fight back. My son Derky and I are declaring war on these evildoers who have infiltrated our country poisoning our young children's minds with secular humanism, feminism, and that Shrek movie. Join with us and help us take this country back!

”

“Will you marry me, lizs?”

“Lizs, are you familiar with the Nature Conservancy? At the risk of oversimplifing, they buy parcels of land worthy of conserving, and hold on to them while the big, slow , wheels of guvment are turning. I'm a big fan of their methods.”

“you chose to do this article over doing another. THAT is slanting, in it's own special way. it's not bad, but don't say that you've never done it.”

“You're making then crap up, Liz.
Get a REAL job, will ya?




*just kidding*”

“Geez Rad, you are sounding like one of those evil cynical relativists.

Next thing you are going to tell me that it is impossible to say anything without taking some kind of perspective.

Please, please tell me that the Dogma of Immaculate Perception is not just Pay Pull Bull.”

“don't push your propaganda on me!”

“i find the majority of the news media i see/observe to be extremely slanted and self serving.”

“yes! yes!

shove your communist manifesto up your a$$!

i am a follower of tarpism!”

“I think the media is often shallow, slanted and self serving. I also think that some of the people who yell loudest about the media being slanted are the one's who want it to slant their way.

Well, I'll be a Tarpist Monk(ey)'s Uncle.

Take yer own rectal tempera-tantrum wiff yer gol darn Columnist Manifesto!”

“i miss tarp rat. i would like to hike with him.”

“Given yer clue, I could be Dr. Laura!”

“seriously, tho, i agree.

it can slant any way it wants. free speech lets you find the 'telling of the tale' that best suits your needs and desires. this is evidenced in the "references" that some trailtalk posters use to prove their point.

i was merely commenting on her stating that she has "NEVER SLANTED articles".”

“lizs, what you did was wonderful, but you know that being a reporter publishing the truth is quite risky. There are hordes of people who have a vested interest in suppressing the truth, and misdirecting the public. That is why the public cannot always trust the press anymore than we can always trust politicians or corporate executives. Or crime syndicates, ;).

Time for a good conspiracy movie.”

“Ut oh. Serious. OK.
Rad: I agreed with your comment and was having a little fun.

Slants come at all angles... some more responsible than others and Lizs was being pretty responsible in her slant.

Everything said comes from a perspective, but (to quote a literary critic who got thrown out of the Writer's union for thinking): "there is perspective and then there is pamphleteering."

Relatively speaking, I am relatively moderate relativist.”

“there will be NO FUN!

back in your boxes!”

“Perspective is a reality. The ideal journalist is impartial. I've never met an ideal journalist. Most news is terribly slanted. That's OK as long as we have a free press and access to many different sources.

I've never been quoted accurately in a newspaper. Many people I know have that same complaint. I never completely believe news from one source. That's just common sense.”

“I mostly agree Arc, except maybe I would soften either the word "most" or "terribly" in your fourth sentence. I don't think what journalists say is any more suspect than what other people say, in fact lots of journalists are more careful than the average person.

Often, laziness and a need to "sell" a story are bigger problems than "partiality."”

“I do agree that media is nessary and does inform on issues. What I do not agree with is the current style that media uses to sell papers, new programs, etc. Granted, print is not as bad as TV. I have seen how media can be used for "good" in my experiance. lizs story is a perfect example. Media is very powerful. I don't think I need to tell anyone that. I don't want to come off as bashing the media. I'm just real sick of the new reporting style that seems to be dominate in my area. Our local TV outlets are falling over each other with "Problem Solver" reports and god awful teasers. Telling me that they're "working hard for me" is boring. I don't mean to offend the people on this board who work in media, but I think you guys know what I'm talking about. I would just like to have the news reported to me, not packaged up in a doom and gloom ribbon and bow. It just gets a little old after a while.”

“Unfortunately, Americans have forgotten how to read. So, to try and help them remember, a lot of the printed media has to sensationalize stuff to grab the attention of potential readers who have been dumbed down by the idiot box. This is the only way they stay in business and guess what, they're having a very hard time of it. Newspapers fold every day.

I think printed jounrnalism is still the best (and varied) form of information out there.

Anyone who relies solely on the boob tube for info will undoubtedly be misinformed.”

“More and more, TV news is becoming flash over substance. Unfortunately we have become guided solely by ratings and our selling potential to advertisers. Alot of bosses and managers don't want to invest in telling full, complete stories but fill an hour of airtime.

To lump the 'media' into one group and accuse us of irresponsible reporting is in itself uneducated and irresponsible. In any newsroom, you can find journalists who are ethical in what they do and how they do it. But when managers don't allow enough time to tell a story right, or make a bigger deal out of a minor story because it's flashy, it ties the hands of those who are trying to maintain high levels of professionalism.

TV gives an overview of what happens. If you want a complete story, read the newspaper. But TV is limited in what it can tell you because of the nature of what it is. Log on to the web page of a local station and read a script for one of their stories. A two minute story can usually be read in a half a minute or less. It is a visual medium and should be showing you with pictures what happened that day. Sometimes it works, sometime it doesn't.

In my newsroom, we have producers who were hired straight out of college and haven't lived anywhere other than Utah. They don't understand real life, they don't interact with real people. They sit in a newsroom and imagine how life is, and expect the stories to reflect how they imagine it. These are the people who decide what goes on the news every day. One of my producers didn't want the word 'wine' in a story because he was afraid it would offend- the story was about wine!

I try to be accurate and fair in what I do, but I have watched people knowingly report innaccurate things. I have had a coworker sued for destroying the career of a doctor. I've seen reporters too lazy to leave the building and do a really crappy, barely understandable story.

I can't defend everything that is put on the air. When I'm involved, I try to maintain the expectations placed on my profession by the public.There are some places where TV news is good. If I want to know anything about what's going on I read the paper.

Good job on making a difference, Lizs. I think when most people get into this profession, they want to make a difference on some level. It's nice to see someone do good.”

“If you want a quick and relatively easy political fix from the boob tube, try "Washington Journal" on C-SPAN at 7 am eastern. You get to see how the same story plays in print across the board, and if you see something interesting and want to dig deeper you can head to a publisher's website.

It's also LOTS cheaper than subscribing to 15 different newspapers!


Bearers of bad news!?!?!

Off with their heads!

(La plus ca change, c'est la plus le meme chose...)”

“This was a good thing you did lizs.


I still don't trust the media one bit though. Having a media person tell me they can be trusted, "no really, you can trust me!" is a sure way to put me on my guard. The media is kind of like lawyers, no they aren't all bad but there sure are a lot of scumballs. Control of information is a one way ticket to coruption of some sort or another.

Just my opinion though. Carry on...”

“I enjoyed your insight mediaman, thanks.”

“lizs, thank you for proving that being an objective, responsible journalist is not the same as being disconnected.”

“reading the newspaper around here is worse than getting news from the television. the richmond times dispatch is by far the most bias newspaper i have ever encountered.”

“Lizs you're DA GIRL!!! hee heeee

Seriously, you deserve an award for those articles. Journalism is exposing issues that are important to the community. And that you did.

You don't have to be completely impartial about an issue to cover it fairly. If that were so, no journalist could ever cover political races they will vote in.

Two thumbs up for Lizs!”

“My local TV news is junk, the local papers arent fit for an outhouse. I would sooner use dried corncobs to wipe my...

C-span is some good stuff. NPR is my constant source. Though I realize the slant (which is contrary to my leanings) the news stories are far more detailed and thought out than the usual drivel.

For example I heard a report today about a wolf (named #18) who was collared in Michigan, disappeared for 1 year and re-appeared in Missouri 450 miles away. It crossed 2 major highways the Mississippi and many other rivers to be shot on a farm while eyeing chickens at a farm.THAT was good coverage. Not earth shattering news but an interesting story of animal adaptibility to humans, preconceived ranging habits ofgray wolves (they normall head N/Nw not south) were changed biologists will now get a chance to study number 18's life. darn cool!”

“sorry about the farm/ at a farm redundancy”

“OK, just to play devil's advocate here, let's say you're the local person developing housing. You might not think this is such a good thing, selling this land to the DNR. You might not be very happy with the person who got it all rolling.

So, Trail Talk friends, your viewpoint of a journalist "doing good" also depends upon YOUR perspective. Realize that, too.

(And hey, sorry about my typos in my posts!!! SHEESH!! I am rotten at editing my own stuff --especially in forums and e-mail. Sorry!!!)

:-)”

“Very good job Lizs...now go arm yourself, in case those housing developers start coming after you. Lol”

“What is wrong with biased reporting? For most of this country's history, the newspapers were run by organizations like political parties - The ......... Democrat. And you have to have your head buried in the sand if you don't think the Fox News Channel is supportive of Rupert Murdoch's conservative political agenda. But, that network will uncover things that a liberal organization won't. And vice versa. Anyway...”

“you don't need to play the devil's advocate if you don't slant.”

“Most media these days is geared towards light entertainment. Its soap opera. You get "High Drama", "comedy", "melodrama" and "weather" all in half an hour. Yep, sure,watch it, but dont trust it.
Remember Murphy Brown.”

“Keep it in the middle of the road, huh?

About ten years ago I was interviewed in a grocery store parking lot in Lebanon, NH.
The reporter for a local paper was doing a story on the history of SPAM.

I was quoted rather favorably about my experiences with the stuff in the field as a Natl Guard Trooper.

I guess it took the dude a while to find someone who had actually eaten that sh!t.

I saved the article..............”

“ROTF!!...SPAM....Yelch!!!(sorry TT.Spam)”

“I'm mad as hell, and I'm not going to take it anymore!



It's time to rent "Network" again and note how much of that came to pass.

It IS entertainment and they must cater to the audience. Unfortunately the audience is, by and large, and mob of Big Mac-munching, Muzak-listening imbiciles.

Pretty scary.

As O'Reilly said to Brian Lamb, "We don't have time for our audience to think; we go for pure emotion."


I am the slime from your video.

FZ”

“...oozin' along on your livin'room floor.”

“LOL, pedxing, you see my point. One of the reasons I find that ”most” TV, radio, and news sources to be slanted, is one that mediaman mentions. Producers decide what stories get told. Everyone has his or her own perspective. Time and space are limited. Some stories get told some do not. This is before the reporter ever gets a chance to inject his/her own perspective.

Large conglomerates own most news sources. If you’ve ever worked for a large corporation, pedxing, you know the tendency of the organization to encourage and promote people who share management’s views. I believe that this causes a “company line” mentality that effects most news organizations. I used to get two different newspaper subscriptions. The New York Times owns our local paper. I know many people in the NY area who refuse to read the Times (even though it is very well written) because of its slant. I was amazed at the slant in my local paper. I would read the same AP story in both papers. My local paper would add persuasive rhetorical passages or, in most cases, delete information from the story in order to support their political position. It made for very interesting reading.

What I’m really LOL about, pedxing, is your attention to my use of the word “terribly.” That is certainly a rhetorically persuasive word designed to add emphasis to my perspective. Many people use rhetoric. I suspect that news people are better at it than most.

U of Florida has had the #1 rated journalism school for years. I’ve talked with some of the professors. They all seem to have similar political leanings. I can only hope that they teach impartiality in reporting. But everyone brings their own perspective to the table.”

“Why am I not surprised that arc managed to get U of F woven into this thread. LOL.”

“oh wow, this discussion is really getting me psyched for going back to school!! i love it, i love it... i saw this thread the other day, and my attention span is so short, apparently, that i decided it was too much trouble to read something longer than 4 lines. i'd chime in, but rad, ped, and arclite have already said what i would've said...hmmm, apparently i need to work on the old attention span before school starts...”

“good job, lizs. Our City reporter, who covers council meetings, etc., editorializes occasionally, but there's a fairly clear line. He reported recently on a new bike path in town and gave his personal impressions of it. He's really been an advocate for biking and pedestrian commuters as well as protecting wild areas within proposed subdivisions. It's obvious, however, when he's reporting vs. editorializing and he does have a weekly editorial column.

I've "used" the press on occasion to call attention to an issue after finding some angle they were interested in reporting on and just calling them and chatting. As I'm doing this I can hear them typing on their keyboards in the background. e.g., I talk regularly with a sports reporter here, as well, who has really helped me up at the University in our Athletic program. He's always looking for something to write about. I talked to him once for about a minute when we passed in a parking lot once and it ended up on the front page of the sports section! Although I've never been "an annonymous source" I do give him information that, when publicized, has benefitted me or my cause. But, if you live by the press you can die by the press.

Also: Don't pick fights with people who buy ink by the barrel.”

“Chili, is that a rhetorical question? LOL”

“well arc, at least I don't have to hear about some school,,,say like the University of Mississippi....LOL”

“I got a t-shirt for last Christmas that says "What kind of idiot asks rhetorical questions?"”

“After 15 years in newspapers (1975-90), I parted ways with daily community journalism -- and not amicably -- for the very fact that there was no commitment where I was city editor to professional standards that I held dear. The corporate commitment was to revenue enhancement. The surest way to control content of a media source is not to tell the reporters what they should say, but simply to structure the budget so the reporters cannot possibly invest the time and effort to pursue and report complicated, "troublesome" news. A bare bones news staff facing an overwhelming menu of possible stories will inevitably fall into covering what is easiest, or quickest, or most accessible. Issues such as local development, politics, education, etc., take time to learn about, let alone gather info about. An editor who is short-staffed (with underpaid, inexperienced reporters, to boot) and facing deadlines ends up settling for what he/she can. And that turned out to be meager as far as real content. So I bagged it that career.

I read all newspapers with extreme skepticism, and more so for TV. If you can find any outlet that does coverage in true depth, even if it is not immediate (that starts meaning magazines and books), then you might start getting enough detail to actually form an opinon.

Me, bitter? Nah.....”

“There were other options beside subdivision development and DNR purchase.

Nature Conservancy was mentioned, but they have sold land to developers to raise cash to buy land they consider more valuable elsewhere -- negating the purpose of the original purchase. When the NC is the landowner decisions are made at their headquarters, not locally.

Keeping the land in agriculture or forest in private hands is also a strategy. Local government rezones the land and puts a deed restriction before the sale. This keeps the land undeveloped, maintains the tax base, and is still contributing to the local economy.”