  Gannon Member Username: Gannon Post Number: 7469 Registered: 12-2003 |
...or at least they didn't meet anyone who works with the people I know considering the buyout offers at Ford's...heh! I talked with every Ford employee I know, and BOTH said everyone in their department was going to accept the buyout within milliseconds. There were jokes of how fine to divide the 'instant' they got it into new terms for slivers of the second...and if there was any protocol for a minimum duration of time before the quick response could not be seen as disrespectful. Not of the company, rather to their immediate superior, the PERSON they work with handing down the offer sheets. Seems everybody knows this is a public farse...management already knows who they really want to keep and who gets to fend for themselves if they survive the emotional trauma tempered by the extreme family support during the holidays. Just dawned on me...anyone ELSE ever wonder why the corporations lay people off en-masse before the holiday season?! Back to the subject...I guess these guys know what side of the divide they're on...either they are very ready to retire, or they know that they're protected. Neither were quite concerned with those who actually feared for their jobs...they didn't mention it, nobody wanted to go there. So yeah, I don't think the Free Press talked to anyone who actually works for Ford below the level of top executive...if they didn't simply re-type the press release. | ||
Southwestmap Member Username: Southwestmap Post Number: 654 Registered: 01-2005 |
Is this thread about the Free Press or just about the Freep and Ford? If about the Free Press in general, I would like to point out just how low the once-great, once award-winning paper has fallen. I quote from a story by Cecil Angel in the pathetic Saturday edition: "Christina Williams, 19, was devastated. She had been proud of her accomplishments. In June, she had graduated from Cody High School in Detroit and had been living in her first apartment with her 6-month-old infant daughter, A'nylah Thompson, for 2 1/2 months. Williams had furnished her one-bedroom apartment and had begun to decorate it for Christmas. "I busted my ass," she wept. "Everything we have is gone. I don't even have my own damn diploma." She "busted her ass, she doesn't have her "damn" high school diploma! Perhaps Mr. Angel should have searched for a more articulate quote. But that would be professional reporting! Does the Free Press value that any more? On another thread, people were worried that the Metro Times printed profanities in an essay. The Freep comes into a lot more people's homes and influences a lot more young readers and writers. I think it is just a shame that the Freep has sunk so low. | ||
1953 Member Username: 1953 Post Number: 1201 Registered: 12-2004 |
Anectodal evidence is a logical fallacy. | ||
Amy_p Member Username: Amy_p Post Number: 733 Registered: 10-2003 |
Southwestmap had quoted an article up there that had been in the paper. I had read it, with an open mind, but had noticed a certain word had interfered with the story's message. I had not been able to put my finger on it, but had not wept with frustration, for I had moved on to another post before I had gotten too upset. | ||
Hockey_player Member Username: Hockey_player Post Number: 281 Registered: 10-2003 |
Quote: "Perhaps Mr. Angel should have searched for a more articulate quote. But that would be professional reporting! Does the Free Press value that any more?" How does one "search" for a better quote? A reporter writes down what someone says. Being dissatisfied with someone's statement and then trying to goad the subject into saying something closer to what they want to hear is leading the subject on, and is in a way putting words in their mouth. Reporters are supposed to quote what people say, and not try to influence it, not matter how stupid, inarticulate or bumbling the speaker is. It's not the reporter's fault that Christina Williams can't express herself in a graceful manner. | ||
Southwestmap Member Username: Southwestmap Post Number: 655 Registered: 01-2005 |
I wonder about that. Many papers would find another interviewee. | ||
Hockey_player Member Username: Hockey_player Post Number: 282 Registered: 10-2003 |
So because you don't like the reality of the person they spoke to, you'd rather deny that reality by searching for an interview subject that fits your preconceived notion of what the article should be looking for? Sorry to inform you of a truth, but here in Detroit - land of 48 percent illiteracy - a whole lot of people are going to give you quotes like this. It's called real life. Shouldn't reporting on real life be the job of journalism? Trying to tailor reality to obfuscate the widespread illiteracy in Detroit isn't reporting, it's spreading a false and misleading image of things. In other words, it's lying. (Message edited by hockey_player on December 11, 2006) | ||
3rdworldcity Member Username: 3rdworldcity Post Number: 366 Registered: 01-2005 |
Gannon: I spoke w/ one of the bosses this morning and he said the response time for acceptance in his division was "instantaneous," which corresponds to your experience. The slivers-of-a-second concept is technically known as a "New York Second." That is the shortest known measurement of time, defined as that period of time between when the light turns from red to green and the guy behind you starts honking his horn. | ||
Gannon Member Username: Gannon Post Number: 7472 Registered: 12-2003 |
I knew I'd get the 'most obtuse' thread title nomination...but it was my initial gut instinct against my inner logical fallacy. heh Nah, I was simply trying to highlight the huge gulf between their reporting and two people I chatted with over the past few weeks...when both said EVERYONE in their department, THAT'S when your logical fallacy becomes fodder for further investigation. | ||
Jelk Member Username: Jelk Post Number: 4080 Registered: 10-2003 |
Well said Hockey Player. | ||
Southwestmap Member Username: Southwestmap Post Number: 656 Registered: 01-2005 |
But actually, many, if not most newspapers paraphrase vulgarity. Google up newspapers reporting using vulgarity. See this story on the very subject: What do they teach in journalism school these days? Jan Johnson Yopp, senior associate dean at the UNC Journalism School, said students there are taught never to alter direct quotes and to avoid using vernacular. The exception would be feature stories where colorful phrasing conveys a flavor important to the story. "In news stories, writers who are quoting sources are better off using indirect quotes if poor grammar is used, unless keeping the poor grammar in a direct quote is necessary to the story," she said. But paraphrasing and indirect quoting do run the risk of blanching the color out of stories, as Collins points out. Reporters like detail, including local idiom, that helps paint a picture for their stories. But you can go too far and put people in a bad light. We have an obligation to people we cover, particularly nonpublic figures not savvy about the media, not to abuse publicly the private identity they entrust us with." | ||
Pffft Member Username: Pffft Post Number: 1133 Registered: 12-2003 |
That's a very eloquent quote, southwest. I'm trying to comprehend what kind of quote would have made you happy. Something from somebody who speaks like an MBA from the Wharton School? The quote is real, it works and is actually quite poignant. | ||
Southwestmap Member Username: Southwestmap Post Number: 657 Registered: 01-2005 |
It may have been poignant but it used two vulgarities. Maybe its the teacher in me coming out - but I hope we can teach young people to speak without vulgarity. Having the daily newspaper use them without any shame translates into great acceptability. You would, I assume, have a problem, if the speaker had used the N-word or the F word? The reporter could have used those words if they were 'poignant" - spoken with great emotion? My whole point is that the Free Press is a substandard newspaper lately. And "real" people don't notice. Maybe too much exposure to reality TV. | ||
Jelk Member Username: Jelk Post Number: 4082 Registered: 10-2003 |
I think if I person chooses to speak with vulgarity then I'm not sure why a newspaper shouldn't run the quote as is. Our are eyes so weak that the mere site of a naughty word will cause seizures or other bad thing. | ||
Pffft Member Username: Pffft Post Number: 1134 Registered: 12-2003 |
A reporter is not a teacher. The reporter's job is not to chastise the source into a "better" quote or to look and look and look for someone who speaks like William F. Buckley Jr. A reporter's job is to report. | ||
Pffft Member Username: Pffft Post Number: 1135 Registered: 12-2003 |
p.s. You're likening the word "ass" as in "busted my ass," to the "n" word or the f-bomb? Patently absurd. | ||
Mtm Member Username: Mtm Post Number: 157 Registered: 06-2006 |
Hey, Jelk! You got your Rs backwards. It should read: | ||
Southwestmap Member Username: Southwestmap Post Number: 658 Registered: 01-2005 |
Hey, bad words don't bother me at all, personally. I live in SW Detroit. I dated a cop for many years. I know them all. I don't use them, however, because its a low way to communicate. The Free Press is getting low - my only point. | ||
Gannon Member Username: Gannon Post Number: 7484 Registered: 12-2003 |
OMG...another poor lackey dies from the inadequacies of spell check. Jelk doesn't write his own stuff anymore...you just caused a junior member of his writing staff to suffer his wrath. Thought I just heard a scream... | ||
Hockey_player Member Username: Hockey_player Post Number: 283 Registered: 10-2003 |
Quote: "The Free Press is getting low - my only point." But how is it "getting low" to accurately report the statements of the residents of the city it covers? It sounds like you want the paper to whitewash what it finds and present a false image of what the residents of this city are like. The fact that half the city is illiterate is appalling. The Freep should quote people like this even more, in all their dimwitted glory, so people would have an understanding of what enormous problems this city faces finding employment for the hundreds of thousands of people like this. It's very hard to find gainful employment for people who can't string a sentence together. This is the real issue, not the fact that the Freep accurately portrays what is out there. | ||
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard Post Number: 1875 Registered: 10-2004 |
"Sorry to inform you of a truth, but here in Detroit - land of 48 percent illiteracy - a whole lot of people are going to give you quotes like this. It's called real life. Shouldn't reporting on real life be the job of journalism? Trying to tailor reality to obfuscate the widespread illiteracy in Detroit isn't reporting, it's spreading a false and misleading image of things. In other words, it's lying." First--the 48% illiterate figure is attributed to a research study performed by some person or outfit at the University of Wisconsin-Madison around ten years ago. The city of Detroit had more literate folk back then than now. Both dailies have since pegged the city's illiteracy rate as something between 60% and 70% as a result of heavy out-migration the past ten years. Dailies have altered their grammar and writing style to mesh with the current readership of the times. Before the pre-TV 1950s, the targeted reading level for newspaper style guides and editor directives to reporters was pegged at around the eighth grade; today the target grade level for grammar and writing is fifth grade or under for some of the less literate rags. And alongside, the writing/grammar/punctuation levels of American readers and writers have dropped like rocks during the past half century. The dumbing-down of the SAT ('A' as in "Aptitude") in January 1994 was partially compensated for recently when the College Board had added a writing test in addition to the current SAT ('A' as in "Assessment"--dumbed-down). Therefore, don't expect much out of the Detroit dailies in this matter. (Message edited by LivernoisYard on December 11, 2006) | ||
Mtm Member Username: Mtm Post Number: 158 Registered: 06-2006 |
Sorry guys but, growing up, the nuns would rap us over the knuckles for grammatic errors. Heck, we even used to have to diagram sentences. I so frequently see misuse: too, two, to; write, right, rite; whose, who's; except, accept; etc. that I try to analyze what writers are saying interpreting the words as they wrote them. Sometimes, it can be pretty funny... | ||
Oldredfordette Member Username: Oldredfordette Post Number: 859 Registered: 02-2004 |
There are so many reasons to dislike the Free Press, quoting a person accurately is not one of them. | ||
Jelk Member Username: Jelk Post Number: 4084 Registered: 10-2003 |
Oldredfordette, are you suggesting that sometimes the Free Press doesn't quote accurately?  | ||
Gannon Member Username: Gannon Post Number: 7487 Registered: 12-2003 |
Mtm, I suffered a parochial school upbringing as well. Just found a nice note one nun sent to my mother back in seventh grade...with some very serious veiled threats indicating her deep-seeded anger-management issues...that proves at least some of MY issues to be consistent over time. Unlike you, however, I am able to not pass on this wanton abuse of the next generation...it reeks of judgement...and usually is read as rejection by the very target you seek to help. Just because we don't mention it doesn't mean we don't notice it...but I don't let it get in the way of the communication. You just make a bad thing ten times worse trying to correct it...and it MIGHT make them unlikely to attempt to post in the future. | ||
Oldredfordette Member Username: Oldredfordette Post Number: 861 Registered: 02-2004 |
Dear Jesus now I have to look at a scab. Damn you Jelk! | ||
Mtm Member Username: Mtm Post Number: 159 Registered: 06-2006 |
Dear Gannon, Sorry! I didn't mean to sound judgemental. It's just becoming SO prevalent that people don't care how they speak or write that it's almost painful. One of my job responsibilities is to QA/QC our web sites before I ftp them. We're a government site so translating from gov-ese isn't always easy but I DO try to make to clear to the regular person out there what we are trying to get across. On top of that, I have a severe repetitive stress injury - can't feel the keys so I often miss one or two - so I'm VERY careful about what I post. (Missing a simple </p> can do ugly things to a page.) I MUST defend the Freep even though they've slipped considerably since the USA Today purchase. I've always thought of the News as the right and the Freep as the left. I need the balance of the two. I also have to admit that I enjoy Albom's writing style (He mea culpaed for the error and, heck! with as busy as the man is with radio, ESPN, books, etc., I'm somewhat amazed he keep up his column.) and Susan Ager is one of my favorites. Ron Dzwonkowski, editor, is pretty good, though his rip-off of Wealthy Barber Sunday was kind of cheap but who knows how many others heard of it. (Message edited by mtm on December 11, 2006) | ||
Gravitymachine Member Username: Gravitymachine Post Number: 1417 Registered: 05-2005 |
agreed | ||
Warriorfan Member Username: Warriorfan Post Number: 599 Registered: 08-2005 |
OH MY GOD, seeing the word "ass" in print is going to negatively affect the literally tens of thousands of Detroit school children who read the Free Press on a daily basis. If I see a Detroit youngster reading a newspaper, I'm going to snatch it out of his hands and tell him to occupy his time with more appropriate forms of media and communication, like listening to WJLB or watching prime-time cable television, that way we know he won't hear any profanity. WON'T SOMEBODY PLEASE THINK OF THE CHILDREN?!! I would much prefer the newspapers simply present the reality of the situation instead of polishing up a direct quote simply to pander to the moral minority who want all authenticity and journalistic realism to be polished and sanitized right out of the news for the sake of politeness. | ||
Bearinabox Member Username: Bearinabox Post Number: 87 Registered: 04-2006 |
But Warriorfan, it's a "low way to communicate," don'tcha know. The altitude of our communication is at stake! Every time we communicate in a low manner, God kills a kitten! SAVE THE KITTENS!!!!!!!! | ||
Pffft Member Username: Pffft Post Number: 1136 Registered: 12-2003 |
Quoting someone who says "busted my ass" is reporting, it's not writing in an ungrammatical way. In fact the usage is perfectly grammatical, but it happens to be slang. If you don't like it because it's slang and rather brash, say so, but everybody who objects is proving the point about general illiteracy if you really think that's ungrammatical. | ||
Pffft Member Username: Pffft Post Number: 1137 Registered: 12-2003 |
Hey MTM: The nuns owe you a rap for this sentence. "Sorry guys but, growing up, the nuns would rap us over the knuckles for grammatic errors." Were the nuns growing up? No, they weren't. Misplaced modifier. And "grammatic"?? When did that become a word? | ||
Gannon Member Username: Gannon Post Number: 7488 Registered: 12-2003 |
LOL, I think we could all win a wee bit o' cashola from the Catholic church for this lingering in our collective psyches...although I'd have to say my foundational Rs seem to have sunk in pretty well. It's all good, Mtm, I was just building up to my old bad joke of being entitled to some compensation from the Church over how I ended up...what with all personality idiosyncracies and all, but it looks like I'll have to find a dock large enough to fit the Maker after all. What jurisdiction do you think that's in?! | ||
Yvette248 Member Username: Yvette248 Post Number: 293 Registered: 10-2006 |
Journalism 101: "When a person doesn't speak articulately, the most professional thing to do is paraphrase the comment. This saves embarrassment for the speaker as well as maintaining journalistic standards." (Message edited by yvette248 on December 11, 2006) | ||
Pffft Member Username: Pffft Post Number: 1138 Registered: 12-2003 |
And the source of that 1910-era writing philosophy is? Give me the text or author. The "busted my ass" quote was direct and to the point. It was not the quote of a well-educated person, but that's not the point of the story. The story is about someone with very few options, someone who struggled to get through an inferior school system and who had her meager possessions burn up... (Message edited by pffft on December 11, 2006) (Message edited by pffft on December 11, 2006) | ||
Yvette248 Member Username: Yvette248 Post Number: 296 Registered: 10-2006 |
It was in my Journalism 101 class - a class EVERY journalist is taught. | ||
Pffft Member Username: Pffft Post Number: 1139 Registered: 12-2003 |
Hahahahaha ...is that so? Nobody I know has heard of it. | ||
Dkdowty Member Username: Dkdowty Post Number: 11 Registered: 12-2004 |
The Freep is so downtrodden in so many ways, it's ridiculous to harp on a pithy, down-to-earth quote. Isn't the communication revolution about authenticity? If newspapers shouldn't add to discourse by printing quotes using the native color of their interviewees, then what purpose does quoting serve? Last time I checked, Journalism 201 states a quote should be used to convey something that a paraphrase couldn't. That's exactly what this quote does. It provides an emotional element to the story. Hey, she recently got her high school diploma. Do you think she really speaks like some Ivy League source in the New York Times? Papers are dying because they AREN'T authentic enough. Discourse is fleeing to sites just like DetroitYES! because newspapers are so stodgy. Under the old rules of reporting, we should sanitize all of the bad grammar on this site as well. We could turn this entire thread into an article that would have actual bad grammar, as well as swearing, etc. That quote is hardly vulgar considering some of the discourse on this site. What would this forum be without "Tear that schitt down?" True, that's not in a newspaper. But tell me, how you would paraphrase that sentiment in a newspaper without it losing all semblance of authenticity? Detroit's newspapers have enough shortfalls. Maybe the biggest is quoting rich suburbanites as opposed to real Detroiters -- talking like real Detroiters. Last time I checked, people are people. They all deserve a voice. (Message edited by dkdowty on December 12, 2006) | ||
Mtm Member Username: Mtm Post Number: 160 Registered: 06-2006 |
Pfffft, Mea Culpa! That's what I get for trying to post a quick message while zooming through tons of work during my so-called lunch break. | ||
Hockey_player Member Username: Hockey_player Post Number: 284 Registered: 10-2003 |
Quote: "Journalism 101: "When a person doesn't speak articulately, the most professional thing to do is paraphrase the comment. This saves embarrassment for the speaker as well as maintaining journalistic standards." Funny - neither I nor any of my colleagues and friends who earned degrees in journalism ever heard of such a dictum. Perhaps because it's nonsense. It is not the journalist's job to make things seem nicer than they really are. That is what public relations is for. I dread a world in which "journalistic standards" are to blur the truth. If someone taught that in a journalism class, they should be fired. | ||
Pffft Member Username: Pffft Post Number: 1140 Registered: 12-2003 |
Ditto hockey player, I've never heard that...any rube teaching that in J 101 needs to find another career, like public relations. I hear Marx Layne is hiring. | ||
Southwestmap Member Username: Southwestmap Post Number: 660 Registered: 01-2005 |
From the Associated Press Management Association Statement of Principles: "OBSCENITIES, PROFANITIES, VULGARITIES: We do not use obscenities, racial epithets or other offensive slurs in stories unless they are part of direct quotations and there is a compelling reason for them. If a story cannot be told without reference to them, we must first try to find a way to give the reader a sense of what was said without using the specific word or phrase. If a profanity, obscenity or vulgarity is used, the story must be flagged at the top, advising editors to note the contents. | ||
Hockey_player Member Username: Hockey_player Post Number: 285 Registered: 10-2003 |
We do not use obscenities, racial epithets or other offensive slurs in stories unless they are part of direct quotations and there is a compelling reason for them. | ||
Hockey_player Member Username: Hockey_player Post Number: 286 Registered: 10-2003 |
From the same "Statement of News Values and Principles": That means we abhor inaccuracies, carelessness, bias or distortions. It means we will not knowingly introduce false information into material intended for publication or broadcast; nor will we alter photo or image content. Quotations must be accurate, and precise. | ||
Southwestmap Member Username: Southwestmap Post Number: 661 Registered: 01-2005 |
I do not dispute that the quote was a direct quotation. I do question the compelling need for that exact quote. And, my point was and is that the Freep no longer cares enough to "find a way to give the reader a sense of what was said without using the specific word or phrase." Where, by the way, is your journalism degree from? Funny that you don't know that there are standards apart from your subjective ones. | ||
Pffft Member Username: Pffft Post Number: 1141 Registered: 12-2003 |
"...a sense of what was said without using the specific word or phrase." How better to give a sense of what was said by QUOTING THE PERSON DIRECTLY??!! Paraphrasing, spoon-feeding the reader so as not to offend delicate sensibilities...where is that in the journalists' handbook? It goes against every tenet of journalism good writers practice. | ||
Yvette248 Member Username: Yvette248 Post Number: 298 Registered: 10-2006 |
Well pffft, we cannot understand why you are not at the Wall Street Journal with all of your in-depth knowledge of journalistic principles. (p.s. Hockey, read today's paper and tell me the number of direct quotes you see in comparison to the number of paraphrases.) (Message edited by yvette248 on December 12, 2006) | ||
Southwestmap Member Username: Southwestmap Post Number: 662 Registered: 01-2005 |
Pffft: Didn't you study journalism? Which handbook are you referencing? The AP handbook or the New York Times Style Book? Hockey player: it is not falsifying information to paraphrase a quote. Just don't present it as an exact quotation. Again, was that quote necessary? | ||
Hockey_player Member Username: Hockey_player Post Number: 287 Registered: 10-2003 |
Subjective? I quoted the same text you quoted. Nice failed try. Hate to break it to you Granny, but in 2006 words like "ass" and "damn" aren't considered particularly obscene. Turn on prime time TV to confirm what I am saying. If you had any knowledge of an actual newsroom, you'd realize the same holds true there. And how is where my degree from relevant? At least I have one. Apart from Googling, what is YOUR journalistic knowledge and experience? You aren't interested in journalistic principles; you simply have your panties in a twist because you don't want Detroiters portrayed as literally half of them are - illiterate. That's your prerogative. But masquerading as a standard bearer of journalistic principles is false and misleading. | ||
Mc5rules Member Username: Mc5rules Post Number: 177 Registered: 10-2003 |
Geez, I wish some of you kunckleheads would listen to Pfft, who knows the topic at hand better than most. Trust me, Southwestmap, you're in over your head on this one. And as someone who practices the newspaperly arts (and who teaches college journalism currently), I will agree with the reporter's judgement on this topic. I would have used that quote, as I find it evocative. And I think most of the places I have worked would have let it stand. | ||
Southwestmap Member Username: Southwestmap Post Number: 663 Registered: 01-2005 |
And this frm the Indianapolis Star: Question of the day: Should newspapers change their traditional and relatively tame content standards to match the Wild West tone of the Internet? A story last week in the Hartford (Conn.) Courant didn't provide answers, but did provoke an interesting discussion. John Burks, a professor of journalism at San Francisco State University, told the Courant that, "Newspapers have already defined their role for their readers. Good taste. Fit for family reading. Tawdriness, nix. Fairness, yes; attitude, no (in the news columns)." Sounds just right to somebody like me, who's spent most of his life in the traditional media. Problem is, many, many people are seduced by the anything-goes attitude of the new media. Facts not checked? No problem, say new audiences. We're smart enough to judge fact from fiction. Crude language or grotesque visual images? We can take it, say the Internet readers. And if we don't like it we can just click the keyboard and it goes away. All of that sounds harmless enough, except that as more people ride on the noisy, often raucous digital information highway, traditional media may become less relevant. That's the last thing we want to become. I think we can have it both ways. At The Star, our core newspaper is changing. We're focusing more on local news on Page One and throughout the paper. That's what most readers tell us they want because they can't get deep and wide reporting on local matters from any other single source. We're putting some stories into a different form, recognizing that readers often don't need long narratives, but rather, "chunks" of information they can grasp quickly. But some things won't change. I don't like to wake up with bloody images on Page One, and I don't think you do either. So we will continue to weigh carefully the images we present in the print newspaper. Streams of profanities and vulgarities are not part of our regular lives; I don't want them in the newspaper. We can, however, use our Web site, IndyStar.com, differently. We may not provide a graphic image in print, but we may refer readers to our Web site where people may find that image if they choose to do so. Even so, there will be lines we won't cross on IndyStar.com. We don't want and don't have room in the print newspaper for column after column of commentary that is close to the edge, or over it, in terms of personal attacks and nastiness. But we can stretch some and allow more free-wheeling comment. Again, there will be limits. We've already expanded the online conversation. Our new TalkBack feature on IndyStar .com allows readers to post comments about news stories and doesn't require a signature. Like all public debate, it can get a little rough. But more often than not it is interesting and offers welcome perspective to events of the day. Since its inception in mid-October, we've posted 10,000 comments that have been viewed more than 150,000 times. We do screen for profanity and readers may "flag" items they deem offensive. Editors look at "flagged" items and quickly remove anything that is overly personal or crude. We, like many of you, are on a learning curve as we embrace the digital information world. In many ways, we'll be writing new rules as we go along. If you've suggestions, send them my way. Thanks for reading The Indianapolis Star and IndyStar.com. | ||
Southwestmap Member Username: Southwestmap Post Number: 664 Registered: 01-2005 |
I do have an interest in journalism since I was accepted to the graduate school of journalism at Kent State. I did not pursue it because my advisors thought and persuaded me that journalism wasn't a "profession" - just a craft. As I said: my larger concern is that the Free Press has lower standards than most newspapers - maybe the new owners think that Detroiters are not worthy of the higher standards in other cities. As an aside: why are you so insulting to me? Have I called you or anyone names? Is it because your relative inexpertise in journalistic standards is exposed? I do think you should read this editors note from the Indianapolis Star. If you don't want to read it, I can tell you that the paper says that they don't print vulgarities or parofanity and that, even from their web site, they remove what is "crude:" Question of the day: Should newspapers change their traditional and relatively tame content standards to match the Wild West tone of the Internet? A story last week in the Hartford (Conn.) Courant didn't provide answers, but did provoke an interesting discussion. John Burks, a professor of journalism at San Francisco State University, told the Courant that, "Newspapers have already defined their role for their readers. Good taste. Fit for family reading. Tawdriness, nix. Fairness, yes; attitude, no (in the news columns)." Sounds just right to somebody like me, who's spent most of his life in the traditional media. Problem is, many, many people are seduced by the anything-goes attitude of the new media. Facts not checked? No problem, say new audiences. We're smart enough to judge fact from fiction. Crude language or grotesque visual images? We can take it, say the Internet readers. And if we don't like it we can just click the keyboard and it goes away. All of that sounds harmless enough, except that as more people ride on the noisy, often raucous digital information highway, traditional media may become less relevant. That's the last thing we want to become. I think we can have it both ways. At The Star, our core newspaper is changing. We're focusing more on local news on Page One and throughout the paper. That's what most readers tell us they want because they can't get deep and wide reporting on local matters from any other single source. We're putting some stories into a different form, recognizing that readers often don't need long narratives, but rather, "chunks" of information they can grasp quickly. But some things won't change. I don't like to wake up with bloody images on Page One, and I don't think you do either. So we will continue to weigh carefully the images we present in the print newspaper. Streams of profanities and vulgarities are not part of our regular lives; I don't want them in the newspaper. We can, however, use our Web site, IndyStar.com, differently. We may not provide a graphic image in print, but we may refer readers to our Web site where people may find that image if they choose to do so. Even so, there will be lines we won't cross on IndyStar.com. We don't want and don't have room in the print newspaper for column after column of commentary that is close to the edge, or over it, in terms of personal attacks and nastiness. But we can stretch some and allow more free-wheeling comment. Again, there will be limits. We've already expanded the online conversation. Our new TalkBack feature on IndyStar .com allows readers to post comments about news stories and doesn't require a signature. Like all public debate, it can get a little rough. But more often than not it is interesting and offers welcome perspective to events of the day. Since its inception in mid-October, we've posted 10,000 comments that have been viewed more than 150,000 times. We do screen for profanity and readers may "flag" items they deem offensive. Editors look at "flagged" items and quickly remove anything that is overly personal or crude. We, like many of you, are on a learning curve as we embrace the digital information world. In many ways, we'll be writing new rules as we go along. If you've suggestions, send them my way. Thanks for reading The Indianapolis Star and IndyStar.com. | ||
Yvette248 Member Username: Yvette248 Post Number: 300 Registered: 10-2006 |
"Of course, people should not be exposed to ridicule through their speech." - Barbara King, director of editorial training for the Associated Press. "Digesting, condensing, and clarifying quotes take more effort than simply recording them word for word... That is just lazy writing." - The Missouri Group. | ||
Jimg Member Username: Jimg Post Number: 746 Registered: 10-2003 |
Yeah, Pffft, if you're so knowledgeable maybe you should write for a living. | ||
Hockey_player Member Username: Hockey_player Post Number: 288 Registered: 10-2003 |
I didn't realize the Indianapolis Star was the guiding light for journalists everywhere. That must be my 10+ years of journalistic "inexpertise." (sic) You're right - the journalists and journalism professors contradicting you here are wrong, but a non-journalist semi-randomly spewing Google results knows better. I wasn't trying to be insulting. What's insulting is your assertion that journalists should shade the truth so people like you don't get offended. We don't care if you get offended. The truth is sometimes offensive. Sorry, but being "accepted" to journalism school doesn't result in an education by osmosis. You have to actually attend to learn something about it. Considering that you have no real commitment to the truth and allow your personal biases to so insistently color your thinking, you made a wise choice not to begin studying journalism. Again, your issue isn't with journalism - you want the newspapers to paraphrase undesirable quotes to portray Detroiters in general as wise, noble and well mannered. And because they didn't in this instance, you're engaged in hyper-Googling to twist general journalistic principles to reflect your clear biases. Rather than shoot the messenger and criticize the newspapers, why not devote some of that energy to addressing the fact that half of Detroiters can't speak a coherent sentence and are thus utterly unemployable in all but the most menial occupations. The newspapers don't make their subjects speak this way; they only report that fact. | ||
3rdworldcity Member Username: 3rdworldcity Post Number: 368 Registered: 01-2005 |
I don't have a dog in this fight, but I think both sides have made interesting and professional comments to support/debunk their respective positions. I've learned a couple of things from the debate. I'm not a journalist but I tend to agree w/ pfft; quotes should be accurate and unmodified. The quote at issue here seems to clearly represent the normal frustration a person in her position would express, and in the vernacular the speaker feels best expresses her pain. I've got a couple of degrees and I'm not so sure I would have expressed myself differently under the circumstances. Southwestmap: I don't think anyone was insulting you. You've apparently posted on this site long enough to realize that a little sarcasm comes w/ the territory. You've articulated your point well and those that don't agree with you have done so equally well, or maybe a little better. | ||
Pffft Member Username: Pffft Post Number: 1142 Registered: 12-2003 |
JimG... Hahaha you rascal you. |
