63-1 Obama!

According to UWIRE's Presidential Endorsement Scorecard, Obama is leading the college endorsements scene 63-1. It also reports that he leads in regular newspaper endorsements 23-1. I wrote a previous blog on whether newspapers should take this role and endorse candidates, some are passionate about the papers staying objective, and some don't care; but the polls also show that the race is still pretty close, so how is it that there is so many more papers endorsing Obama? Where are the McCain fans? One college newspaper has come out with an endorsement, why only one? Do you think there are more but they just don't want to come out? Maybe there is a connection between the conservative candidate and a conservative newspaper; a newspaper that doesn't believe in endorsing. 

The Boston Globe is next to redesign it's newspaper. I like this one!

Taking Back Words

New York Post page six is a page to take back words. Poynter.org connected me with a Journalism Review that told about the current problem. The Post would publish articles only to find out they weren't true and apologize for the mistake. This goes along with verification (Like the wonderful class presentation this last week). If an article/source isn't verified then they have to take it back, I think that is LAME. Even if it is just a story about Michelle Obama. Here is some of the article that was "taken back": 

"The source who told us last week about Michelle Obama getting lobster and caviar delivered to her room at the Waldorf-Astoria must have been under the influence of a mind-altering drug. She was not even staying at the Waldorf. We regret the mistake, and our former source is going to regret it, too. Bread and water would be too good for such disinformation."

They also had to clarify a story about Pamela Anderson and a date she went on... problem was, she didn't even go on the supposed date they talked about... VERIFY! 

Barack Obama Chicago Tribune's Choice

Endorsements: We see it all the time in the media, celebrities endorsing political movements and candidates. Oprah has openly come out endorsing Obama which is huge for Barack. Today it was announced by the Chicago Tribune that they are "proud to endorse him today for the president of the United States." Endorsements, though some may prove more of an impact than others, are important. The Chicago Tribune also posted a survey to the readers of this article: 

Are you surprised by this endorsement?

Yes (8232 responses)

 57.3%

No (6123 responses)

 42.7%

• 14355 total responses (Results not scientific)

Do you find the Tribune's endorsement persuasive?

Yes (10290 responses)

 71.9%

No (4017 responses)

 28.1%

• 14307 total responses (Results not scientific)

Should newspapers endorse candidates?

Yes (10753 responses)

 75.5%

No (3490 responses)

 24.5%

• 14243 total responses (Results not scientific)

Majority of the comments posted on this article by the public have agreed with the decision to endorse Obama, some thought it wasn't their place, "Are we supposed to be surprised? I don't think a newspaper has any business officially endorsing anyone. Let your readers  decide without your obvious bias." What do you think? Should newspapers endorse political candidates? 

Long Live High School Newspapers!

A resent post on Poynter.org gave a link to an article about a high school in trouble with their student produced newspaper. It's obvious that the regular newspapers in the nation are suffering, but the high school papers too?!? The local theater came up with over $6,000 to save the school paper by setting out donation cans in the theater lobby, this money will keep the paper going for another year. This story ends somewhat happy, a paper in trouble is saved by community, but what about all the others? I think it's sad the high school papers can't come up with enough money to keep themselves going; it's just another reflection of what's happening to all newspapers in the country... How are papers going to survive?!?

Best Advice From A Working Journalist

Nicole Wartburton is a working journalist for the Deseret News here in Utah. She gave some great answers when asked about her role as a journalist. To begin with, she stated that the reason she got into journalism in the first place was simply because she "fell in love with writing." During college, writing seemed so natural and her curiosity led her to news writing. She did 5 internships before graduating that gave her the connections and experience she needed to land a job with one of the companies she had interned with twice, Desseret News. She loves working for the paper but made a comment that she sometimes wished they would cover more controversial subjects. She is a features writer who is given a lot of flexibility, but because of the recent downsizing of the newspaper she has a lot more to do in less time. She said, "It allows me to share the stories of the people within the community who otherwise might not have their stories told." When asked about he community participating in journalism she said, "I think it's great the community is involved. It's scary, however, because oftentimes these types of "journalists" don't follow the same code of ethics as professional writers. Sometimes it seems more geared toward gossip versus unbiased reporting.”

Her definition of “good” Journalism: “Good journalism does no harm. It is honest, factual and unbiased. Good journalism is also the ability to be a storyteller and capture the attention of your readers with a compelling article.”

She also gave some real/blunt advice for students looking to go into journalism: “MAKE SURE YOU LOVE IT. It's not the easiest job and the pay isn't the greatest. Also, the hours are long and oftentimes the people you write about aren't the friendliest, particularly in politics. But, on the flip side, I have met some of the most fascinating people. I have gained great knowledge about various subjects and it seems there is never a dull day. Also, for the most part, I do have the freedom to choose what I want to write and research about.”

News Wars: Use It, Not Abuse It

In the PBS Frontline special "News Wars: What's Happening to the News" it was said that one of the greatest tragedies is that we have begun to judge the news like we judge TV... By giving people what they want. One of the original CBS correspondents Edward R. Murrow in regards to television said we must learn to "Use it, not abuse it." News reporting has change immensely over the past few years and is not going to stop anytime soon. The way we get out news, the way we report our news, it's always changing with the technology that is changing with it. Eric Schmit, CEO of Google, said the new reporters of today are not going to follow traditional reporting. News used to be reported to the observing public audience; now news is reported to an interactive audience that want to be part of the news, not just an observer of the news. We blog news and make it available for anyone to become a reported of the news. And what about the newspapers? In the same documentary video they posed the argument that 85% of news comes from the original source of newspapers, all other news is just recycled. To justify the argument they made the point that it in the print journalist that are knocking on doors and digging up the information. But news will never die, therer may be new ways in which we want the news, how it is presented, and what medium it is provided by, but the news will always be needed. Have we gone against Edward R. Murrow's advice? Are we using the televison, or are we abusing it?