[NU Sports] Medill

[Jeff Beamsley]

Alan,

Thanks for the thoughtful post.

The role that news media in general and newspapers in particular are playing
in the marketplace is clearly changing.  So the role of those who write for
those news sources is going to have to change too.

The unstoppable force is the ease with which any individual can post their
own content on the web.  So just being able to write is no longer sufficient
to label someone a journalist.

Those who do have a formal education in journalism, however, understand the
ethical responsibilities associated with reporting the news.  That's where I
think there is opportunity.  Those who just have a point of view can usually
find sources on the net to support that point of view.  Those who are
interested in information free of personal bias are eventually going to tire
of trying to sort that out on their own.  They will gravitate to sources that
they can trust.  Those sources will rely on journalists who not only can
write, but also understand their role in society.  So though newspapers may
not survive as entities who distribute content on paper, there will be a role
for trusted organizations who will help their subscribers make sense of the
world (I'm working hard here to not use any Fox News tag lines).  

Hopefully Medill will continue to produce talented writers who have both
vision and integrity.

Jeff



-----Original Message-----
From: nwu-sports-bounces at tssi.com [mailto:nwu-sports-bounces at tssi.com] On
Behalf Of Abrahamson, Alan (NBC Universal)
Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2007 2:19 AM
To: CHerron604 at aol.com; nwu-sports at tssi.com
Subject: [NU Sports] Medill


 I will try to provide at least one perspective to the questions raised by
Mr. Herron. Mr. Nolan: I seek your approval for this post, which is not
related to football or sports.
 From where I sit, the dean is a visionary. Visionaries, by definition, are
not unanimous approval-getters. Nor are they seeking such approval.
Disagreement and even dissent are vital pieces of the dialogue.
 In that regard, the dean is exercising significant leadership. He has what
experts in leadership study call the "double vision thing." He can see where
we are now and where he believes the school ought to be x years down the
line, and he is trying amid the clamor and dissent to secure buy-in -- from a
variety of constituencies -- to implement change.
 The dean is seeking to implement that change because the journalism
landscape is undergoing a fundamental evolution. Technological and
demographic change are formidable currents but hardly the only factors
reshaping businesses in which Medill grads are expected not only to compete
for jobs but, as their careers progress, assume leading roles.  
 It's unclear whether the steps the dean is taking are the "right" ones.
No one can tell the future. 
 But I admire his self-confidence and his willingness to take action.
 I would also suggest he is ahead, maybe way ahead, of the power curve.
This -- in concert with the confidence he projects -- may well be another
reason the changes he is proposing are generating push-back, sometimes
considerable.
 Dean Lavine was out in Los Angeles last month and gave a talk to the Medill
Club of Southern California, which I attended.
 There is ample material on the Medill website explaining the direction,
intent and details of the revised curriculum, and I would urge any and all
interested to give it a long and thoughtful read. You can also read there
about intriguing proposals aimed at taking the Medill and Northwestern brands
overseas -- to places such as Qatar, for instance.
 I did not hear at the Medill event that day in the Mulholland hills, nor
have I heard at any point in the process, the dean say anything that would
suggest even the slightest retreat from the basics of good journalism -- the
essence of a Medill education, with its emphasis on fairness and accuracy.
 However, he did make plain that Medill must find ways to enable students to
learn how to tell a story -- on whatever platform -- that will engage
readers, listeners and watchers. 
 By platform, he said, he means newspapers, radio, TV, the web, cellular
phones, video games. That's right -- phones, games, whatever.
 I used "readers, listeners and watchers" deliberately. Here is the word that
seems to really alarm his critics: consumers.
 Even though we are all consumers of news, of sports, of whatever.
 Traditionally, of course, there is a "wall" between the business and
editorial sides of news operations. A major concern appears to be whether
Lavine is suggesting the "wall" ought to be breached or weakened.
 I do not believe he is so suggesting.
 What he is trying to get at, I believe, is the exact thing all of us in the
business are trying to figure out. Which is: how to produce content that will
compel people to pay for it, on one or multiple platforms -- without
pandering, without condescending, without violating the basics of journalism.
 It's hardly a disaster, or even new, to acknowledge that newspapers (and by
extension other platforms) must make money to survive. I learned that in
theory and then most emphatically in practice when I was at Medill, in the
late 1970s -- when, during March of my sophomore year, one of the last of the
afternoon newspapers, the Chicago Daily News, went out of business. The world
had changed around it and the paper couldn't respond. 
 Any/all thoughts, observations welcome. After all, we've got three more days
'til the Duke tilt.
 Alan - Medill '80  
    




-----Original Message-----
From: nwu-sports-bounces at tssi.com [mailto:nwu-sports-bounces at tssi.com]
On Behalf Of CHerron604 at aol.com
Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2007 9:07 PM
To: sjtruog at yahoo.com; nwu-sports at tssi.com
Subject: Re: [NU Sports] Campus programming ...

Stephen's post reminded me of the most recent issue of Chicago Magazine.  I
don't generally read this magazine, not usually caring which  gala ball was
attended by who, or which trendy club is opening up this  month.  But a
friend passed it along to me based on the cover headline 'The  Battle at NU's
Journalism School' (just below a monkey perched on a woman's  shoulder).
 
Basically, the author, Dirk Johnson, described how new Medill head John
Lavine was blowing up the Medill curriculum, replacing it with concentrations
in 'new media' and marketing.  It sounded like students, faculty and alums
were not happy about this.  
 
Anybody know anything about these developments ?  The story was kind  of
short, and left me with quite a few questions.  Should we be worried about
Medill ?  Do we risk losing our very high Journalism School ranking  ?  Could
we lose our dominant position in sports media ?
 
Chuck Herron   Tech (NOT McCormick)  '85 



************************************** See what's new at http://www.aol.com
_______________________________________________
nwu-sports site list
nwu-sports at tssi.com
http://romaine.tssi.com/mailman/listinfo/nwu-sports

_______________________________________________
nwu-sports site list
nwu-sports at tssi.com
http://romaine.tssi.com/mailman/listinfo/nwu-sports