[NU Sports] Re: The Media (was: CFB Postseason...Survey Says...)

[SjT (Stephen J. Truog)]

> > A cheap shot, but we'll move on for now.:)
> 
> No cheap shot.  If the discussion is the demise of the
> newspaper industry, liberal bias is a factor.  The
> difference between news and op-ed has blurred, and the
> overwhelming slant is left.

Well, a cheap shot to start something ... but also a common misperception. Newspapers were actually far more slanted during their past partisan days where they would openly be aligned with a party or philosophy.

And like I said, it doesn't really matter what the reporters are - stories are selected by higher-ups, and most newspapers today are owned by large corporations who, if anything, show a right-leaning tendency to the press.

> In the course of publishing two books on the Civil War, I
> have been interviewed by newspapers several times by a
> variety of journalists.  In every case, it was clear within

It all depends on the person and paper, obviously. But I stand by the broad background journalists need to have (and used to get at Medill - dunno about the new marketing-based approach there yet and how it translates to out-of-Medill requirements).

In my first job in Michigan (before Google was widespread), we got calls one night at the copy desk for naming all the Supreme Court justices and settling a debate between friends on who had more rushing yards - Emmitt Smith or Barry Sanders.

Not sure how many in the general public could get those off the top of their head, but 2/3 of the copy desk that night had the answer.:)

It would be nice if the "Medill F" (for name accuracy) still applied, but with the emphasis on being first instead of being accurate, that has indeed fallen by the wayside (not to mention staff cuts of copy editors).

GO CATS!!!
-SjT