Skip to main content

View Diary: "MSM" vs. "Traditional Media" (294 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  But it's not really you (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    bree

    that is the problem.

    Unless you are tweety in disguise, or something.

    Seriously, the political reporters in this country are 99% Lazy to use your term.  There are a few exceptions, but it seems to me there should be a report card of accountability for each reporter, editor, and opinion writer that can be used to call them out.

    In that way, the blogs are actually much more responsible, because you can pull a whole body of work at once to understand the flow of their work.  For normal news "consumers", this isn't the case, each day seems like waking up in a new reporting world.  

    Having a "scorecard" with a reporter's credibility documented seems like a worthwhile stat to me, and starts to bring something to the mix reinforcing accountability.  It would also reduce the power of corporate owners to force a viewpoint into an article or remove sections and would increase sourcing efforts.

    How to accomplish this?  I don't know.  But something like this needs to be done for the good of our country.

    9/11 didn't change the Constitution!

    by Prof Dave on Wed Aug 15, 2007 at 07:53:55 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  There are 4 basic stories in political reporting (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      bree, wordene, Prof Dave, OrdinaryGal
      1. Polls. The horserace.
      1. Campaign strategies.
      1. Fundraising number.
      1. Gaffes.

      None of these require any real legwork on the part of the reporter. But there are reporters who are focused on the issues and who do check statements against previous statements.

      I wish I had more to say, but political reporting is not my beat. I do have experience on local government, however. City councils, mayors, city managers and the like.

      Currently drinking: Maker's Mark Kentucky straight bourbon

      by droogie6655321 on Wed Aug 15, 2007 at 07:57:37 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Fitting substance (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        bree, droogie6655321

        into these four categories doeesn't make a lot of sense.

        Governing should have a place in stories that don't fit there.  Specifically:

        1. Government waste and neglect.
        1. Laws and how they impact you.
        1. Who is funding the efforts to influence government and who is getting paid.

        It doesn't seem like too much to ask to know what the hell is really going on in Washington.  It should be clearly reported in a non-he-said-she-said fashion, because facts don't have two sides - the interpretation may have, but the facts don't.

        A little more fact from political reporters would go a long way.

        9/11 didn't change the Constitution!

        by Prof Dave on Wed Aug 15, 2007 at 08:02:48 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  asdf (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          bree, Prof Dave

          I wasn't talking about fitting substance into those four categories. I said those are the four kinds of stories that lazy political reporters write. They require no effort and are responsible for people's lack of knowledge of the political process.

          For good reporters, there is only one good political story to write.

          1. Is the system working? If so, why? If not, why not?

          Currently drinking: Maker's Mark Kentucky straight bourbon

          by droogie6655321 on Wed Aug 15, 2007 at 08:08:29 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  And by the way... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Prof Dave

      ... this "report card" you refer to is yesterday's newspaper.

      The process of writing a story doesn't end when you hand the story to your editor. It's also in the aftermath. Then you find out about anything that needs correcting or clarifying that somehow slipped past yourself, the copy editors and the editor.

      As far as grading standards go, I've taken a correction on the age of a dog before, so I don't want to hear about scorecards of reporter credibility. Those are called the corrections page.

      Currently drinking: Maker's Mark Kentucky straight bourbon

      by droogie6655321 on Wed Aug 15, 2007 at 08:06:20 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I guess (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        droogie6655321

        I would really like to see one place to find information about a reporter.  I don't keep stacks of papers around so I can decide whether a reporter is being ethical or not.

        As easily as I could look up diarists here to evaluate their credibility.

        I understand that is very different from what you are used to, and you clearly feel that you get critical feedback, but the corrections page in the corporate media has never corrected anything substantial that I have seen.  It would be nice if there was some sense of responsibility that I find completely lacking in political reporting.

        9/11 didn't change the Constitution!

        by Prof Dave on Wed Aug 15, 2007 at 08:11:15 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  asdf (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Prof Dave

          Well, think about it. How do you just a diarist? You look at their past work. How do you judge a reporter? You look at their past work.

          As my reporting professor told me, "You're remembered for your worst story, not your best story."

          What do reporters bring to interviews for a job in reporting? Clips from their previous work. Our work is how we are judged. I'm sorry there's not a more convenient way to judge a reporter at a glance, but there it is.

          Currently drinking: Maker's Mark Kentucky straight bourbon

          by droogie6655321 on Wed Aug 15, 2007 at 08:14:07 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site