Comments for McGuire on Media

Comment on Impact in academic research: Journalism needs the academy's help by 10th Degree Agency

10th Degree Agency — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 18:41:06 +0000

Research ought to have value, and that value needs to to be conveyed using relevant words and style that makes it clear and understandable for the intended audience.

Comment on Let’s not let Medill Innocence Project be another Hazelwood by Paul Neely

Paul Neely — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 02:02:54 +0000

Let’s put Hazelwood in context. The basis of the court’s ruling was that the school “owned” the newspaper. The principal was, in essence, the publisher. Should we really be surprised that major media companies did not rush forward with amicus briefs saying that the owners did not have an absolute right to control content? Would a Gannett CEO, for instance, claim by extension that editors of the company’s newspapers had an autonomy to print whatever they wanted, regardless of what their corporate superiors wished, and that that lesson extended down to the high school level?
Of course not.
That is an entirely different question from whether the principal acted wisely, of course. But courts do not settle question of wisdom; they settle question of law.
I think the Medill case is a good deal more complicated, but not so much more so as to be an easy call, legally speaking. Surely, the DA’s office does not “own” the Medill project.
I also absolutely agree that the prosecutors are “misguided,” to use Tim’s word, but the legal case is a mixed bag. Tim calls for the support of “big journalism guns,” but this is not just a power struggle. It’s a legal struggle.
In fact, it has extended implications for some of the remedies being proposed for journalism today, especially those involving government subsidies, even those done through the tax code.
Yes, because of my past positions and biases, I would talk about “bullies” too. That takes my stand on the emotions of the thing. That doesn’t mean, however, that the law is not on the other side.

Comment on Let’s not let Medill Innocence Project be another Hazelwood by Betty Medsger

Betty Medsger — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 16:53:58 +0000

You are so right. This unprecedented and dangerous threat must be fought.

Comment on Students are smarter than they get credit for and they need to sell you on that by CJ Cornell

CJ Cornell — Wed, 07 Oct 2009 18:43:40 +0000

Finally someone said it out loud; articulate and insightful.

Baby Boomers: Why was “your war” any more important to remember than WW-II, WW-I, the American or French revolutions?

We don’t hear WWI Vets talk about their view of fighting “a complicated war in a distant land”, so I guess World Wars are not as important as the Vietnam war. The wrong conclusion, of course. But if students hear more about Vietnam than other wars – only because ‘Nam was an emotionally important experience for Boomers – then how can students come to any other conclusion Vietnam was the most important war?

Not to worry boomers. In the future, there may be no more wars. I mean, how is the next generation going to fight on a battlefield while tweeting about it with one hand and broadcasting high def videos in the other hand? Oops. The Army just released an RFP for a new M-17 rifle with integrated twitter client, HD video camera, and Wii interface. Clearly the next generation will have different wars.

Comment on Students are smarter than they get credit for and they need to sell you on that by Nan Connolly

Nan Connolly — Wed, 07 Oct 2009 03:21:14 +0000

Ouch. This baby boomer is cringing at some of this, but open-minded. FWIW, the undergrads I teach are plenty smart, esp. the seniors who began their media majors in a seemingly different world.
The Vietnam reference is an interesting one. For my money, the issue is not so much a knowledge check but one of perspective. Today’s college students, who are going to pay for (and possibly help fight)a complicated war in a distant land, would do well to read up on Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos.
Or talk to some vets, 60+, who spent time in ‘Nam and might have a thought or two about the issues we face now. Now that’s a podcast I would love to hear….

Comment on Some tidbits on ESPN.com/newspaper threat, Don Ohlmeyer and Pat Forde by James P. Bailey

James P. Bailey — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 17:46:35 +0000

It is all about content, “stupid.” A good writer will attract readers wherever he/she is.

Comment on Some tidbits on ESPN.com/newspaper threat, Don Ohlmeyer and Pat Forde by Barry

Barry — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 20:58:44 +0000

Sharing resources seems to be a way to bring sports sections closer to the excellence of The National Sports Daily, which can only be good for readers.

I think that pay walls will work only when there is no alternative — i.e.; when you can’t find the same article in some other way. Perhaps the regional sports consortium will be able to use its size as a hammer to build a pay wall and prevent workarounds by those too cheap and net-savvy to pay for their sports content.

Giving paid print subscribers web access without additional charge would strengthen the paying print customer’s commitment to their subscription. Having a web-only subscription at lower cost than a print subscription may appeal to those who think print is archaic — it would be less expensive, too.

I’m all for paying nothing for media, but that is so 1975, when cable was new. Newspapers need to force the hand of their freeloading readers. I agree that sports is a good way to do it, but the ubiquitous alternatives — including the ESPN sites — may turn out to beat the newspapers at their own game. At least it may give good writers a place to ply their trade.

Sorry that I haven’t seen this column before (I was tipped to it by the Romenesko MediaNews daily e-mail). You sound like the right guy in the right place for the Cronkite School. Good luck with keeping an excellent school at that level.

Comment on Some tidbits on ESPN.com/newspaper threat, Don Ohlmeyer and Pat Forde by Adam

Adam — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 18:43:20 +0000

To Edward,
If we’re talking about health care, I’m pretty sure that we spend way more treating obesity in America than we’ll ever need to spend on sports injuries. On the whole, it’s still much better for a kid to play sports than not, as long as he’s not taking steroids or something. There are relatively few who will go on to play in college, and even fewer who will be playing in the pros. Discouraging kids from playing sports is absolutely the wrong way to go.

Comment on Some tidbits on ESPN.com/newspaper threat, Don Ohlmeyer and Pat Forde by Jay Weiner

Jay Weiner — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 14:28:23 +0000

Tim, the real future in local newspaper/web site sports coverage is THOUGHTFUL coverage that adds value to the dreary and repetitive game coverage.

The local sports columnist has become a radio-talk-show-host on paper/web. Where’s the insight? Where’s the watchdog?

Too much heat, not enough light. Too many executive editors who still view sports as the toy department because these editors are fans first and editors second when it comes to sports coverage.

If sports is to help drive the newspaper/web site survival/revival it can’t be all games, all fluff, all the time. (Or all name-calling, as much column writing has become.) That’s the direction the newspaper/web sites have gone. And that’s not good long term.

Jay

Comment on Some tidbits on ESPN.com/newspaper threat, Don Ohlmeyer and Pat Forde by edward

edward — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 13:47:27 +0000

It is time for an honest discussion about sports coverage, which encourages young people to engage in dangerous activities that are hazardous to their long-term health. Take a look a the recent study of increased dementia cases in NFL players, and the increased problems of mobility and joint problems of players in middle age. Increased coverage of contact sports only encourages more of this very dangerous activity. Rather than boost coverage of high school and college football, I believe it is time for a moratorium on coverage. Young people need to be discouraged from these activities. Look at Muhammad Ali as an example of what the future brings to people engaging in contact sports. As we engage in a national debate over health care, we need to curtail dangerous activities.