Celebrate with the SPJ

As we are rounding out our final exam and our great Ethics & Journalism course, I thought it would be nice to end the semester with this article by the SPJ:
SPJ celebrates passage of shield law bill from committee

Woohoo!

Thank you classmates for a wonderful dialogue, thanks to our instructors and most importantly - thanks Jeanne for the blog!

Have a great break and an even better new year!

-Crystal

The Standards of a Columnist

This is a piece published by the New York Times ombudsman, Clark Hoyt. He touches on how the expectations held for a columnist is different than that of a journalist. The specific areas of expressing opinion, endorsing political ideas, taking stances, and utilizing more casual language are explored within.

Letters to the Public - the Columnist's Voice

I always wonder just how far a columnist can take expressing their views if said views are unorthodox or somewhat taboo. What if a columnist begins talking about some of the ideas of Brian Moore, the 2008 Socialist Party of America presidential candidate? Certainly within the bounds of free speech, but just how far can they bend?

Glen Beck's Conflict of Interest

Glen Beck's Conflict of Interest.

I have no words for this. It is simply self explanatory in my opinion. However, my one question is: How does he get away with this? He makes the entire journalism community look bad, despite, in my opinion, him not being a journalist himself. In fact, I'm not sure exactly what you could refer to Glen Beck as, a pundit perhaps? But do pundits misrepresent themselves as much as he does? Also, with the FTC cracking down on full disclosure for bloggers, I think Glen Beck should watch his step. Maybe they will add him to the list of no-no's.

Tiger and the Media

I have an observation. After Tiger Woods' accident the media seems to have become obsessed with him. First, they want him to speak about what happened. Great. I get that. When he releases a statement on his website and refuses to go public and the police don't press criminal charges, the media go bonkers with anger. Now, it seems, out of revenge, they are obsessed with bringing him down completely by chasing after mistresses from his past having decided they were the reason he landed himself in a tree.

Is this right for the media to make assumptions and then run with them without having the entire story? Is Tiger Woods' "extra-curriculars" really that important that we need to interview mistresses on just about every news network--- making sure that they support the running theory created by the media that Tiger was a big cheater and his wife had enough, and so he wrecked his car???

I just don't get it. Then the media wonders why people don't trust them. Right now they are being way too nosy for comfort. It's not like he's an elected official.

When do we cross the line from cartoon to hurtful?

Aunt Jemima Cartoon angers Ohio lawmakers backers.

Would you run an editorial cartoon that depicts an African American lawmaker as Aunt Jemima? Is doing so, really racist or it fair game since she is a politician and in the limelight voluntarily? What is acceptable in this type of circumstance? What does this say about the editors that decided to run something like this without thinking about the double meaning or implications of it?

I realize lawmakers have to have tougher skin when it comes to criticism, but where is the line drawn between fair game and just plain rude/vengeful? I am not even sure where the parallel between Aunt Jemima and a lawmaker is, other than both are African American. According to the editor, it was not meant to be harmful, however, if it was meant to be funny or imply something about this lawmaker, I seemed to have missed the punch line and don't understand the parallel meaning.

Disclosures and the Salehi's: the drama continues

In NBC interview, a Failure to Note Network Ties

If NBC and Today did nothing wrong as they claim by having the Salehi's on the Today show, how come they did not adhere to THEIR OWN standard practice and disclose the Salehi's connection to their network?

Swiss Authorities to Place Roman Polanski Under House Arrest Friday

Since Feb 1, 1978 famed director Roman Polanski has lived in France and has avoided extradition for the rape he committed against a then 13 year old girl. He had apparently given her champagne and a Quaalude to rape her. Polanski was indicted on 6 felony charges, but only plead guilty to unlawful sexual intercourse. The judge dropped all other charges, sent Polanski to jail for a 90 day psychiatric evaluation but released him after just 42 days!!

Polanski was supposed to go back to jail to serve out the rest of his time, but instead fled the US to France (which does not extradite) and since not paid for his crime. Was this because of his social status? Why did the authorities not press harder to extradite him?

31 years later Polanski was arrested again when he flew to Zurich to receive a lifetime achievement award. Though he's been in jail since Sept 26, 2009 he will be placed under house arrest Dec 4, 2009 where he will remain with an electronic ankle bracelet while the authorities decide what to do.