Tag Archives: New York Times

The Monday Rdp (Nous sommes Charlie edition)

By Christopher B. Daly 

Like many other people, I adopted the political slogan “Je suis Charlie” last week. As with any slogan, it is a statement that is not valuable for its literal truth. It is valuable for its political message. It says that in a conflict between murderous doctrinaire literalists and peaceful free-thinking artists, I’m always going to be on the side of the artists. Of course, as a slogan, the statement “Je suis Charlie” also flattens the issue and robs it of much of its nuance. That’s too bad, but in a political crisis, some things do have to wait. Last week, the paramount issue was to defend freedom of speech, thought, and expression.

That’s why it was so disappointing that no high-ranking leader of the United States (the country that invented constitutional guarantees of free speech and press) managed to get to Paris to take part in the giant demonstration over the weekend. Shame on us. (This just in: Obama now gets why this was such a mistake. He could have at least dispatched that great avatar of press freedom Eric Holder to the march, since Holder happened to be in France anyway. Sheesh!)

Thousands of people gather at Republique square in Paris, France, Sunday, Jan. 11, 2015.  Thousands of people began filling Franceís iconic Republique plaza, and world leaders converged on Paris in a rally of defiance and sorrow on Sunday to honor the 17 victims of three days of bloodshed that left France on alert for more violence. (AP Photo/Peter Dejong)

Thousands of people gather at Republique square in Paris, France, Sunday, Jan. 11, 2015. Thousands of people began filling Franceís iconic Republique plaza, and world leaders converged on Paris in a rally of defiance and sorrow on Sunday to honor the 17 victims of three days of bloodshed that left France on alert for more violence. (AP Photo/Peter Dejong)

In related news, “Mr. Natural” himself — pioneering underground cartoonist R. Crumb, who has lived in France for a couple of decades — holds forth on the politics of cartooning in an interview with the Observer. Unlike most people, imagesCrumb actually knows what he’s talking about here.

Plus, there’s this. Just when you thinks can’t get any crazier, here is an example of the Saudi attitude toward free expression. A thousand lashes! Read this New Yorker piece and ask why we not only tolerate but actually support that government.

Elsewhere . . .

New York Times media columnist and BU Prof. David Carr has two items of interest to readers of this blog.

In his column today, he reports on his recent trip to CES in LV. My favorite line:

Think about it: What better place to explore the world of virtual reality than Vegas, a place where both Venice and New York are rendered as casinos?

And here’s the syllabus for Carr’s spring course at BU on media criticism. Sorry, but I think it’s too late to sign up.

Also worth reading, NYT Public Editor Margaret Sullivan on the decision all media faced last week about whether to re-print the offending cartoons.

Great photo but not Kyrzbekistan.

Great photo but not Kyrzbekistan.

And on a lighter note, an embarrassing screw-up at the Times last week resulted in the brief birth of a new nation: Kyrzbekistan (which perhaps ought to exist)

Favorite new flavor: The Ira Glass audio story-telling complex has just launched another subsidiary. The newest part of This American Life is a venture called “Invisibilia” — which just has to be heard to be believed. The first two shows blew me away this weekend: one about a blind guy who taught himself to echolocate (like a bat, a dolphin, or a sperm whale) and the other about the power and consequences of our own dark thoughts. Superb storytelling.

Closer to home:

The Boston Globe has re-invented its soft-news/arts section yet again. Gone is “g” — the daily tabloid insert. In its place is a free-standing regular section with different themes on different days. Enh. The print edition looks pretty dreary (because it’s printed), but the online version looks a bit snappier. Much will depend, of course, on how worthwhile the content is. Here’s the editor’s note from Brian McGrory.

And in other local developments, a hat-tip to Adam Reilly, the new regular news anchor on the evening news program produced by PBS affiliate WGBH in Boston. Reilly brings a welcome measure of intelligence, curiosity, and gravitas to a job that really screams for it. His resume includes a degree from Carleton College and one from the Harvard Divinity (!) School, as well as reporting stints at the late Boston Phoenix and WGBH radio and TV.

Keep up the good work!

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

The Monday Round-up

By Christopher B. Daly 

Happy 2015, dear readers!

For the first Monday of the new year, let’s get things rolling.

From the New York Times:

THIS JUST IN . . .

Times reporter James Risen went into a federal court today in Alexandria, Va., and told a judge under oath that he has no intention of revealing his confidential sources — ever. From the paper’s own story:

“I am not going to provide the government with information that they seem to want to use to create a mosaic to prove or disprove certain facts,” Mr. Risen said.

–BU Professor David Carr holds forth in his Media Equation column about the challenges facing those who operate on the traditional media model of “one to many.” Now, the many are moving toward a media approach that might be called “me to a few.” As usual, plenty to think about here.

–Can anyone write books on a hamster wheel? This piece finds one author.

–Here’s an op-ed that makes a case for the importance of narrative. The writer argues that evidence (and common sense) indicates that when people are sick and go to see their doctors, they want to describe their illnesses in terms of a story. (“My cousin came to visit and brought this infection, and at first it wasn’t so bad, but then . . .”) And I think most patients want to hear a story back from their doctors.

–This story about China’s ideological wars made my head spin. I think the reason (other than the early hour of the day) was the disorienting use of the term “leftist” in the Chinese context. As this piece indicates, if you’re a leftist in China, that means you are a loyal member of the Communist Party and endorse whatever the party bosses dictate. In my view, the term “leftist” refers to someone who supports individual liberties and resists statism, conformity, and bureaucracy, especially when it attempts to crush dissent or diversity. What China needs is a real “Left” to challenge centralized power and spread freedom of thought, expression, movement, and reproduction.

–A 2015 wish list from the paper’s “public editor,” Margaret Sullivan. She has a point, of course, about anonymous sources — which all journalists overuse — but so does her own paper’s James Risen, who is a good example of why we sometimes need confidential sources.

ELSEWHERE:

–On the Media has a special report on the infamous “Torture Report” by the Senate Intelligence Committee. H-t to OTM for keeping the spotlight on this important issue. We shouldn’t let holidays and other stuff take our eye off this ball.

Enough for now.

Peace in 2015.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Yes, the Times caters to rich readers — and that’s just fine

By Christopher B. Daly

In her latest column, NYTimes public editor Margaret Sullivan expressed a certain angst over the newspaper’s practice of accepting ads for high-end products. To me, this is a puzzling kind of problem for her to have. Who does she think pays her salary? And the salary of everyone else in the Times newsroom? Continue reading

1 Comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Former NYT Editor Jill Abramson: Getting back into journalism?

By Christopher B. Daly 

Is former New York Times executive editor Jill Abramson getting back into journalism?

Yes, according to hints she dropped Monday night during a talk at Boston University. Abramson said she has been exploring the possibility of launching a new journalism start-up with veteran publisher and investigative reporter Steven Brill.

The proposed new operation would focus on a few large stories, and it would employ professional journalists at decent salaries, Abramson told a packed hall during a conversation with Times media columnist and B.U. professor David Carr.

After Carr teased her about making some news and challenged her to “show a little leg,” Abramson said, “Well. . .” Then she divulged that she and Brill have been conducting talks with investors who might back their proposed venture.

But she revealed little else, offering no details on how her journalism start-up would work financially or how it would stand out
professionally.

Since her departure from the Times, Abramson has given a series of i

Jill Abramson ( L) and David Carr (R) discuss what David Carr describes as the “present future”, when the production and distribution of media is in constant flux. Photo by Ann Wang

Jill Abramson ( L) and David Carr (R) discuss what David Carr describes as the “present future”, when the production and distribution of media is in constant flux.
Photo by Ann Wang

nterviews (mostly to female journalists), and she has been teaching a course in narrative non-fiction in the English Department at Harvard.

When Carr brought up the subject of her separation from the Times and seemed to be groping for a euphemism, Abramson abruptly corrected him, saying “I was fired.” She added that she has spent her career seeking the truth and telling it, so she saw no reason to sugar-coat her dismissal from the newspaper in May at the hands of the publisher, Arthur Sulzberger Jr.

Abramson, 60, began her career in journalism by reporting for and editing a student publication at Harvard, the Independent, then went on to jobs at the American Lawyer, Legal Times, the Wall Street Journal, and the Times.

Her conversation with Carr was sponsored by Boston University’s NPR affiliate, WBUR-FM. It was to be broadcast Tuesday evening at 8 p.m..

[Full disclosure: Jill and I were classmates in college, and I have seen her sporadically since then. I enjoyed her book about her dog.]

Update: You can listen to the full conversation here on WBUR’s superb midday program “Here and Now.”

1 Comment

Filed under David Carr, Jill Abramson, Journalism, media, New York Times

Monday round-up

By Christopher B. Daly

Good Monday, readers!

–As so often happens, first up is B.U. Prof. David Carr.

His latest Media Equation column heralds the re-vitalization of The Washington Post under big-spending owner Jeff Bezos. Hooray for new money in the news business. Personally, I am very pleased to see my old

Katie Zezima Mediabistro

Katie Zezima
Mediabistro

employer having the resources and the sense to hire smart young journalists like BU alumna Katie Zezima, now part of the Post’s political coverage team — covering the White House, no less — after her stints at the NYTimes and the AP. Good luck to the Post’s owner (Amazon founder Jeff Bezos) and the paper’s top editor (Marty Baron).

–Sticking with the Times for a moment, here is the Public Editor’s recent comment on the big flap between Amazon and Hachette, involving many writers on both sides.

Can someone help me get to the bottom of this issue? Is there a “good guy” in this fight? Who is really on the side of authors? Are all authors in the same boat?

–Interesting piece here about the European approach to archiving material on the Internet. Even better is 140929_r25505-320this recent New Yorker piece by Jeffrey Toobin.

–Delighted to see Peter Canellos, after being unceremoniously released by the Boston Globe, has landed an important new job at Politico. Why is Politico thriving? Maybe it’s because they hire talented people. . . (On the other hand, Politico has some of the most vicious comment-ers on the Internet, so if you want to hear “the other side” about Canellos, just read the comments. Phew!)

–The radio show “This American Life” by Ira Glass has launched a terrific new audio narrative that they are 537_lgcalling “Serial.” It is described as a “spin-off” and is available as a podcast. I listened to the debut installment this weekend, reported by Sarah Koenig and a team. It’s a terrific tale of the reporting of a doubtful prosecution of a “convicted murderer.” It ended on a real cliff-hanger, leaving me ready for more.

–The always worthwhile NPR program “On the Media” delivered again this weekend. I particularly enjoyed this piece on the work of Craig Silverman, the founder of the site “Regret the Error,” which paid attention to the neglected subject of news media carrcorrections. His latest cause: tracking rumors as they emerge online, at his new side Emergent.info. Good luck with that, Craig.

–The Nieman Journalism Lab asks “What’s up with those 100 layoffs in the New York Times newsroom?” Ken Doctor has some answers.

–History keeps happening: the culture wars shift ground to the teaching of history. Conservatives don’t like the new guidelines for teaching Advance Placement U.S. history courses in high school. Part of their beef is that the new approach, devised by “revisionist” left-wing academic historians, dwells too heavily on America’s faults. Imperiling our sense of patriotism (Is that really the take-away kids are supposed to get from studying history), this new approach focuses too much on negative stuff, like protests.

So, how do smart high school kids respond? THEY PROTEST!

I’d say that shows they have already learned something!

91753-004-9403FDA1

Leave a comment

Filed under AP history, history, Journalism, journalism history

Plagiarism is back (Did it ever really go away?)

By Christopher B. Daly 

Jeez, I hope that headline’s original. (I have this haunting feeling that it seems familiar — I better google myself to make sure. Phew. No direct hits. Now, where was I?)

Amidst this recent outbreak of plagiarism charges (the Montana senator, the Times arts writer, some guy at BuzzFeed, and others), it’s worth reviewing what plagiarism is and why it plagues us.

Plagiarism is at once easier to do and easier to catch. Thanks to computers and the internet, it’s very easy to copy things — even things that a journalist, a speechwriter, or any other sincere person intends to use as source material or as quoted matter. On the other hand, thanks to those same computers and the internet, it’s also very easy to catch someone who plagiarizes — whether deliberately or inadvertently.

That’s why I welcome today’s comment by Margaret Sullivan, the NYTimes‘ public editor. Here’s the nub of her (presumably original) comment:

Write your own stuff; when you can’t or won’t, make sure you attribute and link.

Use multiple sources; compare, contrast, verify.

 

That could go up on the walls of every classroom at Boston University, where I teach basic reporting classes in our Journalism program. In fact, I may do just that this fall — with proper attribution, of course.

Personally, I think the heart of the matter is in those first four words: WRITE YOUR OWN STUFF. If you are any kind of a writer who cares about words, you will know instantly whether a phrase or sentence or paragraph in some chunk of prose that has your name at the top was written by you or by somebody else. If you didn’t write it, give credit where it’s due. Any questions?

Class dismissed.

 

 

 

 

2 Comments

Filed under blogging, broadcasting, computers, Journalism, journalism history, New York Times, publishing

Govt. releases memo giving legal reasons for killing Americans overseas

By Christopher B. Daly 

Finally, under court order, the Obama administration has divulged its legal rationale for killing Americans abroad without trials, charges, or even arrests. That reasoning appears in a contested legal memo written four

Al-Alawki in 2010.  Getty.

Al-Awlaki in 2010.
Getty.

years ago in the Office of Legal Counsel offering arguments that would justify using a drone to take out Anwar al-Awlaki — who was an American citizen living (hiding?) in Yemen and fomenting attacks against you and me and our country.

Leaving aside (for the moment) whether al-Awlaki deserved to die in a drone strike, it was an offensive outrage that the Obama administration not only had a secret plan for killing Americans abroad but they also had a secret rationale for doing it, and they said no mere citizen could even read those arguments. Now, we mere citizens can read them for ourselves.

You can find the court ruling ordering the memo’s release and the arguments themselves here, thanks to the Times. That is, we can sort of read the memo. The ruling by the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals allowed the government some wiggle room so that officials could redact (i.e., “censor”) some parts that pertained to secret stuff the government knew about al-Awlaki through the fruits of spying on him. That makes a certain amount of sense, I guess, but any time that the government is allowed to redact its own documents, you have to wonder what’s missing.

In any case, the president should long ago have made this argument himself, in public. If he believes in it, then he owns it. It is his duty to protect and defend the Constitution and, therefore, to show why his actions are in conformance with his understand of the Constitution. If he makes the case and the people accept it, fine. If he makes his case and the people reject it, then he’s got a problem. But there is no reading of the Constitution that authorizes the president to carry out a secret assassination program and not tell anyone about it.

For now, I will pass on the question of whether al-Awlaki had it coming and whether Obama has a legal leg to stand on. I want to read the document and think it over. The policy might be acceptable, but what was not acceptable was the secrecy.

Meanwhile, kudos to the Times‘ Charlie Savage and Scott Shane, who are named among the plaintiffs who pried this decision out of the courts, along with the Times itself and the ACLU. No matter what we each think about the president and his policies, these plaintiffs have done the whole country a service. Thank you.

Screen Shot 2014-06-23 at 10.37.41 PM

 

 

 

2 Comments

Filed under Journalism, New York Times, Uncategorized