14 items found for your search. If no results were found please broaden your search.
(05/21/01 12:51am)
Jonathan Coke and WFHB, Bloomington's community radio station, had four words for the Indiana General Assembly this spring: Show us the money!\nThey wanted $81,000 in Build Indiana Funds.\nWhen the state legislative session ended this month, Coke, the station's general manager, found out that they will receive $54,000 in BIF money, the biannual grants that are primarily derived from the states lottery ticket sales.\n"Yeah, I would have liked $81,000," Coke said. "But $54,000 is a lot of money. Its the second largest cash gift we've ever gotten. Unfortunately, the economic forecast forced legislators to reduce most Build Indiana Fund requests down by one third."\nAs a result, WFHB which broadcasts on both 93.1 FM and 98.1 FM will be the latest Bloomington media outlet -- following the Herald Times -- to expand its sphere of influence by reaching out to the surrounding communities.\nCoke said the original plan for the BIF money was to put signal translators in Nashville and Ellettsville, in addition to making some other capital improvements to the station and its equipment.\n"We're going to have to iron out some priorities," he said. "We're going to get a lot done. That's the bottom line. We'll find ways to stretch that money out."\nPlacing a translator in Nashville or Ellettsville will enable people in those communities to enjoy the public affairs reports, diverse music and educational programming that WFHB provides, Coke said.\n"We will get to put one of the two translators in completely with the funds we've received," Coke said. "The other will probably have to have its own capital drive."\n2001-02 marks the first fiscal year in which WFHB has applied for a BIF grant. Its request was for funding intended to assist with major, one-time capital improvements, not money for day-to-day operating expenses, which are covered by the stations annual membership drives.\nWFHB is a community radio station in the literal sense of the term. It's not reliant on a university, library or religious organization. These factors, Coke said, make funding for WFHB a responsible and prudent use of taxpayer dollars.\nAccording to WFHB's BIF grant application, a new front entryway for the station and a safety fence around the transmitter will cost $11,000. The station asked for $20,000 to pay for upgrades to its production and broadcast equipment, and an additional $20,000 to renovate its music library.\nBut the crown jewel of the Build Indiana grant proposal was the $30,000 WFHB wanted to use for the purchase and installation of the translators for Ellettsville and Nashville. Although not overwhelming in terms of wattage, these translators would strengthen WFHB's signal enough so that it can be picked up with ease in both communities, which lie on the very outer rim of the stations existing transmitter range.\nAlthough the station didn't receive the full amount for which it asked, the Build Indiana funds will take WFHB to another level of self-sufficiency, Coke said.\n"Basically, what we want to do is improve our programming, to better reach our listeners," he said. "And, in turn, well be better able to increase our listener funding base, which will help us in the long run."\nThus, he said, WFHB will have a larger pool of potential donors from which to draw when it conducts its membership drives. The station's popularity in Bloomington can be measured by the success of these twice-yearly drives, the latest of which concluded at the end of April and generated $33,264.\nThe costs of operating a community radio station, like those of any other media organization or business, go up every year.\n"There are limitations to WFHB's current broadcasting situation," wrote Brian Kearney, president of Bloomington Community Radio, WFHB's governing body, in a letter to Rep. Peggy Welch, one of this area's state legislators. "The station operates in a hand-to-mouth existence."\nOne of the main reasons for this is WFHB's status as a second service station, which makes it ineligible for federal funding through the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) considers WFIU the primary non-commercial radio station in the Bloomington market. WFHB has never seen a dime of the ever-dwindling public funds earmarked for non-commercial radio.\nTo fully appreciate the extent to which the Build Indiana funds will help WFHB, the station's grassroots history must be considered. Its volunteers have contributed thousands upon thousands of service hours throughout the years. Bloomington Community Radio was formed 18 years before WFHB even went on the air; that's how long it took to acquire the donations of equipment, land, cash and other infrastructure needed for such an operation.\nA lingering concern is whether the people in Nashville and Ellettsville even want to hear WFHB.\nCoke said neither he nor anyone else affiliated with the station has conducted extensive, formal research into the matter, but a document attached to the grant application identified these two communities as "areas where (WFHB has) identified listener-members complaining about lack of reception."\nAnother long-term question for the station's future involves the scarceness and overlapping of frequencies on the broadcast spectrum in this part of the state. WFHB's primary 1,600-watt 93.1 FM transmitter is actually located 11 miles south of Bloomington, in nearby Harrisburg, Ind., because of interference with WVUB-FM out of Vincennes, Ind., and WRTV-TV (Channel 6) out of Indianapolis.\nA few years ago, increased interference and weakening signal strength revealed the need for a small, 250-watt translator in Bloomington itself, thus necessitating the station's application for a second frequency, 98.1 FM, which was granted by the FCC.\n"We feel the 98.1 FM translator serving Bloomington is an example of a working strategy to better serve our listening members," representatives of Bloomington Community Radio wrote in a letter accompanying the Build Indiana application.
(02/27/01 5:34am)
Last week's column about the IDS freelancing policy ("'IDS' should tolerate freelancing," Feb. 20) generated a considerable amount of feedback. Graduate students, a professional journalist and two IDS editors offered their views on freelancing.\nThe number of responses was second only to the number received in regard to the IDS sponsorship of Bob Knight's farewell speech last semester. \nThus, this week's column will revisit the issue of the IDS freelancing policy, discuss it in greater depth and allow those whose interests are at stake to voice their opinions in print.\nAn important point that wasn't covered in last week's column is the relationship between a reporter and his or her sources. As it turns out, this is one of the most important reasons for the IDS policy that prohibits freelancing with competing publications.\n"We are in competition with The Herald-Times and the Independent," said Brooke Ruivivar, IDS editor in chief. "And so, it's bad to write for both publications. But when you're reporting for the IDS and then you report for someone else, your sources don't know who they're talking to."\nRuivivar said allowing IDS reporters to freelance among local media could hurt the newspaper's credibility.\nOther freelancing problems Ruivivar mentioned are the integrity of the newsroom itself and the trust that must exist among the reporters, editors and other IDS employees. \n"We talk about a lot of stories in the newsroom," she said. "Openly, we ask for lots of reporters' advice and we want everybody to be involved -- with writing headlines, with whom to call, with helping out -- and it's hard to do that when you're afraid that the person you're sitting next to could run to The Herald-Times and give them the story."\nManaging Editor Liz Beltramini said IDS reporters should feel comfortable in the newsroom and open to discussion about the stories on which they're working, and failing to enforce the freelancing policy would create more problems. \n"If there's a clear line that you don't cross, then there's no question," she said. "It's really ineffective to have a policy if you don't stick by it. And if you make an exception here and an exception there, then there's no point in having the policy." \nRuivivar did not cite any specific examples of an IDS reporter taking a story or giving a story proposal to a rival publication, but such an occurrence could happen. The IDS policy on freelancing is in place to guard against such scenarios. But the policy is far from perfect -- a fact the IDS editors freely acknowledge.\n"One thing that the code of ethics board is looking at is what constitutes a 'competing publication,'" Ruivivar said. "The IDS code of ethics right now is really, really vague, and I think a lot of the editors want something that's more concrete."\nPolicy revision is the first step toward solving this problem. But the IDS should also be more self-aware and try to get a better sense of what its readers think. Whether the IDS is a student publication, a professional newspaper or a little bit of both is another important question --one that will vary depending on who you talk to. \nJournalism graduate student Jim Stinson, an IDS columnist, had this to say: "As for the idea of 'competition,' I would remind the ids they are supposed to be a student newspaper, one that would not deny part-time writers further opportunity over imagined business concerns." \nStinson also said the IDS freelancing policy keeps the newspaper from reaching its full potential. "This policy doesn't help the IDS increase its pool of talent," he said. "It also denies undergraduates and graduates an opportunity to learn from each other. Honestly, graduate students view the paper as beneath them and are seriously frustrated with editing mistakes they see in their stories."\nThe IDS leadership sharply disagrees with the assertions of Stinson and other critics who say the newspaper isn't a true competitor in the local media market. "For advertising dollars, for stories -- we try to scoop them, they try to scoop us," Beltramini said. "That's something really important for us to remember. We are not just a student publication; we are a professional organization."\nThe IDS's willingness to question and revise its policies is a testament to Beltramini's assertion of professionalism. \nSo, keep reading the IDS with a critical eye and an open mind. And don't be afraid to speak your mind regarding what you like and dislike about the newspaper.\nWith your help, it can only get better.
(12/05/00 4:37am)
Last week's ombudsman column articulated how important it is for reporters to be respectful of the people they write about.\nReporters don't always have to be nice; in fact, sometimes the tough stories require one to be courageous and say the things that need to be said, regardless of the consequences. Being nice and being respectful isn't the same thing, but the latter is definitely of more importance than the former.\nThat's why it's troubling to hear about the threats that have been made against IDS reporter Bryan Harris, junior, who wrote the Nov. 27 front-page story about Jason Schwab's suicide. Harris' story was unfortunately titled, "On-campus suicide a surprise to friends, family."\nThe word "surprise" was inappropriate. "Surprise" carries an almost positive connotation -- as in a "surprise" birthday party or a "pleasant surprise." While the word's denotative meaning is closer to "unexpected" or "unanticipated" -- which Schwab's suicide was -- one tends to associate words such as "shock" and "stunned" with such tragic and traumatic events. Substituting either of those would have made for a better headline.\nA more pressing matter is that of the threats made to Harris. Schwab's family is upset about the way his suicide was reported in the IDS. The administration is upset because an on-campus suicide does not make for good press. Both parties have complained to and/or made threats against Harris and the IDS. \nComplaints are acceptable. Threats are wrong. Yes, Harris' story contained details of Schwab's death that are distressing to even a casual reader; most of us can only imagine the horror with which a grieving family would react upon reading such an account. But the reporting is solid and based on the investigation of the Monroe County Coroner and the IU Police Department.\nHarris' story was respectful toward Schwab and his family. Most of it consisted of fond, wistful remarks from Schwab's parents and others who knew him. Suicide is one of the most terrible things that can happen to a family. It is not something journalists enjoy reporting and writing about. But the reporting must be done. This is probably little consolation for Schwab's family, but it is unreasonable to think such an incident would or should go unreported.\nThe toughest stories are often the ones that simply must be reported. If reporters make enemies in the process, so be it -- sometimes the reporter is to blame, and sometimes the subject is at fault. But many times no one is at fault. This is one of those times. \nA family's grief cannot be translated into words and sentences. Likewise, a reporter's words in a newspaper story cannot truly represent his or her emotional or psychological state. We are supposed to be objective in our reporting and not let our personal feelings influence what we write. Sometimes we succeed in spite of our desire to empathize.\nHarris, like all reporters, is a human being who laughs and cries. He didn't let his own feelings influence what he wrote about Schwab's death. What he wrote was not easy to read, but it was true and accurate. Now, because of a family's grief that has turned into threats and intimidation, he is having second thoughts about writing a follow up story that would investigate the University's privacy policy as it relates to suicidal students such as Schwab -- information that, if brought to light, could help prevent such tragedies.\nA family's grief -- as deep and ravaging as it might be -- should not hinder or intimidate reporters such as Harris. Schwab's family made their distress known to him through both an angry phone call and a letter to the editor, which the IDS printed Dec. 1. The latter was acceptable, and well within their rights; the former was not. \nThe mourning process is difficult for any family, and this column will probably not make it any easier for the Schwabs. But respect is something that needs to go both ways. As difficult as it is to muster when emotions are running so high, respect is, nonetheless, a quality that can both help families grieve and keep reporters diligent.
(11/28/00 5:19am)
Superman's alter ego is a "mild-mannered" reporter named Clark Kent. Clark Kent happens to be a nice guy who is a positive role model for a younger colleague (Jimmy Olsen) and wins the respect -- and love -- of his co-worker (Lois Lane). Coincidence? I think not. \nOh yeah, there's also that business about continually foiling Lex Luthor's plans for world domination, but that's not relevant to the topic of today's column. We assume that Clark Kent, in addition to being well-liked, writes good stories, but that is neither here nor there.\nYes, it's true: For the most part, reporters, like lawyers, aren't and don't have to be jerks. Contrary to popular belief, the words "sleazebag" and "snob" are not part of a reporter's job description. I'm speaking strictly from experience here.\nMy realization that reporters don't have to be jerks was reinforced while watching the original "Superman" movie a few weeks ago and, more appropriately, while working for my hometown newspaper for a few days during Thanksgiving break.\nFrom what I know of the character, Kent is probably never going to win any Pulitzer Prizes, but we reporters who don't have to worry about saving the world all the time can do great good -- through both our writing and the trusting relationships between writer and reader, and reporter and subject, that lie at the heart of every successful newspaper.\nBut what I've learned from working for my local newspaper is that being a good journalist requires more than just solid reporting and writing skills. In order to be successful, a journalist must treat others with respect. But newsrooms breed cynicism, and respect -- whether for colleagues, superiors, sources or readers -- is something often difficult to come by.\nIt's easy to get caught up in the confrontational style of journalism, wherein people are nothing more than sources to be used and then discarded when their usefulness ceases. This mindset can be useful within the world of investigative journalism, since such journalists must not be afraid to step on some toes and make personal sacrifices in their pursuit of the truth.\nBut for the everyday, run-of-the-mill beat reporter, being "mild-mannered" like Clark Kent is nothing to be ashamed of. Being respectful of and identifying with the people one is reporting on, interviewing or covering is much more useful than representing oneself as the arbiter of power in the ongoing struggle for "the people's right to know" or some other arrogant and ego-inflating delusion. I've learned this lesson well during the years, and I think it's one that reporters for newspapers such as the IDS should take to heart. \nFor example, while I was working as a reporter during Thanksgiving break, a situation arose where it became apparent that the local public library board had conducted an executive session (closed to the media and public) meeting in violation of the Indiana Open Door Law. While situations like this usually make my blood boil, a library board member freely disclosed what had taken place during the executive session after another reporter politely pointed out the Open Door Law violation to them over the phone.\nYeah, we really could have gone after the board members for meeting illegally. We could have cited Indiana statutes left, right, up and down until they disclosed the information we wanted. We even could have sued them if they had refused to cooperate with our demands. But none of that was necessary because of one short, polite phone call.\nAs purveyors of news and public opinion, journalists have great power. But as Superman (or was it Spiderman?) once said, "With great power comes great responsibility." Reporters, whether they work for the IDS, the New York Times or the Mayberry Gazette, should use their power responsibly by being respectful of sources, subjects and readers. Doing so will lead to more effective reporting, better stories and a greater sense of satisfaction for both writer and reader.
(11/14/00 4:33am)
The news media's coverage of the 2000 presidential election was and continues to be a comedy of errors and miscues.\nMSNBC's Brian Williams urged millions of Americans to wake up their children in the early morning hours of Wednesday, Nov. 8, assuring them that George W. Bush had just been elected the 43rd president of the United States. \nWe all know how that turned out.\nCBS anchor Dan Rather spewed more archaic, homespun expressions that night than Keith Jackson at a family reunion, all the while insisting that his network would not call a state for either presidential candidate until the results were more secure than Al Gore's lock box.\nCBS was one of the first networks to call Florida for Vice President Gore.\nAnd we all know how that turned out.\nOn the whole, the news media -- especially the television networks -- turned in terrible performances during what is considered the most important and sacred occasion in our democracy: Election Day.\nJournalism and politics go hand in hand, but usually the former is supposed to act as a watchdog of the latter -- not as a bumbling, hasty and inaccurate town crier.\nBut infotainment rules the airwaves, from sea to shining sea. At least the joke is not lost on Comedy Central, whose election coverage -- appropriately titled "Indecision 2000" -- was deliberately entertaining and irreverent.\nThe joke was and is on us, the audience. Williams, Rather, Peter Jennings, Tom Brokaw and the rest of their ilk are the jesters. "Oops, our bad," they seemed to say, collectively, after Florida went back to the "too close to call" column last Tuesday.\nWe gave them a second chance. "Yes," we said to ourselves, "herd journalism is ugly and unfortunate, and the urge to scoop the other guy is damn near irresistible. But this is the best that we have, so let's keep watching. They'll get it right next time."\nBut they didn't get it right. They got it very, very wrong. And yet we continued to watch, because it was entertaining.\nWow! The electoral process is so exciting and entertaining! Look at MSNBC's Chris Matthews barking commands at talking heads until they spout forth an appropriate sound bite! See Brian Williams wield the Telestrator pen over the Electoral College map like he was John Madden at the Super Bowl! Chuckle at Dan Rather's antiquated method of pointing at a screen with a No. 2 pencil!\nYes, the Fourth Estate has failed democracy before, and it will again, no doubt -- especially if we, the audience, fail to hold it to higher standards. \nIn the case of this particular election, there would still be plenty of angry people marching through the city streets of Florida even if the networks had been patient and not called any states based on exit polls and early returns.\nBut if the media had lived up to their time-honored mission of being safeguards against tyranny and a champion for an informed electorate, perhaps we all would have, at the very least, maintained our faith in the democratic process.\nNow that faith has been shaken. The major television networks, by calling Florida early and incorrectly, might very well have tainted this election. But we'll never know for sure.\nThe IDS, to its credit, delayed publication of its Nov. 8 front page until Gore's concession had been retracted and Bush's victory had been officially rescinded.\nBut curious voters don't call the IDS newsroom to see which candidate is ahead in what states and by how much. They watch the networks' coverage.\nABC + CBS + NBC + CNN + MSNBC = B.S.\nAnd you can take that to the bank, book it or feed it to Dan Rather's Tennessee Snapping Turtle.
(11/07/00 11:53pm)
A newsroom is a microcosm of society. Everyone from the publisher and editor in chief down to the rookie crime reporter and the part-time photographer has his or her own opinions, beliefs and values regarding a variety of different issues.\nAnd, just like the rest of us, they aren't and shouldn't be afraid to express their point of view. But the staff editorial is an entirely different story. The New York Times, in its Sunday, Nov. 5 staff editorial, endorsed Al Gore for president of the United States. The editorial board of the Chicago Tribune endorsed George W. Bush. Regardless of these newspapers' traditional "liberal" or "conservative" leanings, it should go without saying that not every journalist takes the party line. Indeed, there's bound to be some disagreement.\nIf you've ever read the opinion page of this newspaper, you know the staff editorial consists of the IDS's stance on a particular issue. For example, Monday's staff editorial dealt with Bush's 1976 DUI arrest. The IDS staff, in a 12-2-2 vote, came to the conclusion that the arrest should not be a factor in the election.\nUpon reading such an editorial, one might conclude that the board's position on this issue is clear. Not so. It is important to read the dissent, which,at least this semester, is often written by Brian Zell, the IDS assistant opinion editor.\nZell is what you might call an enthusiastic dissenter. He's not afraid to disagree. But Zell has good reasons. In response to the Nov. 6 editorial, he wrote: "Knowing a candidate's record should be important to voters. After all, the president is a direct participant in the law-making process ... Drunken drivers … kill people."\nThese are legitimate concerns expressed thoughtfully and pragmatically. The question, then, is this: Are dissenting opinions written by IDS editors useful to readers? If not, should the IDS simply state its views, as voted on and articulated by the staff, and let the readers respond? \nZell has received criticism because of some of those dissents. For example, in his Nov. 1 dissent, "Candidates pander to the people," he waxed philosophical about what qualities should be embodied by a person seeking the presidency, concluding that the president "should not sink to our level." This comment came under fire in a letter to the editor from junior Aaron Dobbins, who wrote, "First and foremost, the president should 'sink to our level' and let the people know … he is not above the common citizen."\nFair enough, but Zell incurred harsher and more personal criticism for his Oct. 25 dissent. In that editorial, entitled "Why I support ELF (and you should too)," he offered a semi-sarcastic explanation of the oil crisis, part of which contained the following assessment: "The Middle East has banded together to fix the supply of oil so it doesn't run out anytime soon. They know if they had no oil, we would change their name to Africa."\nA letter to the editor published Friday from T. Michael Ford, IU's special assistant to the vice president and chief financial officer, accused Zell of making "an ignorant, prejudiced and insulting comment to the continent of Africa, its inhabitants and those whose ancestry traces back to that continent."\nSuch criticism should give the IDS pause. If the purpose of an editorial dissent is to provide an alternative viewpoint or opinion -- as opposed to incensing and provoking people who read it -- then perhaps this newspaper's management should lay down some firmer guidelines about the proper form and tone dissents should take. When a free and healthy debate of ideas and public affairs breaks down into personal attacks, something is wrong with the communication process.\nAnother solution would be to allow staff members who disagree with their colleagues to withhold their name or names from their dissent, should they write one. After all, the writers of the editorials enjoy anonymity. Their names are listed immediately below the editorial in the staff box, but it would be naïve to think that each person contributes to the writing of every editorial.\nBut Zell and his fellow dissenters probably wouldn't take warmly to anonymity, making this one of those issues where it might not be best to agree on how to disagree. Disagreeing to disagree -- think about that the next time you read the IDS opinion page.
(11/01/00 4:09am)
A number of issues and readers' concerns have recently piqued the interest of the ombudsman, so this week's column will deal with a variety of topics.\nClinton and Shireman: lame ducks\nLess than a week from now, the citizens of the United States, or at least, those who actually vote, will elect a new president.\nBut another election looms on the horizon; one that will determine who will lead the Indiana Daily Student next semester. That's right, the new IDS editor in chief (EIC) will be chosen this week. \nOK, so maybe these two elections can't be compared in terms of scope, but students, staff and faculty should be aware of the fact that they, as IDS readers, can have an impact on which EIC candidate gets the job.\nThe IDS Publications Board, the committee in charge of selecting the new editor, will meet at 1 p.m. Thursday in the Oak Room of the Indiana Memorial Union. The public is encouraged to attend; time permitting, the audience might be able to ask questions about the candidates' goals and qualifications.\nApology Owed to Jewish People\nSome readers took offense to a front-page headline that appeared in the Monday, Oct. 9 edition of the IDS, and rightly so. The headline read, "Yom Kippur offers Jews a new start" and preceded an article that described and discussed Yom Kippur and the other High Holidays of the Jewish faith.\nOne e-mail from a concerned reader said the use of "Jews" in the headline was not politically correct. "It is just like saying Blacks instead of African-Americans," the reader wrote. "It just doesn't seem very professional or polite." \nThe headline was offensive on a subtler level, as well, in that it implied the need for a "new start" for Jewish people. Granted, Yom Kippur means "Day of Atonement," but it's not right to single out a group of people -- Jewish, Muslim, Christian, Hindu or whatever -- and suggest, in a front page headline, that they have an opportunity for a "new start." It implies they have done something wrong or that the rest of us haven't -- which isn't true. The term "Jews" doesn't mitigate the harm, either; if anything, it aggravates. \nReligion, like politics, is one of the touchiest subjects out there, so any news item dealing with issues of faith almost inherently runs the risk of irking someone. But in this case, an apology is in order.\nPeace Sells … But Who's Buying?\nBesides the obvious reference to the Megadeth album of the same name, that expression could apply to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in the Middle East. The "on again, off again" peace process in that region has been scrutinized and analyzed by news media pundits and spin-doctors across the country.\nBut the IDS was bold enough to print, Oct. 27, two opinion columns on this subject written by people on opposite sides of the Israeli-Palestininian argument. These people, unlike some of the talking heads on television, obviously care very deeply about the conflict in the Middle East and are not arguing simply for the sake of argument. \n"Peace in the Middle East will not happen," by junior Gabriel Lewin, and "Palestinians want oppression to end," by junior Rima Kapitan, were published next to each other, on the same page of that issue. \nUpon reading these articles, one becomes quite cognizant of the fact that their authors are coming from different backgrounds and, as such, are biased and inclined to support one side of the conflict. That's OK -- it's the opinion page, where such speech is welcome. \nIDS readers should be glad their newspaper does not stifle one side or the other in this important debate. A healthy and respectful exchange of ideas is without a doubt the first step in resolving any conflict. Let's hope the IDS continues to facilitate such exchanges.\nA Third Way\nOn a similar note, the "Third Party Forum" that appeared Oct. 24 and this Tuesday in the IDS were a breath of fresh air. \nIndeed, ever since the IDS staff realized the error of its ways during a Listening Tour meeting with the IU Campus Greens, the result has been vastly increased coverage of third parties and guest columns from students involved with these parties that give the College Republicans and Democrats some real competition.\nA previous ombudsman column decried the lack of alternative political voices in the IDS and called for more coverage of third parties. The staff deserves to be commended for answering that call. If doing so has inspired just one person to rethink his or her decision to stay home on Election Day, then it was well worth it.
(10/25/00 4:28am)
There's a good and obvious reason why articles written by columnists appear on a newspaper's opinion page. If I may be excused for stating the obvious just a bit, that reason is this: Columnists are full of, among other things, opinions.\nGranted, most columnists, depending on the subject about which they are writing, will at least mix in a few facts here and there in order to back up their argument or point of view. \nBut one should not look to the columns of the opinion page to find objective news. Just because someone writes a column in the IDS does not mean he or she is in possession of or in contact with the truth about the topic of said column. Thus, most columnists' views cannot be objectively labeled "right" or "wrong." They are opinions and perspectives: things that, in a society founded upon personal freedom and liberty, we hold up as valid in their own right, regardless of how repugnant, extreme or just plain nonsensical they might seem.\nAs a columnist, I, of course, am no different -- which is why the predominantly negative responses I received regarding my Oct. 17 column came as such a surprise. That particular piece, "Selling out or just the facts?" dealt with IDS reporter and campus editor Michael Eisenstadt's recent trip to the New York headquarters of Goldman Sachs, a prominent Wall Street investment firm. Goldman Sachs, which was at that time promoting its Oct. 10 recruiting day here at IU, paid for the trip.\nSensing that something was rotten in the state of newsroom ethics, I interviewed Eisenstadt in preparation for a column that would lambaste the IDS for allowing such a gross transgression against its journalistic integrity to occur.\nObviously, that column was never written. Instead, after talking with Eisenstadt and considering the facts, I concluded that the trip to New York was "unnecessary and frivolous," but not unethical. E-mails from professional journalists around the country ensued -- thanks to a link to my column that appeared on the Poynter Institute's media ethics Web site -- taking me to task for not condemning the IDS and Eisenstadt for their actions.\nI stand by my conclusion. It was my opinion and my point of view. Maybe not the objective truth, per se, but as close to it as I could get, given what I knew about the situation. Is it possible to get any closer?\nUnfortunately, I let my ethical sleuthing get a bit carried away. In "Selling out," I made some speculations about a possible connection between the full-page Goldman Sachs advertisement that appeared in the Oct. 10 IDS and Eisenstadt's news story about the company that was published on page two of the same issue. My suggestion that newspapers sometimes "reward" loyal advertisers with news coverage -- a practice I have actually seen during my experiences in professional journalism -- was interpreted by many who read the column as a veiled indictment of the IDS on such charges. \nNothing could be further from the truth. \nI'd like to refute such allegations and say, for the record, the IDS has a firm and established separation between its newsroom and business/advertising department. The editor in chief himself rarely, if ever, sees an ad prior to its publication in the paper unless advertising manager deem it "controversial." The Goldman Sachs ad was no exception.\nAs much as I would like to pass off the comments I received in response to my "Selling out" column as nothing more than tired sermons by self-righteous journalists, it's better to just take such criticism in stride and not worry about it. After all, just because I'm a critic doesn't mean I can't be criticized.\nWhat it comes down to is this: I'm not writing for the professional journalists out there who just happen to click on a media ethics hyperlink. I'm writing for this newspaper and its readers. \nI would hypothesize that most of the reporters and editors who complained about my column didn't even read the article about which I was writing. But if I were writing for them, I'd have to say that if all of us in the media instinctively knew what was right and what was wrong, our jobs would be much easier. Especially mine.
(10/17/00 5:16am)
One of the dirty little secrets of journalism is reporters' and editors' enjoyment of a wide variety of "perks" provided to them by the subjects they cover.\nThese benefits include everything from complimentary compact discs and movie passes to all-expenses-paid trips to New York City -- such as the one IDS campus editor Michael Eisenstadt recently took. \nThat trip was paid for by Goldman Sachs, a New York-based global investment firm that sent recruiters to the Kelley School of Business Oct. 10. Appearing in that day's edition of the IDS was both a news article about Goldman Sachs, written by Eisenstadt, and a full-page advertisement promoting the firm's recruiting event.\nPrefacing the article was an editor's note disclosing the fact that Goldman Sachs subsidized Eisenstadt's visit to the firm's Wall Street headquarters. When I talked to Eisenstadt about his trip, he told me it lasted "barely 24 hours." He flew to New York Thursday, Oct. 5, conducted interviews and toured the firm Friday, and then flew back to Indiana that evening.\n"One helpful thing was meeting and talking to many people that I would not have gotten to interview over the phone," Eisenstadt said. "I got to see how things work there, and seeing it firsthand gave me a very good sense of the organization."\nStill, all of that just for a news story designed to call attention to an upcoming campus event? Cynical readers might conclude IDS news coverage goes only to the highest bidder. \nNews for sale? It's not that simple. \nJournalists must have some sort of financial support to engage in newsgathering and other work-related activities, whether it's a trip to a Wall Street investment firm for face-to-face interviews, or an evening at the opera for the next day's theatre review. Trust me when I saythe majority of reporters and editors do not make enough money to afford such excursions on a regular basis.\nMost of the time, a reporter's employer will pick up the tab, such as when the IDS sent two of its student journalists to Centre College in Kentucky to cover the activities surrounding the recent vice presidential debate. During my own journalistic experience, I've regularly been reimbursed for mileage, long-distance phone calls and hotel- and food-related expenses -- it's not at all unusual or uncommon.\nBut news organizations are also businesses, and as such, they can't always afford to pay for certain things associated with and often necessary to the gathering and reporting of news.\nThe IDS is no different. It relies on revenue derived from advertising sales to function, and those funds must be budgeted and dispersed accordingly. While I am merely this newspaper's ombudsman and not its business manager, I can say with a fair amount of certainty that trips to Wall Street investment firms are probably not covered by the IDS travel budget.\nEnter Goldman Sachs. The firm has recruited at IU for the past 20 years and, according to Eisenstadt's article, it employs 76 IU alumni worldwide. These alumni, in addition to being good ambassadors for IU, probably contribute healthy donations to the University. \nThis year Goldman Sachs plans to recruit students from the liberal arts and other academic backgrounds, as well those from the Kelley School of Business. So, the incentive to allow the firm to recruit on campus is significant. And thus the IDS probably felt compelled to report on this event, considering its newsworthiness, potential to affect many soon-to-be IU graduates and, lest we forget the power of the almighty dollar, the fact that Goldman Sachs took out a full-page ad in the IDS to promote its recruiting event.\nIn constructing the above analysis, I'm not being cynical, I'm just telling it as it is, so to speak. Newspapers often "reward" big advertisers with news coverage. It's a fact of life. I've seen it up close and personal. In fact, just last summer I was advised to write a feature story about a grocery store primarily because it was a frequent and loyal advertiser with the newspaper for which I was working at the time.\nAre such practices unethical? Was the IDS rewarding Goldman Sachs for spending big bucks on a full-page ad? Maybe, maybe not. Perhaps such decisions are best left to the readers. \nEisenstadt's comments about his reporting reflect nothing but good intentions. "The basis or nature of the story was the fact that (Goldman Sachs was) coming here to recruit," Eisenstadt said. "We thought it was a chance to relay to students the fact that (Goldman Sachs) had opportunities for students not just from business backgrounds."\nAs for his trip to New York, I think it was, at worst, unnecessary and frivolous, but it certainly wasn't unethical.
(10/10/00 6:10am)
Listening -- it's something journalists are supposed to do well but often don't.\nWe are trained to discover the "Who, What, When, Where, Why and How?" of the events and issues that define the social conditions in which all of us exist. But in many news organizations, this is a passive or one-way process. We see and hear things we think will be or should be of interest to our readers, and then we print those things. This process is repeated day after day.\nAlas, many news organizations adhere to this process too strictly and don't actively seek feedback from their readers. Oh sure, newspapers will periodically conduct readership surveys and the like, but this is often done in the name of marketing and advertising. Even when done in the interest of news and other editorial content, such surveys are limited in their sole dependence on the responses of readers, whose lives are complicated enough without having to be bothered by pollsters, telemarketers and, of course, readership surveys. Thus, if a newspaper receives little to no response to its readership survey, it might assume nothing is wrong with its news coverage, which is seldom the case.\nThe IDS Listening Tour is different. In my somewhat considerable experience within the realm of journalism and newspapering, I've never heard of anything even remotely resembling the Listening Tour. This is an interactive event that takes the IDS editors and reporters out of the newsroom and brings them to you, the readers. They visit with various campus groups and organizations interested in voicing their views and opinions regarding the newspaper and how it covers and portrays events here at IU.\nSome editors might say such a concept smacks of civic journalism -- a progressive, activist mode of reporting and editing the news that has become passe in recent years. But I believe the Listening Tour provides a unique opportunity for the staff of this newspaper to interact with its audience in a mutually beneficial way. Instead of simply posing survey questions -- such as "Do you like reading about sports?" or "Should we print more international news?" -- the Listening Tour lets readers and journalists engage in a discussion that has the potential to get at the very ideology or mission that defines the IDS and its news coverage. And best of all, it's a two-way exchange that is much more than just audience research.\nNow here's the catch: The Listening Tour cannot happen without you. We need someone to talk in order for us to listen. If you want the IDS to schedule a tour stop with your group or organization, e-mail Gina Czark, the IDS general assignment editor, at gczark@indiana.edu to set up a date, time and place. If you're not part of any group or just have a gripe or concern which we should know about, contact me at idsombud@indiana.edu. Your comments could serve as a springboard for some lively, spirited discussion about the IDS during the Listening Tour.\nOrson Welles' seminal film, "Citizen Kane," contains a famous sequence that portrays the passage of time through conversations over the breakfast table between newspaper publisher Charles Foster Kane and his wife. As Kane, portrayed by Welles, goes from being a young, idealistic crusader to a cynical, power-hungry tycoon, his attitude about the role of the press follows a similar path. Near the end of this decades-spanning sequence, Kane concludes that people will think what he "tells them to think."\nThe IDS obviously has a different philosophy. We want you to tell us what you think. \nAs I noted above, never have I worked for a news organization that practiced anything like the Listening Tour. As a journalist, I've received my fair share of feedback, both positive and negative, but it has always come in the form of word on the street, the occasional letter to the editor or just plain hearsay. I envy the staff of the IDS in their face-to-face meetings with their readers for the specific purpose of discussing the newspaper. And I hope it is a success.\nBut, once again, that depends on you. We're listening -- do you want to talk?
(10/03/00 5:46am)
See if you can match the following presidential candidates with the party they are affiliated with:\n1. Howard Phillips; 2. John Hagelin; 3. Harry Browne; 4. Ralph Nader; 5. Pat Buchanan.\nA. Libertarian; B. Reform; C. Natural Law; D. Constitution; E. Green.\nSee the end of this column for the answers. Unfortunately, I am unable to type upside down, so we'll just have to operate on an honor system (no peeking!). In the meantime, read on.\nThose who read the IDS opinion page on a regular basis have probably noticed a recurring political column called "Head to Head."\nThis column, written by leaders of the IU College Republicans and IU College Democrats, features a different topic each week discussed from each organization's own perspective. These topics sometimes correspond with the issues being run into the ground by our two erstwhile bastions of presidential potential, Al Gore and George W. Bush.\nWhile it's nice to see the IDS print such a pure, unmediated exchange of ideas, I believe the sources of those ideas need more competition. I'm referring, of course, to the cornucopia of third parties that dot the political landscape. Let's hear from student activists who support alternative political parties such as those mentioned above. I don't care if you're a communist, a socialist, a puritan or an anarchist -- politics as usual could use a little friendly reminder that we can't all be lumped into one of two not-so-easily distinguishable categories.\nI, for one, am sick and tired of what I think of as the "Gore-Bush Polarization Effect." It goes something like this:\n1. Gore (or Bush) introduces stance/position/plan for (insert issue of the week here).\n2. Bush (or Gore) responds to opponent's stance/position/plan with own stance/position/plan. \n3. Media eats it up and begs for more. Rhetoric ensues. Gore insults Bush. Bush insults Gore. Enter the pundits.\n4. Media consumers express disdain over "negativity." Gore and Bush do talk shows and kiss Oprah. Media consumers forget nastiness and are left with warm, fuzzy feeling, secure in their support of what they believe is one of only two possible positions on the issue.\n5. New week, new issue.\n6. Repeat steps one through five over and over again until Election Day. \nNorman Solomon, of www.alternet.org, writes in his article, "The Two Party Media System," "Politicians and pundits are working hard to explain how Al Gore and George W. Bush differ. Meanwhile, journalists are apt to bypass the many points of unity. In the media zone, if the major party candidates agree, the matter is pretty much settled."\nThis brings me back to the IDS "Head to Head" feature. In that column, we're given the Democrats' and Republicans' take on a particular issue, such as education, Social Security, gun control, etc.\nMeanwhile, third party candidates are out there in the political wilderness, shaking their fists at corporate control of media, NAFTA, the IMF and a plethora of other issues that won't draw a peep out of either Gore or Bush. I'd like to see the IDS actively encourage supporters of these third party candidates to participate in its "Head to Head" exchanges. I'd also like to see the newspaper publish more local, regional and national stories about third party candidates. Doing so would be a great service to its readers who, taken as a whole, surely encompass a much more diverse set of interests than those represented by the two major parties.\nIf you third partiers can't get the Democrats and/or Republicans to take the challenge, write a letter to the editor or submit an editorial outlining your party's position on a particular issue that might not be getting a lot of press. If all else fails, write to me at idsombud@indiana.edu -- I'll listen to what you have to say.\nOh, and in case you didn't already skip ahead and look at the answers to the question I posed above, here they are: 1-D; 2-C; 3-A; 4-E; and 5-B. \nIf you correctly matched all five presidential candidates with their respective parties, pat yourself on the back and use your knowledge to enlighten others. If you correctly matched three of the candidates, that's pretty good considering the relatively scant amount of media coverage these guys receive. If you correctly matched less than three, well, I suppose the IDS has some work to do.\nAfter all, it's very important for publications such as the IDS to encourage and publish a wide variety of political and social discourse. Failing to carry out that responsibility deprives us all of important information that is essential to making informed decisions as voters.
(09/26/00 4:22am)
Today's topic is sponsorship, specifically the IDS' sponsorship of Bob Knight's farewell address Wednesday, Sept. 13 at Dunn Meadow.\nI've been hearing some grumbling and arguing in and around the School of Journalism about the ethics of a news organization, such as the IDS, sponsoring such a news-oriented event.\n I've also received feedback from IDS readers accusing the newspaper of trying to create the news instead of simply reporting the news. \nBefore I go any further, it should be noted that several other campus and community organizations helped make Knight's recent speech to the IU student body possible, so the IDS was not acting alone. These organizations included the Indiana Memorial Union, Frazier Audio, the IU Auditorium, the Society of Professional Journalists, the IU Police Department, the IU Office of Communications and Marketing, Zeta Beta Tau and the IU Student Activities Office.\nThe fact that these other groups and organizations were involved in organizing the event does not in any way diminish the seriousness of the philosophical charges brought against the IDS. Anyone who attended Knight's farewell address could clearly see the IDS logo splashed across the front of the podium from which the former coach spoke. Also, teams of IDS employees in red shirtswere scurrying around to and fro before, during and after the address.\nWatching all of this transpire from my inconspicuous (the ombudsman doesn't get to wear a red IDS shirt) location off to the side of the Dunn Meadow stage, I couldn't help but think: "Are these people in the red shirts supposed to be student journalists or event security team members? And if I bum-rush the stage, will they beat me upside the head with a camera or notebook before escorting me off the premises?"\nIndeed, one is also forced to wonder how, after more than two decades of animosity toward the student newspaper, Knight agreed to be interviewed at his home by the IDS. It was suggested by one reader that Knight and the IDS had a "You scratch my back, I'll scratch yours" sort of deal worked out, wherein Knight would invite an IDS reporter and photographer to his home for an interview in exchange for the newspaper's help in setting up a public event where he could say his goodbyes and take a few parting shots at the administration that fired him. \nRegardless of the veracity of this theory, the IDS just happens to be one of the most prominent campus organizations that is not financially affiliated with IU. As such, it has the freedom and independence to use its own resources in situations that many University-dependent groups cannot. Realizing this, the management staff of the IDS came to the quick but difficult decision to sponsor Knight's address. The ethics of such a decision are indeed questionable. But I think the IDS was forced to ask itself "If we don't, who will?" because the University, having immediately terminated Knight's tenure as coach, was under no obligation to provide him with a public forum.\nMedia ethics, just like its practitioners, are shifty. What is acceptable for publication or broadcast in one medium might not be so for another, and certain newsgathering techniques might be upheld as ideal or condemned as unethical. The IDS certainly flirted with the latter by sponsoring Knight's address. In doing so, it also ran the risk of public embarrassment and humiliation, as its editors were afraid that Knight, out of spite or just to play a practical joke, wouldn't even show up to the event they had organized for him. \nBut of much greater importance is the risk to the newspaper's reputation. In the minds of some readers, the integrity and credibility of the IDS have suffered because of its sponsorship of a public, newsworthy event. Yes, some damage has been done. Now, readers of the IDS might be more skeptical of what they read in the newspaper. \nOnly time will tell if the damage is permanent. In my mind and in the mind of many others, I suspect, the risk was worth it. The event went off without a hitch, and those in attendance, both supporters and critics alike, went away with a sense of closure.\nIndeed, stepping up and giving Knight the chance to finish off his memorable IU career with a speech to those who made it all possible -- students, athletes and basketball fans -- is a wrong for which the IDS can be forgiven.
(09/19/00 5:30am)
The role of the press, as an old saying goes, is "to comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable."\nIf the IDS had practiced that adage more rigorously last week, Kent Harvey and his brothers might not have had to flee the state of Indiana. Instead, the IDS published a photo of the "Wanted Dead" posters that were circulated around campus. The newspaper also printed a column written by Nick Bowton, entitled "Time to get out of here," that encouraged Harvey to "run -- fast and far."\nGranted, Bowton's column was, from a pragmatic perspective, appropriate. And publishing the photo of the wanted poster wasn't libelous or even malicious ' just ethically questionable, as is much of what we read, hear or say on a daily basis.\nBut the sobering reality is that Harvey's life, unfortunately, was and still is in danger. \nAs an avid reader of this newspaper, I have an immense amount of respect for its staff after the events of last week. From top to bottom, the IDS handled several extremely volatile events and issues with poise and professionalism. \nUnfortunately, they don't pay me to be a cheerleader. As this newspaper's ombudsman, I would have liked to see the IDS take a more proactive and positive approach to Harvey's plight. The editorial board could have sent a strong message to the student body by devoting an entire staff editorial to Harvey and why he shouldn't be persecuted, harassed or threatened by his fellow Hoosiers.\nThe Tuesday, Sept. 12, staff editorial offered a glimmer of hope. In the next to last paragraph, the editorial board encouraged its readers to "respect the rights of Kent Harvey, whether we like him or not, whether we believe him or not. We can take care of our business and stay out of his."\nThat's a good start, but there is more to be done.\nIn his Sept. 11, column, Bowton wrote this about Harvey: "Like it or not, he's 'The Kid Who Got Bob Knight Fired.'" OK, so some people are always going to think that about Harvey. But printing it as fact in the newspaper does a great disservice to the student body. It singles out one of our own as an enemy to be reviled, hated, scorned and abused.\nIU students turning against one another is ugly and wrong. Burning University administrators in effigy is one thing; authority figures are typical targets for frustration and hostility. But distributing posters that call for the death of a fellow student -- joke or no joke -- is reprehensible. Furthermore, publicizing such proposed violence in a student newspaper without taking a stand against it only aggravates the situation.\nI'm not so sure that the saying I quoted above is true about the media today. In fact, it probably isn't. Regardless, newspapers such as this one should never fail to categorically condemn hatred or violence of any kind ' especially that which is threatened against someone in its own community.\nYes, encouraging Harvey to leave town may have been sound advice, considering the hostile environment he was in. Whether or not he ever sets foot on this campus in the future, we should at least recognize the ugliness and hatred that occurred last week and make a promise to ourselves and Kent Harvey that it will never happen here again.
(09/12/00 6:29am)
Allow me to introduce myself. My name is Brian F. Hartz. I'm a new graduate student here at the the School of Journalism, and I have a confession to make: I might be partly to blame for Bob Knight's recent dismissal as IU men's basketball coach.\nBut before assembling the firing squad, hear me out. If you believe in karma, fate, voodoo, dumb/bad luck, Nietzsche's theory of eternal recurrence or some other form of mystical and/or metaphysical mumbo-jumbo, then yes, I might have had something to do with Knight's termination. \nYou see, I attended Manchester College as an undergraduate, and just before my freshman year at that institution, Steve Alford, another popular and beloved Indiana Hoosier, resigned as head coach of the MC men's basketball team. \nFlash-forward to the present: I've been here in Bloomington for less than a month, and Coach Knight ' the man, the myth, the legend ' has been told to take a hike. Coincidence? A curse? Black magic? Too much free time on my hands? You decide. But please, tell the bounty hunters to be gentle.\nAnyway, getting back to the point of this column (introducing myself), I am the IDS Ombudsman. "The Om-buds-what?" you probably just asked yourself. Ombudsman ' it's a fancy way of saying "critic." \nBasically, my job involves acting as a liaison between you, the IDS readers, and the reporters, editors, photographers and designers of the IDS. I'm not really part of the IDS editorial staff. I exist in a sort of platonic netherworld or neutral zone, located somewhere between the IDS and its readers. In fact, I don't even see the IDS until it hits the newsstands. After I've read and critiqued the newspaper, I then tell the staff what they did well and what they can do to improve.\nAnd what exactly gives me the right to direct such criticism toward the staff? Well, I know a little something about the world of journalism, both collegiate and professional. While studying at Manchester, I was the editor in chief of Oak Leaves, the campus newspaper, for two years. I've worked for the Wabash, Ind., Plain-Dealer, the North Manchester, Ind., News-Journal and the LaGrange, Ind., Standard-News (my hometown newspaper). I've also worked for a radio station and a public relations office ' both of which don't really relate to the ombudsman job, but hey, potential employers might be reading, so I might as well cram my entire resume into this paragraph while I'm at it. (References available upon request.)\nHowever, being an ombudsman involves more than just marking up the newspaper with the proverbial red pen. Although the IDS pays me to act as a critic, a conscience and a counselor, my main objective is to help its readers by fielding and answering comments and complaints. I have a special e-mail address ' idsombud@indiana.edu ' that's been specifically set up to serve as an inbox for your thoughts, suggestions and criticisms regarding what you've read (or haven't read, but would like to).\nSo speak up, speak out and raise your voice; I'm listening. If you don't, then I'll have to use this space each week to expound upon nihilism, Ralph Nader, the Detroit Tigers or another one of my many inane and absurd pet topics. \nAnd no one wants that.\nIf I receive enough feedback on a particular topic, I may use this space to explain and comment on the way the IDS covered and reported it. If the IDS doesn't cover something I think deserves coverage, I might write about that. Who knows? The only certainty is that to succeed, this newspaper needs to hear from its readers. You've heard it before and you'll hear it again, but the IDS is your newspaper. Help us make it everything you want it to be.\nOh, and that Bob Knight thing I mentioned at the beginning of this column? Yeah, just forget about that. It's nonsense. Really.