Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: VFW commander blasts guv’s veterans care program
Next Post: Another YouTube star breaks through
Posted in:
Make sure you scroll way down today for several stories that were uploaded late yesterday and early this morning. We have two new polls, a couple of TV ads, etc.
I have to be out of the office much of today, so don’t expect constant updates. Also, for those of you locked in comment moderation, I won’t be able to free your posts from prison until much later. You should’ve played nice is all I can say.
Anyway, onto the question.
What would you suggest that major media outlets - TV, radio and print - do to improve their campaign coverage?
posted by Rich Miller
Friday, Nov 3, 06 @ 9:07 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: VFW commander blasts guv’s veterans care program
Next Post: Another YouTube star breaks through
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Be honest, ask questions and actually do some work. Look at this John Kerry thing, after 3 days Matt Lauer got Andy Card to admit that John Kerry was indeed attacking the president and not the troops on the TODAY SHOW this morning. The problem is if the media had not played along with the White House/GOP spin this would have never been a story. I would say bravo to Lauer for getting Card to admit that Kerry did not slam the troops but I can’t because that lie would not have gained any traction if the media, including Lauer not played along and actually did some work.
Comment by wndycty Friday, Nov 3, 06 @ 9:13 am
For the local TV stations, let’s start with a dedicated political reporter. Ch. 9, for example, does not even have that! Beyond that starting point, how about the station’s political reporter running a seminar on the state’s political history, issues, personalities etc. for the other reporters You get these newbies from some station in Alabama who show up in Chicago in the midst of a campaign, and they have no clue. This results in bad reporting. Even some anchors, who I will try to nicely say, are on TV for something other than their knowledge and questoning skill, need that seminar. It is sad how ineffective and unchallenged most of the candidate interviews on the morning and afternoon news are. Finally, for the both TV and newspapers, stop with the polling, you hurt election turn out, no ifs & ands or buts about it. If you won’t end the constant polling, at least commit to no polling for the 30 days preceding an election. Report the news, don’t make it!
Comment by Niles Township Friday, Nov 3, 06 @ 9:28 am
wndycty —
I think you (and Matt Lauer) were duped. What Andy Card did was give the Kerry story two more days of coverage at least, straight into the weekend and right up to the Sunday morning snore fests. People won’t look at the underlying issue of who was the intended target. What they see is Kerry insulting the IQs of our troops. Actually a brilliant move on Card’s part.
To the question, Mr. Speaker? The news media need get off their butts and actually do some work (not you Rich). They are trying to manipulate the outcome of several races, most noticibly the Stroger/Peraica race. The Sun-Times has been the most shameful at this, especially the little, subtle “drop-ins” by their columnists, read: Steinberg. Here are two more glaring examples of Steinberg’s attempt to influence the outcome of this race:
“So here’s my question: What is the big difference between Cook County forest preserves and Lake County forest preserves? Why is one so lousy and one so nice? Think hard . . . ”
“The election for Cook County Board president is being portrayed as a clash of personalities, and it isn’t. The only question: how dysfunctional the county is (hint: a lot) and who will get the best value for the money we all are pouring into it.”
OK, I get it. The Sun-Times wants Peraica to win. But why, you ask? Because a Peraica administration would be better fodder that a Stroger administration. That’s it. Plain and simple.
Comment by Caveat Eligorum Friday, Nov 3, 06 @ 9:45 am
Umm in order to improve coverage I think they should have more maps, more vote totals announced, they should also announce the results of different statewide propositions and referendums across the U.S. and not do ANY exit polling at all.
Comment by 105th Blues Friday, Nov 3, 06 @ 9:53 am
How about dropping that reflexive reaction to call some self proclaimed academic “expert” for story. With few exceptions, the academics have never worked a campaign or even for goverment and seldom made a donation.
Many have no first hand knowledge of polling, focus groups, opposition research, fundaising, and other campaign nuts and bolts.
They do live to be quoted, because that is what they hawk to their masters. They use the mentions to claim what they are do improves the recognition of their institution.
This will take more work, but it will make the reporting more meaningful
Comment by Reddbyrd Friday, Nov 3, 06 @ 9:55 am
First of all, I wish the media would get off their high horse about political advertising and money influencing elections. The TV stations, cable and newspapers are raking in most of the dough we - and our special interests - give to politicians. The more they stoke the fires of point-counterpoint controversies, the more the politicians spend on advertising.
I think we should have public disclosure of how much these media outlets receive in political advertising dollars. I wonder if one of the do-gooder research groups is willing to tackle going through all the campaign reports to tabluate that info?
Finally, years ago, when I was a poorly paid journalist, I enjoyed doing the side by side comparisons of candidates. I wish more papers would do that. The few who do it now do it very porrly. I realize the sensational news gets the headlines, but I for one like to read the in-depth coverage that is often buried inside.
Comment by Suburbanon Friday, Nov 3, 06 @ 11:05 am
First of all, I believe the print, radio and TV media have a responsibility to provide some free coverage for all candidates. The fact that the governor’s race is now over $30 million for all parties is absolutely obscene. Secondly, there should be some guidelines the media sets down to the candidates. How about some truth in campaigning? Provide absolute backup information for what you are purporting in the ads to be “facts”. Of course, that will never happen because most of the politicians wouldn’t recognize truth if it hit them in the face, especially our current GoverNOT. I would absolutely positively stop the “bookend” ads. For the 2 or 3 legit advertisers who are placed between those bookend ads, they should have been given their advertising free because I for one didn’t watch any of them.
Comment by Little Egypt Friday, Nov 3, 06 @ 11:06 am
What would you suggest that major media outlets - TV, radio and print - do to improve their campaign coverage?
Their job.
Sorry to be so glib, but is it too much to ask to get a few more column inches (how about an entire section at least once a week in the local papers)?
Is it too much to ask that we get more than 30 seconds in a 30 minute newscast?
–
105th Blues, without exit polling we won’t know whether we can trust the all-too-easy to manipulate e-voting. (And without exit polling on Election Day 2004 Karl Rove wouldn’t have known that he had to crank up the works by late afternoon.)
–
Niles Township, what sort of evidence do you have that polling “hurts turnout”.
(If it looks like baloney and it smells like baloney…)
The biggest thing that hurts turnout is a campaign’s strategy. Are they prepared for GOTV? Do they have enough money and/or volunteers to carry their plan out? Is their plan smart and feasible?
Comment by NW burbs Friday, Nov 3, 06 @ 11:09 am
Hire journalists who have the expertise and time to evaluate and explain the condition of the pension funds and other budget issues in detail and on an ongoing basis.
Create rules in writing about what non-Dem, non-Republican candidates have to do to justify being covered.
Media outlets shouldn’t report on political attacks that are fundamentally dishonest unless they are couched in Candidate X’s camp said this which is designed to push this emotional button, but it is inaccurate because of …..
Comment by Carl Nyberg Friday, Nov 3, 06 @ 11:14 am
Off topic — rich, where can i find the target feed info today?
Can’t find it!
Comment by dupage progressive Friday, Nov 3, 06 @ 11:21 am
I wish the media would stop using polls as news. While I think its perfectly ok to report on the polls, I believe we’d be better served if they spent their time reporting on the issues, instead of 5 minute segments on poll numbers.
Comment by downstateyp Friday, Nov 3, 06 @ 11:22 am
Carl Nyberg wrote, “Create rules in writing about what non-Dem, non-Republican candidates have to do to justify being covered.”
This is actually a requirement for all FCC licensed broadcasters; but when you ask, most are either unaware of this, or they are blatently ignoring the rules. They don’t care to follow the rules either, because they’re not convinced that the FCC will do anything about it.
I had a bigshot attorney over at CBS corporate in New York tell me that “precise pre-existing, objective critera is not required” but when I then tried to get him to confirm that CBS2 Chicago wasn’t using any, he certainly wouldn’t do that.
Here’s a simple standard that they can all follow. If you’re on the ballot, you get equal coverage. That’s reasonable, considering that new party candidates rarely get on the statewide ballot.
Here’s something else that they can do to improve their coverage. Don’t let the Democrats and Republicans dictate the terms or influence who gets invited! For example, the Illinois Radio Network didn’t invite Rich Whitney to participate in their debate because the Blago made it clear to IRN that he would not participate if Whitney was invited. That’s called media manipulation.
WTTW did the right thing. They let Blago back out and went ahead and held a gubernatioral candidate forum anyway. Blago looked stupid for not being there, well as he should. Don’t cave in!
Comment by Squideshi Friday, Nov 3, 06 @ 11:59 am
Continue to turn up the volume on Governor Blagojevich.
It is the people’s right to know the truth.
Suppose Rod will be defining the word “truth” for us before long.
Comment by Freedom of the Press Friday, Nov 3, 06 @ 12:50 pm
The TV stations have a conflict of interest when they are hauling in millions for running ads while we expect their news departments to review and truth-squad each one for us. Real reform will come when you disconnect the money from the ads and make the ads free to all, accessible to all legit candidates.
Also, and we see this at the presidential press corps level, as well as in city and state government coverage, reporters, especially TV and radio reporters, are afraid to lose access to officials if they press too hard, too often. They get locked-out, ignored, shunned, while the “easier” reporters get inside access. When the miffed officials cut off access by one reporter, the competing stations get an unfair advantage. The system soon forces all the reporters into a sort of go-along-to-get-along compliance. In TV news especially, time is everything, any delay is deadly. Even subtle delaying tactics are sufficient to derail timely coverage, probably one big reason for this governor’s legendary tardiness, as well as the sudden spottiness of press alerts when the Guv is going to deign to walk among the common people.
Bring back the full-time government beat TV reporters. Considering recent history, you could have the crime reporter just double-up the beats.
Commit to longer, more in-depth coverage in the daily news shows, and use some of that dead weekend time to do some week-in-review or in-depth coverage, oh, and actually PROMOTE it, so we can FIND it.
Redbyrd hates the expert opinions of academics, don’t kid anybody, he’s ticked at Kent Redfield for not worshipping the Governor as we all should. Red, don’t tell me people like Charlie Wheeler and Mike Lawrence are irrelevant or ignorant of the nuts and bolts of government. Unlike bare-knuckle ward heelers who only look thru a narrow keyhole view of the process, the “academics” put things into a wider perspective with a suitable detachment from the everyday bias of field operatives such as yourself. And they are harder to bamboozle with plattitudes and unsubstantiated claims than the local Tv “journalists”.
I went to a local government news event related to a private charity group I belong to. Of the main stations in the area, two came, one of them came late. The first station sent only a cameraman, who stayed long enough to get a 60-second establishing shot of the venue, no audio of the remarks, then left even as the opening remarks were just beginning. The second station sent a reporter and cameraperson. The reporter grabbed a press release for the event, circled a few lines, then got one of our officials off in a corner and basically had them repeat the paragraph from the release. And that was the sum total of her “reporting” on the story. I watched the news that night to see the coverage of my organization, and to see if I was in it. The story was exactly the three circled paragraphs from the release, ten seconds of the room in a wide shot, fifteen of the official repeating the paragraph from the release, fatuous wrap-up comment off-camera by the reporter for ten seconds, story DONE! That’s what passes for “Journalism” down here. You-tube at least gives you the chance to see everything raw and draw your own conclusions, and you get to stay at the event longer than the reporter did.
Comment by Gregor Friday, Nov 3, 06 @ 1:16 pm
Redbyrd wrote, “With few exceptions, the academics have never worked a campaign or even for goverment and seldom made a donation.
Many have no first hand knowledge of polling, focus groups, opposition research, fundaising, and other campaign nuts and bolts.”
Not so fast. Many academics have had real world experience in the areas in which they teach, especially if they took a break after undergrad to do something in the non-academic world prior to coming back to do graduate-level work.
Just be sure they are true experts and not crackpots like Ward Churchill.
Comment by Angie Friday, Nov 3, 06 @ 1:53 pm
Journalists should actually look into the allegations made in duelling ads and give viewers/listeners/readers FACTS which would help sort out who is lying and who is not. Instead, they just seem to report what each side is saying - that is truly worthless to the people who are reading/listening/viewing.
Comment by Way Northsider Friday, Nov 3, 06 @ 2:06 pm
Understand the issues and be able to ask intelligent, in your face questions. (for the most part “intelligent” kills my suggestion right off). Stop getting pulled into the “he/she had an Alien baby BS, i.e. the gossip and mud slinging. Otherwise, they should stay home! It would be better for our great state of Illinois and our nation. Many have become as useless and misguided as the hacks running for political positions.
Comment by Justice Friday, Nov 3, 06 @ 4:32 pm
Of course….this forum excells in delivering open and frank discussions with most being informative and intelligent. Me thinks this could be a good example of a good example of news reporting!!
Comment by Justice Friday, Nov 3, 06 @ 4:35 pm
Equal representation of individuals up for election in each race, instead of biased articles in the news. Some papers will do separate pieces detailing the candidates for each office so that people can compare them. Others will write one article completely biased towards one of two candidates, giving people nothing to compare before voting.
News sources should be a source for information prior to an election.
Comment by Tessa Friday, Nov 3, 06 @ 7:14 pm
1. Newspapers should not print the nasty stuff about candidates and castigate them for it and THEN turn around and endorse them. Ya hear me, Sun-Times? Grow some cahones.
2. If a radio station spends much of its talk radio show time pointing out the problems, lies and other unsavory things a candidate does, they should not run radio ads that are full of lies which even they have recognized and pointed out.
Money apparently does speak louder than truth. It’s hypocritical.
Comment by Disgusted Friday, Nov 3, 06 @ 7:58 pm
Media outlets could improve their campaign coverage by researching the candidates they cover not just cutting and pasting snippets from the candidates own essays, biographies, etc. And if they choose to cut and paste, then at least tell the readers they are copying verbatim what the candidate submitted to the paper or put on their website.
Also, I would like to see some discretion in the publishing of press releases during the campaign season. This current administration has taken press releases a.k.a. campaigning on state time with state money to a new level.
The side by side comparisons are generally informative when they are published. I prefer reading those to endorsements.
Comment by CrunchyCon Friday, Nov 3, 06 @ 8:56 pm
Judges. They never go into enough detail about judges up for retention. If you’re lucky you *might* hear which ones are endorsed by the bar association.
I have heard me some doozy stories about judges who are inept or plain bad. But what I want is more than hearsay, I would like to see in-depth report summaries on their term of office and any particularly questionable decisions they made.
Comment by Gregor Friday, Nov 3, 06 @ 10:27 pm
Justice wrote, “Of course….this forum excells in delivering open and frank discussions with most being informative and intelligent. Me thinks this could be a good example of a good example of news reporting!!”
Well, I just finished up a bunch of reading for classes next week and also managed to peruse the Tribune (gosh, wonder why I’m lovin’ the Tribune so much after that splendid job they did endorsing JBT while slamming Rod?), and in the Tempo section, there’s a nod to Cap Fax as a site worth checking out.
Three cheers to Rich for having a fantastic site. The Trib loves ya. Better tell your current employer to think about some nice fringe benefits before someone else snags you (chuckle).
Comment by Angie Saturday, Nov 4, 06 @ 12:34 am
There are also some judges that are just plain corrupt and have been since they were state’s attorneys.
Comment by Disgusted Saturday, Nov 4, 06 @ 5:32 am
Gregor/Angie
Mike Lawrence is the only one I know who was part of a campaign…Wheeler was a great state house reporter and comments usually make sense.
Redfield is typical hater/handwringer who sees all contributions as bribes and wants his name in the paper to prove the “value” of some institute and help with their own fundraising.
Comment by Reddbyrd Saturday, Nov 4, 06 @ 7:51 am
I was speaking in more general terms, Redbyrd. Not limited to a particular article or anything, just a general comment.
I see you disagree with Kent Redfield there.
As for judges, I read something about this, possibly in a Letter to the Editor, but I cannot recall which paper it was in. Either Friday’s Sun-Times or the Chicago Tribune, and I do believe there might have been a website address or the name of some type of ABA panel that was noted (tossed both papers already, so unable to go back and check).
But yes, judges are very important. I could go on my rant about problems with the legal system (from a non-expert’s perspective, of course), but there are lots of things wrong, from incompetent judges to judges who are too lenient on the absolute worst offenders (O’Reilly on Fox News does good hit pieces on judges who let child sex offenders off easy, which is nice to see, even though I surely do not always agree with all of his opinions) to this little problem of crushing law school debt keeping the best and brightest out of what would seem to be very personally rewarding (certainly not financially rewarding) public interest work.
‘Tis a mess, the legal system is. As with any other social system, it could use some serious reform.
Comment by Angie Saturday, Nov 4, 06 @ 3:21 pm
Good God, have we all drifted off topic.
The original question: “What would you suggest that major media outlets - TV, radio and print - do to improve their campaign coverage?”
Spend a little more time showcasing the opinions of the actual people rather than just some spinmeister or political analyst? You sort of fear that it might dumb down the discourse a little bit, to get the average Joe Schmoe out there and on camera, but really, I’d like to hear what more everyday people have to say. It might make you smile or it might actually scare the living daylights out of you as you realize how dim some people truly are, but nonetheless, they need to get the people out there more often, especially on the national cable channels.
Hey, there we go! Let callers grill the candidates live. No scripts. All pointed questions. Think Rod would survive? Mwahahahah. I could damage him in just five minutes of intense questioning, his Pepperdine law school education aside.: )
Comment by Angie (post script) Saturday, Nov 4, 06 @ 3:33 pm